NATO: From Control of the Western Territorial Line to Control of the Wider International Territory

Introduction calculate that their interests will be protected

among the efforts for a common purpose. It can

ALTHOUGH IT IS OFTEN CLAIMED THAT be said that countries that think they have enough

alliances are formed for defensive purposes, it is power to realize their own goals may act and

also noted that formation processes are structured enter into an alliance to reduce the cost, shorten

against certain threat perceptions, including the time, or justify the country’s action through

economic, political and ideological purposes. the alliance. The United States of America (US)

(Russett, 1971, s.262-89; Trauschweizer, 2016, s. reorganized NATO, a regional military alliance

166-94; Fang & Johnson & Leeds, 2014, 775-809; at the beginning, to organize the power-security

Synder, 1999, 102-119; Synder, 1997; Osgood, (economic, political, and military) problem in

1968). Western Europe and the Mediterranean in a way

When countries enter into alliances, they that suited its interests after World War II.

The Problem of Line Security the Soviet bloc (Harman, 1999, 544).

in the Cold War The US emphasis on economic relations

with Europe also showed that the US economy

The Cold War process began when the NATO could not be isolated from the international

Treaty was signed in April 1949. It was clear that capitalist economy, which is the reason for

in this process, NATO would be controlled by its existence, and that it had to be involved

the most powerful military force, the United in the markets of developed countries.

States. Contrary to the Monroe tradition, Although it was stated that the emergence

the US, which started to become a party to of Washington and Moscow, which were in

the military-political-economic relations of cooperation during and after the war period

Europe in every field with the World Wars and as representatives of two different political-

especially the Cold War, aimed to protect its economic structures, constituted the main

interests first.1 The admission of Türkiye and basis of the tension in the new process, as it

Greece to NATO in 1952 was a continuation of was understood over time, the primary cause

the policy of containment of the Soviet Union. of the tension was economic. For this purpose,

Nine days after West Germany (German in the new international system that the US

Federal Republic) was admitted to NATO, the wanted to build post-World War II, NATO

Soviet bloc countries gathered in Warsaw on was structured as a security organization, the

May 11–14, 1955, and the Warsaw Pact was UN as a political organization, and the World

signed on May 14 (Nogee & Donaldson, 1988, Bank and IMF as economic organizations.

110). The effort to expand NATO’s sphere of Washington gave weight to military

influence was followed by the inclusion of structuring in Europe, believing that the

Spain as the 16th member of NATO in 1982.2 spread of Socialist/Communist ideology

The disintegration of the Soviet Union with would endanger the US market in Western

the end of the Cold War also paved the way Europe. The deployment of US troops to

for the US to add new countries to NATO in Europe was intended to intervene as a player.

the 1990s and 2000s. The necessary conditions for this were created

While the US was attempting to rebuild the by the Cold War. Through NATO, Washington

capitalism of Western Europe, which had come aimed to control the Western European line,

to a standstill with World War II, it started where the United States had vital interests.

to interfere directly in the internal relations It was stated that NATO emerged as a

of Europe by creating military-political- result of the beginning of the Cold War, and

economic cooperation. The Marshall Plan was the embargo imposed on Berlin by the Soviet

brought to the agenda in 1947 to keep Europe Union in 1948–1949 played an important role

economically within the interests of the in this. It is also stated that the United Nations

US. This plan aimed to revive the European reached an agreement on November 13, 1948,

economies under the hegemony of the US3 which was accepted by Moscow but rejected

and thus prevent possible radicalization that by the West. The US used helping the people

may occur in these areas and a shift towards who were starving due to the blockade in

Berlin for propaganda purposes and thus had policy during the Cold War period. Suggesting

the opportunity to blame Moscow. (Thomas, a realistic foreign policy for the US in this

1969; Rawnsley, 1999, 31). period, Prof. Morgenthau also stated that, as

an unrivaled superior power in the Western hemisphere, the US always strived to maintain a privileged position (Morgenthau, 1952Morgenthau (1952). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). Decision-makers in Washington Washington believed that the Soviet Union expressed that NATO being against was threatening the Western European market. the Soviet Union was vital to US Decision-makers in Washington expressed

interests in Western Europe. that NATO being against the Soviet Union was

vital to US interests in Western Europe. While

In the report titled “Assessment of the Washington acknowledged that Europe’s

Current Process in US Foreign Policy,” dated role and responsibility would increase in the

February 24, 1948, prepared by George new security arrangement, he continued to

Kennan, the Political Planning Director of the emphasize that NATO would play a leading

US Department of State at the time, to present role, at least in the medium term, due to its

to the Secretary of State, George Marshall, existing organization.

it was reminded that the US held 50% of the In the speech of the then US Secretary of

world’s wealth and constituted 6.5% of the State (1989–1992), James Baker, at the West

world’s population. Kennan continued, stating Berlin Press Club in 1989, it was stated that it

that the duty of those who govern the US is to was important to end the division in Europe

establish the type of relationship necessary to and to maintain the relationship between the

maintain this inequality in a way that will not US and Europe in terms of politics, military,

harm national security in the future, and “all and economy (United States Information

our attention should be directed primarily to Service, 1989). In the same speech, Baker

our national goals everywhere. We should not stated that NATO was essential for maintaining

deceive ourselves that we have the luxury of the link between North America and Europe

thinking of others and of helping the world” while also suggesting that NATO was a flexible

(Report by the Policy Planning Staff, 1948Report by the Policy Planning Staff (1948). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).⁴ organization and could adapt to rapidly

In this report, which mentions three long- changing situations.

term possibilities for Western and Eastern At NATO’s London Summit on July 5–6,

Europe, Kennan mentions the possibility 1990, the leaders of NATO countries agreed

that Germany or Russia may control this on the restructuring of the alliance (The

geography, as well as a federal European Independent, 1990). When French President

structure, and states that it is necessary to Mitterand’s idea of a European Confederation

choose a European federation that includes brought forward the claim that NATO could

Western and Eastern Europe. This political be excluded from Europe, the NATO secretary

tradition was brought to the fore on different general opposed this, thinking it would pave

occasions by decision-makers in US foreign the way for European instability.

Margaret Thatcher with other summit leaders at the 1990 NATO London Summit. (Akiyama, 1990Akiyama (1990). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

The British foreign minister of the time, D. the leaders of the North Atlantic countries

Hurd, emphasized that NATO was important stated that they gathered for the renewal

for European security, indicating that London of the alliance in light of the historical

was of a similar opinion to Washington on change affecting the European continent

the future role of NATO in Europe (NATO and that efforts would be made to develop

Review, 1990). For Washington, Britain was the European Security and Defense Identity

one of the most important guarantees of by using NATO’s facilities and capabilities

European-North American unity in Europe. (Hill & Smith, 2000, 217). The Declaration

Former US foreign minister H. Kissinger of Euro-Atlantic Cooperation was published

stated that the US should play a supportive at the Madrid meeting of the North Atlantic

role in the new European security system Council on July 8, 1997. At the meeting

and emphasized that NATO should keep where the decision to invite the Czech

up with new developments but maintain Republic, Poland, and Hungary to NATO

its presence there due to possible conflicts membership talks, it was stated that the

that may arise in the European geography member states of the North Atlantic Council

(Newsweek, 1989Newsweek (1989). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). gathered in Madrid to shape the new NATO

In the statement published in the meeting as it entered the 21st Century (Hill & Smith,

held in Brussels on January 10–11, 1994, 2000:237).

In February 2001, US President Bush NATO. At the summit, it was emphasized

(2001–2009) and British Prime Minister Blair that NATO must prepare its forces to take

(1997–2007) supported Bush’s European action when necessary, and it was decided

Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) efforts that effective military power is essential to

to improve defense capability (in which maintaining security in the Euro-Atlantic

NATO did not intervene). region. Therefore a NATO Response Force

should be established to send to the required

regions. The European intervention

force, which was stated to be 60 thousand Europe’s efforts towards a people, would use NATO infrastructure, security structure that could but when Greece rejected Türkiye’s request

exclude NATO created constant to participate in the decision-making

discomfort in Washington. process of this force, Türkiye opposed the

use of NATO’s facilities by the European intervention force. On the other hand, a

The joint statement stated that the ESDP NATO intervention force consisting of 21

would be supported to the extent that it thousand people was brought to the table

strengthens NATO’s capabilities (Terriff, by the US. This development is important

Weber, Croft, & Howorth, 2001). Here, it is regarding the US’s efforts to keep NATO in

seen that London and Washington are not the EU’s geography.

parties to a structure independent of NATO. After the Cuban Missile Crisis in October

In his speech at the European Security 1962, the President of France (1959–1969),

Policy Conference in Munich on February Charles de Gaulle, expressed doubts about

3, 2001, D. Rumsfeld, the then US Secretary relations with Washington. In his letter

of Defense (2001–2006), emphasized that to the then US President Lyndon Johnson,

attempts to reduce NATO’s effectiveness dated March 7, 1966, France’s decision was

would be a confusing repetition or upset the expressed as “to ensure our full sovereignty

transatlantic link (Hill & Smith, 2000, 233- in our geography”, “to end participation in

34).⁵ Former US Secretary of State (1993– the combined command”, “to remove the

1997) Warren Christopher and former troops from NATO’s control” and “to change

Secretary of Defense (1994–1997) William the form of our alliance without changing

Perry also suggested restructuring NATO its essence” (Permanent Representation of

and making it a force that could intervene France to NATO, 2017). Charles de Gaulle

in situations where the common West’s brought the French naval forces out of

interests might be harmed (Christopher & NATO’s control. It also gave notice to NATO

Perry, 1997). to remove its headquarters from France. It

The Prague Summit on November 21–22, withdrew its troops from NATO on June 21,

2002, was an important turning point for 1966.

Closing ceremony of NATO's Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) facility at Rocquencourt, near Paris, on March 30, 1967. (NATO, n.d.NATO (n.d.). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

This development complicated Gaulle’s in the medium and long term, Washington

relations with the Washington administration. aimed to maintain its effectiveness in the

In a letter dated March 22, 1966, written in wide European geography together with

response by US President Johnson, there was the countries it included in NATO in the

a clear sense of astonishment. In his letter, post-Cold War period. It was seen that,

Johnson wrote that it is difficult to believe in in response to the efforts of France and

this attitude of France, which “makes a special Germany for a European-centered security

contribution to the security and development structure, the UK made efforts to organize

of the West”, and that “France, an old friend the European defense system in a way that

and ally, will be put on hold whenever France would be integrated with NATO and that

wants to assume its leading role again” a full consensus on security could not be

(Western European Union Assembly General reached in the Euro-Atlantic line in the

Affairs Committee, 1967). Eventually, France 1990s.⁶

returned to NATO’s military wing in 2009.

Europe’s efforts towards a security The Effort to Extend

structure that could exclude NATO created the Line of Control through NATO

constant discomfort in Washington. Against

this development, which may have led to the Jaap de Hoop Scheffer from the Netherlands,

exclusion of American forces from Europe elected the new NATO secretary general in

January 2004, stated at a press conference centers with a comparative advantage.⁸

with US President George W. Bush The geography of the Greater Middle

that NATO could not remain neutral East, which can also be called the Islamic

to the events in Afghanistan (June 29, geography, was also highlighted because

2004). In the statement published at the it contains energy resources, which are

meeting attended by the leaders of the the most suitable product in terms of

North Atlantic Council member states, providing the material resources necessary

it was decided to deploy the NATO- to maintain hegemony in the new system

led International Security Assistance and therefore continue to play a vital role

Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, and it was in the hegemony race today. It is clear

emphasized that contributing to peace and that the areas where energy resources

stability in Afghanistan was NATO’s main are located would play an important role

priority (NATO Press Release, 2004NATO Press Release (2004). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). These in reorganizing the share taken from the

statements showed that NATO’s fields of system in the restructuring process that

activity were being expanded. took place in the transitional periods. The

sharing problem in this process led to an increase in uncertainty. Today, many developed European Today, many developed European countries must meet their energy needs countries must meet their energy from other areas. In the 1990s, following needs from other areas. the end of the Cold War, Japan-centered East Asia and Germany-centered Western

In Western Europe, where NATO was Europe came to the fore as centers that

deployed, efforts were made to open up could be an alternative economic power

new areas for the increasing market needs to the United States. However, over time,

of the international capitalist economy, it became clear that the dependence of

whose existing market was led by the US. these centers on foreign energy was an

It was brought to the agenda primarily important problem. It was known that

due to its proximity to Eastern Europe’s these power centers were shown as a risk

geography, which the Soviet Union in the 1992 Pentagon report (Tyler, 1992Tyler (1992). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).⁹

controlled. Especially in the 1980s, steps In the report, the efforts of the countries

were taken to open and develop these that could be an economic alternative to

markets by imposing appropriate rules. the US in the areas where energy resources

For this reason, the idea that democracy are concentrated would have reduced their

can only happen with a free market was energy dependence. It was emphasized

propagated, and attempts were made to that this situation would pave the way for

prove it true.⁷ alternative power centers such as Germany,

It was clear that the free market France, and Japan to stand on their own

understanding would privilege imperial and act independently in world politics.

Russia is the main provider of imported energy for the European Union

Energy production and import rates of the European Union. (Eurostat, 2020Eurostat (2020). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

If Europe met its energy needs primarily (Newsweek, 1989Newsweek (1989). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). The effort of the United

from the Russian Federation, the Middle States to control the North African and

East, or North Africa and established its Middle Eastern markets and resources, along

own army outside the control of the US, it with the Western European and Eastern

could disrupt the international order that European markets, was deemed essential

the US established after World War II. In for the project to be successful and for the

1947, the expectation of the Washington hegemony to be sustained.

administration to be able to adequately America’s post-Cold War regional and

benefit from the European market, which international activities were based on this

depended to a significant extent on the account. NATO’s turn towards Eastern

prosperity of the US and the economic Europe was related to the effort to control

standing of Europe, could have been in wider Europe. A new line of control was

vain. A Europe in which Eastern Europe was created towards Poland, Hungary, the Czech

controlled by Germany and North Africa Republic, Romania, and Bulgaria (The New

was controlled by France could exclude the American, 2003). With the inclusion of these

United States from the region or narrow countries in NATO, the effort to secure this

its economic sphere of activity. As Dr. H. line continued. For the US, it was important

Kissinger pointed out, it could risk turning to prevent Germany’s efforts to control these

the US into an island on the edge of Eurasia markets and its rapprochement with Russia

by expanding its sphere of influence eastward. director of the US National Security Council,

Dr. Kissinger expressed his uneasiness that in 1995 (Ikenberry, 2004Ikenberry (2004). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). On the other hand,

Germany could claim a leading role in Brzezinski said that if the democratization of

Europe and that a rapprochement with the the Middle East was not rushed and there was

Russian Federation might arise (Kissinger, an election, bin Laden would win in Saudi

2001). Arabia (Brezinski, 2004Brezinski (2004). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).

From Geopolitical Alliance The convergence of the EU with to Economic Competition central and eastern European

The containment policy implemented by countries by expanding its

the US against the Soviet Union during the borders to the east occurred

Cold War began to be implemented against at the same time as the USA

the liberal capitalist countries, which were expanded its influence with former allies and new rivals, in the post-Cold

War period, although not as harshly. In the NATO in this region. This

new process, the old allies disagreed over indicated a regional rivalry in

sharing the market (O’Loughlin, 1996, 133).10 the wider European region.

The struggle was about whether the market

could be controlled, and as was seen in the In the 1990s, the US started discussing

case of the People’s Republic of China, they the Greater Middle East issue. In 1995, they

did not have a problem with communism established a division at Rand Corporation

as long as they kept the market open. Many called the Greater Middle East. While defining

who defined the Soviet Union as the devil’s this, they started from Afghanistan and drew

empire in the 1980s because it closed the a line that included the east of the Caspian,

market continued to have close relations with the Caucasus, the geography of western Asia,

communist China. and North Africa. Defining the area of vital

In the strategy put forward by then-US US interests as a region starting from western

President George W. Bush (2001–2009), the India and extending to the Mediterranean

‘Greater Middle East Project’ was put forward Sea, it was proposed to give NATO a role

to create more freedom for the Middle East. that includes India (Kemp & Saunders, 2003;

It was envisaged that the West would support Lewis, 1995; Lesser & Nardulli & Arghavan,

some West Asian and Arab countries, 1998; Kissinger, 1994). This geography is

especially those with energy resources, to mostly Islamic, where energy resources are

strive for democracy, market reforms, and concentrated. Some included the Balkans in

human rights (A Forward Strategy for NATO, this area. In the 1990s, they discussed the

2004). “We fight for democracy because the events in the Balkans and the lack of timely

larger the pool of democracy, the greater our intervention in the conflicts as a part of

security and well-being,” said Anthony Lake, Washington’s effectiveness in Europe.

US Colonel Ralph Peters, in his article “Blood Borders: How a Better Middle East Would Look Like”, laid out the objectives of the Greater Middle East Project as shown on this map. (Armed Forces Journal, 2006Armed Forces Journal (2006). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

The European countries, which needed 1995). According to Carpenter, if the

the help of NATO and, therefore, the US, Bush administration could not prevent

by failing to stop the civil war, facilitated the growing divergence in interests and

the work of those in Washington trying to policy approaches between Europe and the

get involved in the region. According to US, it would have difficulty maintaining

Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security the new mission it wanted to impose on

adviser of the Carter era (1977–1981), the NATO (Carpenter, 2003, 511).

failure of NATO here would weaken both It started in Afghanistan after 9/11

NATO and America’s global leadership (2001). Afghanistan is an important

(Federici & Cafentzis, 2000, 35). With route for transporting Kazakh-Turkmen

this intervention, the US could show that energy resources to the Indian Ocean.

there was still a European power there. After Afghanistan, Iraq was seen as

The convergence of the European Union an important area of operation in the

(EU) with central and eastern European westward expansion of the Greater

countries by expanding its borders to the Middle East project. With the invasion

east occurred at the same time as the US of Iraq, Russian and French companies,

expanded its influence with NATO in this which had acquired significant energy

region. This indicated a regional rivalry investment rights there, were excluded

in the wider European region (Hardy, from the region. It was also noteworthy

that Syria and Iran aimed to prevent the for International Peace (founded in 1910),

connections there, and these countries the G-8 was to be held in June 2004 under

were intimidated into adopting a the name of the Bush administration’s

condescending attitude towards the US “Broader Middle East Initiative.” It was

(Taheri, 2003Taheri (2003). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). stated that he would announce a project

at the summit. The “Greater Middle East” geography included the Arab world,

Finland’s membership was made Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, and

Türkiye. It was aimed at democratizing the in accordance with the policy region and transforming it economically of containment of the Russian and politically. In fact, it was clear that Federation. they were aiming for forms of government suitable for them. The form of government

Türkiye’s refusal to accept this role also in Saudi Arabia was not mentioned

impacted the idea of northern Iraq as a (Ottaway, M., & Carothers, T., 2004Ottaway, M., & Carothers, T. (2004). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).

regional operation center. Northern Iraq’s US Republican Senator Chuck Hagel,

Mediterranean connection was sought. at the security seminar titled “US, NATO,

Their intense interest in Cyprus can also and the Greater Middle East” held in

be considered in connection with this. Brussels on January 23, 2004, stated that

A line needs to be established from the the threats to NATO come not from the

northwest of Iran to connect northern big powers but from the small ones, and

Iraq to the Caspian. Then needs to be a NATO needed to be more involved to

revolt against the Azeris or the Kurds bring stability to the Greater Middle East.

in northwest Iran. It is known that the Türkiye was trying to be convinced to play

uprising and the repressive practices that an important role in the Greater Middle

followed have been used as justifications East Project and was said to have the

for humanitarian intervention. As potential to influence this geography, as

emphasized in the Carter Doctrine, it stated by Chase, Hill, and Kennedy (1996,

was stated that the main purpose was to 47).

ensure US-centered control of the energy In March 1999, Poland, the Czech

resources in the region (Carter Doctrine, Republic, and Hungary were admitted

2005).11 It is known that they have not to NATO. On March 29, 2004, NATO

been successful in these attempts, but admitted seven new countries (Bulgaria,

control efforts with different methods Romania, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania,

continue. Slovakia, and Slovenia). This brought the

In the article titled “The Greater Middle number of NATO members to 26. The

East Initiative,” published in the March number of members increased to 30, with

29, 2004, Policy Brief magazine of the US- Albania and Croatia (2009), Karabakh

based think tank the Carnegie Endowment (2017), and North Macedonia (2020).

Meeting of Finnish President Sauli Niinisto and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in March 2023. (Presidential Press Office, 2023Presidential Press Office (2023). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

The efforts to ensure the eastward East with the new definition was discussed.

expansion of NATO planned by the In his speech at Galatasaray University,

Washington administration, together with NATO Secretary General Scheffer stated that

some of its allies, were blocked by Türkiye’s NATO is “no longer a passive organization for

veto. With the abolition of the veto, the way deterrence but an alliance on the move.”13

for Finland’s membership was cleared. It In his statement before the Istanbul Summit,

was accepted for membership on April 4, Scheffer stated that the summit could create an

2023. Ankara vetoed Sweden’s membership opportunity for NATO to create a framework

application on the grounds that it protected for the area stretching from the Mediterranean

terrorist organizations in its country. Finland’s to the wider Middle East (Scheffer, 2004, 6).

membership was made in accordance with Dick Cheney, the US Vice President from

the policy of containment of the Russian 2001–2009, also gave clues about the project

Federation. As before, Moscow stated that this in his speech at the World Economic Forum

development threatens the security of Russia held in Switzerland on January 24, 2004. It

(The Guardian, 2022The Guardian (2022). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.; Jakarta Post, 2023Jakarta Post (2023). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). was expressed that it was in everyone’s interest

At the Istanbul Summit, the role that to promote freedom and democracy in the

NATO could play in the enlarged Middle Greater Middle East.

While the United States had conflicts said, “The best and indeed the most sensible

with its former allies in its effort to secure choice is to adapt American-style economic

the market and keep it out of the control of and political priorities for the entire world”

competitors, it also continued its activities (Kissinger, 2001, 252). This statement can

against potential alternative powers such be seen as an expression of an effort to seek

as the Russian Federation. Russia faced a legitimacy to justify their imposition.

containment policy around itself, and the After the Cold War, tensions increased

US tried to cut its connection with Iran in as the international system was not settled.

the Caucasus by controlling Georgia (NATO, After the post-Cold War system could not

2006). Georgia’s efforts to be included in be established for more than 30 years, the

NATO were made to move the US control of different powers Washington and the allies

NATO over a wider area. However, the effort wanted to control began acting differently. On

of the US and some of its allies to extend this subject, Dr. Henry Kissinger mentioned

NATO to the Caucasus to both expand the before the end of the Cold War: “…if you

area of control and narrow the sphere of fail to prevent the alliance of Germany and

influence of the Russian Federation faced the France, and they do ally with Russia, it will be

reaction of Moscow (Reuters, 2008Reuters (2008). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). After a great disaster,” in an article in Newsweek in

Russia intervened in Georgia in August 2008, December 1989 (Kissinger, 1989Kissinger (1989). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). Those who

the US took a step back. thought that they would not have difficulty

controlling this system calculated that the Soviet Union could not resist the US policies

Dr. Kissinger mentioned before and that the Russian Federation and others,

the end of the Cold War: "…if which took its place, could be brought to

heel in the same way. However, as the new you fail to prevent the alliance of power centers increasingly put forward their Germany and France, and they demands, the Washington administration do ally with Russia, it will be a began to find it difficult to oppose them. 9/11

great disaster," in his article in was thought of as an opportunity to control

Newsweek in December 1989. the new system, but this development, in

which allegations were made that it occurred

Iran saw cooperation with Russia as a because precautions were not taken, did

counterweight to the United States. On the not work even though it allowed the US

other hand, France continued its stance in to intervene as far as Afghanistan through

favor of Washington to maintain its traditional NATO (Vidal, 2002Vidal (2002). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).

influence in African geography. Due to the high costs, direct conflicts

Some state that the Greater Middle East between the major countries were avoided.

Project was a positive effort to emphasize the The power race continued to seize hegemony

dissemination of democracy in the region. in the system booty through other local or

H. Kissinger, a former US Secretary of State, regional actors.

Syrian and Russian soldiers stand guard at a military position in the recaptured neighborhood in the Eastern Ghouta countryside of Damascus, Syria, on April 1, 2018. (Xinhua/Safarjalani, 2018Xinhua/Safarjalani (2018). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

While the efforts to establish new alliances The Impasse of Imperialist Policies

in the Eurasian geography continue,

Washington, which has to intervene in In the first half of the 20th century, centrally

everything in the unipolar system, has developed countries were at each other’s throats

difficulty meeting this cost. As the reactions to get a bigger share of the world economy. Due

and resistance increased in different to the high cost of these experiences, the major

countries against the efforts to impose on countries started to develop new methods in

others, the Washington administration the sharing wars. Especially after World War II,

became more aggressive in its policy of ethnic and religious movements were used in the

intimidation. These aggressive policies will surrounding countries that were to be subjugated.

put the United States and its affiliates in In this way, the demands to be imposed on the

a difficult position in their international surrounding countries were brought to the

economic activities, where they gain the agenda when the governments in these countries

most. Since these developments will reflect had difficulties, especially in the face of the

negatively on the welfare of the country’s demands of ethnic and religious groups.

people, they can potentially increase social There was a constant change in the appearance

opposition in their society and among their of imperialism in the last quarter of the 19th

close allies. century, and there were differences in its methods.

During the 20th century, although some centrally which use the resources they transfer from the

developed countries sometimes disagreed surrounding countries to satisfy some of the

about maintaining international influence, the demands of their societies, continued to preach

imperialist structure of the international system that the people of the developing countries can

did not fundamentally change. The change is get rid of the negative conditions they are in with

observed in the approaches and methods used. It liberal globalization, while Kissinger expressed

aims to direct the opposition to the existing system that globalization is another name for American

to other areas. The cost of maintaining activity in hegemony (Kissinger, 1999, 7).

the environment using an ethnic-religious card,

one of the most important methods left its mark The Field of Geopolitical

on the last quarter of the 20th century, was also Competition Expands

high for neighboring countries such as Türkiye,

which was the target of imperial impositions. It The geography of the Greater Middle East,

is known that the Washington administration stretching from Afghanistan to Morocco, as

resorts to controlled instability, using it to well as Eurasia, extending from Hungary to

remove obstacles to its effort to maintain its China, being part of the geopolitical rivalry,

hegemony, and uses instability and provocations shows the relationship between geography

when military actions are necessary for this and politics and is expressed in the political,

purpose (Escobar, 2002Escobar (2002). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).12 economic, and military efforts for the control

Maintaining hegemony has a cost. For this of the geographical areas where the strategic

reason, central countries have entered a race resources are located in the world. Therefore,

over the control of energy resources. The issue the region has been at the center of discussions

of northern Iraq can be understood within (Abu-Lughod, 1989, 343-5; Gills & Frank,

this framework. Washington wants to establish 1996, 86).

new structures to help the US control the In the first half of the 20th century, Germany

energy resources in the Gulf and the Caspian and Britain’s efforts to influence Europe were

basin and establish states it can keep under its replaced by the competition between the

control. Efforts to create a troubled region that US and the Soviet bloc in the second half of

will have to follow policies at odds with its the century, as the US came to the fore as

neighbors and, therefore, dependent on the US the strongest military-industrial power. In

are being carried out in Iraq and the northeast the 1990s, the strength race gained a new

of Syria. The existence of 261 billion barrels dimension, but it has not been completed yet.

(estimated) of oil reserves in Saudi Arabia, 96 In this process, the states that want to reach

in Kuwait, 112 in Iraq, 93 in Iran, and 160– their specific goals in the strength race in the

200 billion barrels (estimated) in the Caspian international system have made an intense

basin (also approximately trillions of cubic effort to determine which methods should be

meters of natural gas) shows the reason for the used in this race and their priorities. The world

competition of central countries in this region is witnessing new geopolitical competition in

(Oil & Gas Journal, 2003Oil & Gas Journal (2003). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). Developed countries, the first quarter of the 21st century.

Former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski delivered a speech at the 50th Munich Security Conference. (Kleinschmidt, 2014Kleinschmidt (2014). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

Brzezinski, the national security adviser of is an example (Huntington, 2003, 22-49).13 He

former US president Jimmy Carter (1977–1981), argues that hegemony can be sustained through

emphasized the importance of Eurasia and imperial solidarity. He also states that healthy

stated that 60 percent of the world’s national cooperation with Europe will support America’s

income and three-quarters of the known superpower position (Huntington, 1999, 48).

energy resources were located in this geography Charles A. Kupchan from the US Council on

(Brezinski, 1997, 31). Brzezinski stated that Foreign Relations draws attention to the fact

as much as the US needed the whole world’s that the future clash of civilizations may not be

market and resources, Eurasia needed American between the US and the rest of the world but

dominance for stability and emphasized that between developed Europe (Kupchan, 2002, 42-

there is an inevitable process of interdependence 44).

(Brezinski, 1997, 36). The control of resources has political,

In today’s world, where competition is military, and economic dimensions. While the

about the seizure of resources, it is seen that effectiveness of the US at a certain regional level

the control of energy resources is one of the brings along its privilege in energy, possible rival

basic conditions for ensuring international powers such as Germany, France, and Japan have

effectiveness, and it is seen that research chosen to stay close to the US due to their lack of

that tries to explain geopolitical competition energy resources in their geographies and their

without reference to resources is highlighted. lack of structures to control the regions where

Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” the resources are located.

The Russian Federation, on the other hand, foreign policy and turn to alternative markets

continues to be an important power center in the new Eurasia for oil production. However,

with its self-sufficient resources. The Russian they need US-centered solidarity in security

geostrategist Alexander Dugin published his matters.

book Fundamentals of Geopolitics the same The priorities of the US and some of its

year Brzezinski published his book The Great allies in international investments through

Chessboard. In this work, he explored the international oil companies, and thus the

ways of a new structuring in Eurasia and thus income they provide, significantly contribute to

estimated how to block US activity in this the economic gains essential for international

geography. He discussed an axis that included hegemony. For the US to maintain its hegemony

Russia, Germany, Iran, and Japan at the base in the international system, it is necessary to

of this bloc. This project highlighted Moscow’s control the system’s military, political, and

demand for a multipolar world order against the economic pillars as they were after World War

unipolar system the US had attempted to build II and allocate the necessary resources for this.

The Russia-Ukraine War

For the USA to maintain its The beginning of the conflict between Ukraine

and Russia has created new opportunities for hegemony in the international the US to increase the effectiveness of NATO system, it is necessary to control again. In 2019, French President Macron’s the system’s military, political, statement that NATO was brain dead caused and economic pillars as they were discomfort in centers such as Washington

after World War II and allocate the (The Economist, 2019The Economist (2019). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.; The Guardian, 2019The Guardian (2019). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).

necessary resources for this. However, starting in 2014, Moscow’s decision

to annex Crimea with a referendum and the

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting attempt to protect the Russian population in the

Countries (OPEC), where a significant portion Donbas region started a new security debate in

of the world’s oil reserves are located, continues European geography, and in some of its reports

to be active in the world energy market as an in recent years, Washington’s security strategies

organization dominated by Islamic countries. towards the Russian Federation were also

Developed industrial countries that are highly mentioned. In the same report, it was stated that

dependent on foreign energy (natural gas, oil, the military assistance and consultancy of the

etc.) act in cooperation with the US to meet their US in the Ukraine-Russia conflict could provide

needs. It is also noteworthy that the countries significant advantages in terms of increasing

that produce the most oil in the world, such as the expenses of Russia without causing a

Saudi Arabia, where Washington’s effectiveness provocation that could lead to the spread of the

is high, sometimes try to follow an alternative conflict (RAND Corporation, 2019, 4).

The Ukraine war allowed the Washington While the problems in relations between

administration to restructure NATO’s the US and the UK and some of their

effectiveness as a control mechanism in the Western allies in Europe were increasing,

wide European geography while putting the Chinese President Xi visited Moscow,

a barrier in front of the discussions and and during his meeting with the President

attempts to exclude NATO from Europe of the Russian Federation, Putin stated that

(Chatham House, 2023Chatham House (2023). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). The US and some their countries play a driving force in the

of its allies, who want to control the line, geopolitical change in the world (Lemaître

will want to extend their control to an & Ruisseau, 2023; Ellyatt, 2023; Aljazeera,

area level, that is, to some parts of Eurasia 2023). Considering that China is shown as a

and Africa, if they are successful in these target after Russia in the Western press and

efforts. In the Caucasus, when the Russian some Western leaders’ statements and that

Federation blocked the control mechanism the US, UK, and Australia have established a

they wanted to establish through Georgia, joint military pact in the region, he sees that

they had to step back. It is seen that they these developments are linked to Russia’s

have difficulties in Ukraine, which they resistance.

have chosen as their new control area. The US-British alliance is disturbed by

Following Dr. Kissinger’s warnings, they the fact that India meets its energy needs,

took an important step in blocking the especially from Russia (Chang, 2023;

rapprochement of their European allies, Sen, 2022; Naqvi, 2023). It is because the

especially Germany, with Moscow, but as energy cooperation between India and

Kissinger stated, they faced new problems. Russia prevents the success of the embargo

Some allies, such as Washington and against Russia. In addition to the rising

London, who have difficulties taking a step social reactions in European geography,

back, think that Russia’s victory in the war the inability to control China and Indian

would be an important step back for the Prime Minister Mondi’s refusal to accept

United States after all NATO’s efforts, as the termination of energy cooperation with

NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg stated Russia made it difficult for Washington and

as the reason for this difficulty (Stoltenberg, London to build a new international system

2023). under their control, relying on a military

While Prof. John J. Mearsheimer also structure like NATO.

stated that the US and its European allies

played a provocative role in the Ukraine Conclusion

issue (Mearsheimer, 2014Mearsheimer (2014). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.), Kissinger,

who saw the cost of the war and its risk of In addition to powers such as the Russian

spreading, suggested to Zelenski and his Federation, it was pointed out that NATO

allies to adopt a compromising stance in could face a long-term competition

order to end the war (Carbonaro, 2002; problem with China and the US (The

Bella, 2022; Kissinger, 2014). National Security Strategy of the United

States of America, 2002, 26-7; Brezinski, more years (Kupchan, 2002, 62; Baun,

1997; Kissinger, 1994, 826). The high rate of 2004, p. 27-38). On the other hand, it

development in China increases its energy is also recommended that governments

needs. It was stated that China would want follow an increasingly intrusive policy

more say in the geopolitical competition to maintain control. Robert Kagan from

over oil production centers, increasing the Carnegie Foundation suggested that

its problems with the US, which does not American hegemony be preserved, and

want partners with alternative power and intervention should be considered before

resources (Segal, 1998Segal (1998). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.; Ricks, 2000Ricks (2000). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). The crises occur. He also stated that this is

embargo imposed by the US due to its necessary to be a global superpower

problems with Iran was evaluated as an (Kagan, 2001Kagan (2001). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).

opportunity by the Chinese administration. While Washington recommends action

While China had the opportunity to sign wherever NATO interests are threatened

an energy agreement with Iran, which had (The National Security Strategy of the

difficulties in the market due to the US US, 2002), it was emphasized that the US

embargo, this situation also allowed Iran always had the right to use military force

to breathe economically (Fassihi & Myers, in any country in the world when there

2021). was a threat to its interests (Shuia, 2004:

The attitude of the Washington 34). Having added Europe after World

administration, which tries to threaten War II to the American continent, which

the countries of the Gulf region through the Monroe Doctrine essentially defined

Iran, has been seen as an opportunity for as the sphere of interest by emphasizing

China. The Chinese administration used that Washington would act to protect

the economic relationship it established US interests wherever they existed, the

with Tehran to relieve the tension between Washington administration redefined this

Saudi Arabia and Iran and succeeded sphere with the new realities that emerged

in bringing the two countries together. after the Cold War.

The meeting between Iran and Saudi The process of giving NATO a task to

Arabia clearly disturbed the Washington protect new areas of interest, namely all

administration. areas in which the US and some of its allies

It is stated that Washington has difficulties operate or want to operate, has been started

in its efforts to control the international following changing imperial demands. The

system. Charles A. Kupchan, who served as US and its close allies aim to shift NATO’s

a member of the Clinton administration’s control areas from the western territorial

national security council and worked line to the wider international territorial

at Georgetown University, stated that area faces great difficulties. How this

with the emergence of centers such as a process will develop will be determined

united Europe, it would be difficult for by the attitudes of social, regional, and

the US unipolar system to last even ten international actors.

Notes References

1 In his speech at Harvard University on June 5, 1947, US Secre- Abu-Lughod, J. (1989). Before European Hegemony: The World

tary of State George Marshall warned that America’s prosperity was System, AD.1250-1350. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 343-5.

due to Europe’s recovery. See (LaFeber, 1989, 456) Aljazeera. (2023, March 27). China’s Xi tells Putin of ‘chan- 2 In 1999, the Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary joined, and

in March 2004, Bulgaria, Romania, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Slo- ges not seen for 100 years’. https://www.aljazeera.com/

venia, and Slovakia became members. news/2023/3/22/xi-tells-putin-of-changes-not-seen-for-100

3 Hegemony: A situation in which a state or a class controls its Barnet, R. J. (1990). Reflections: After the Cold War. The New

sphere of activity and other states or classes are forced to submit to Yorker, January 1, 72.

the demands of the hegemonic power or class. While states are cal-

led hegemons at the world system level, classes are called hegemons Baun, M. (2004). The Implications of EU Enlargement for the

within the state. United States. Perspectives, 21/2004, 27-38.

4 The US Department of State Policy Planning Staff was created Bella, T. (2022, May 24). Kissinger says Ukraine should cede ter-

on May 7, 1947. Its purpose was to develop long-term policies. ritory to Russia to end war. The Washington Post. Retrieved ⁵ US President Bush stated they would keep US military power

at a level other countries could not reach. (CNN International, 2002, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/24/

December 2). henry-kissinger-ukraine-russia/

⁶ G. Robertson, the NATO secretary general at the time, accused Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The grand chessboard: American primacy

France, Germany and Belgium by saying that they were aiming to and its geopolitical imperatives. Basic Books.

destroy NATO. (Buhl, 2003Buhl (2003). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.)

⁷ Marc Grossman, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs at Brzezinski, Z. (2004). Where do we go from here? Military Tech-

the US Department of State. In his speech, “American Foreign Policy nology, 28(1), 16.

in the Twentieth Century,” he said, “There is no democracy without Bühl, N. (2003). France and NATO- Partnership with Obstacles.

a free market”. In the same speech, Grossman stated, “The United

States has never been more integrated with the global system in its NATO’s Nations and Partners for Peace, 2, 67.

history, and American power is the main key to diplomatic success.” Carbonaro, G. (2022, June 5). Henry Kissinger: Ukraine Should

(Grossman, 2022) Give Up Territory to Russia to Reach Peace. Newsweek. Ret-

⁸ According to the charity Oxfam, developing countries face the rieved from https://www.newsweek.com/henry-kissinger-uk-

barrier of tariffs when exporting to rich developed country mar- raine-should-give-territory-russia-reach-peace-1710548

kets. This is four times higher than that of rich countries. These

barriers cost developing countries $100 billion. This figure is twice Carpenter, T. G. (2003). The Bush Administration’s Security Stra-

the amount of aid that developing countries receive. See (Vass, 2002, tegy: Implications for Transatlantic Relations. Cambridge Re-

937). The debt interest paid by the economies of the developing view of International Affairs, 16(3), 511.

countries is higher than the profits of the multinational companies

from their international investments. See (The Guardian, 1998The Guardian (1998). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). Ac- Chang, F. K. (2023, April 5). China’s and India’s Relations with

cording to Dicken, MNCs significantly impact integrating local eco- Russia after the War in Ukraine: A Dangerous Deviation?

nomies with the global economy. This negatively affects developing Foreign Policy Research Institute. https://www.fpri.org/ar-

countries because of the sudden changes in the world economy. See ticle/2023/04/chinas-and-indias-relations-with-russia-af-

(Dicken, 1998, 276). ter-the-war-in-ukraine-a-dangerous-deviation/

⁹ When the Pentagon’s 1992 Draft Defense Planning Manual was

leaked to the press, it sparked considerable controversy. Paul Wol- Chase, R. S., Hill, E. B., & Kennedy, P. (1996). Pivotal States and

fowitz, who was the undersecretary of the defense ministry at the US Strategy. Foreign Affairs, 75(1), 47.

time, played an important role in this draft, where the main purpose Chatham House. (2023, February 20). Seven ways Russia’s war on

was to prevent the emergence of a rival country in the former Soviet Ukraine has changed the World. Retrieved from https://www.

geography or anywhere, and that the geography where there are suf- chathamhouse.org/2023/02/seven-ways-russias-war-ukrai-

ficient resources to contribute to the transformation of an alternati-

ve power center into a global power is a hostile power. It is emphasi- ne-has-changed-world

zed that it should be prevented from passing into control. It is stated Christian Science Monitor. (2004, December 2). A Forward Stra-

that the US strategy should focus on preventing the emergence of tegy for NATO. Vol. 96, Issue 54.

potential global competitors in the future (New York Times, 1992New York Times (1992). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.).

10 According to Richard J. Barnet, the most important problem Christopher, W., & Perry, W. (1997, October 21). NATO’s true

faced by the US is economic, and the source of the problem is not mission. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.

the Communist world but the capitalist countries (Barnet, 1990, 72). nytimes.com/1997/10/21/opinion/nato-s-true-mission.html

11 On September 24, 2002, US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul CNN International. (2002, December 2). Special Event: President

Wolfowitz said about the Iraq intervention: “Iraq is floating on a sea George W. Bush Addresses Troops at Fort Campbell. Retrieof oil.” If Iraq is to be invaded, it will be because of oil, not because of

terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, or Saddam Hussein. (Wri- ved from https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/se/date/2002-12-

ght, The Guardian, 2003, June 4). 02/segment/04

12 9/11 can also be seen as the beginning of such a legitimacy DeHoop Scheffer, J. (2004). Anticipating Istanbul. NATO Review

process, says Vidal. See. (Vidal, The Observer, 2002Vidal, The Observer (2002). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.) (Istanbul Summit Special), 6.

13 G. O. Tuathai says the purpose of Huntington’s thesis is to turn

global politics into a clash of civilizations. See. (Tuathai, 1998, 170- Dicken, P. (1998). Global Shift: Transforming the World Eco-

76). nomy (3rd ed.). London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.

Dunlop, J. B. (2004). Aleksandr Dugin’s Foundations of Geopoli- Kissinger, H. (2001). Does America Need a Foreign Policy?

tics. Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democra- Toward a Diplomacy for the 21st Century. New York, NY;

tization, 12(1), 41-57. London: Simon & Schuster.

EDM Parliament. (n.d.). Paul Wolfowitz and the reasons for in- Kissinger, H. (2014, March 5). How the Ukraine crisis ends.

vading Iraq. Retrieved from https://edm.parliament.uk/earl- The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washin-

y-day-motion/22456/paul-wolfowitz-and-the-reasons-for-in- gtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukrai-

vading-iraq ne-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-

Ellyatt, H. (2023, March 21). Russia and China are being driven 8466-d34c451760b9_story.html

together as the chasm with the West deepens. CNBC. htt- Kissinger, H. A. (1999). Globalization and World Order. Paper

ps://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/21/russia-and-china-are-beco- presented at Trinity College Conference, Dublin.

ming-ever-closer-and-the-west-should-worry.html Kupchan, C. A. (2002). The end of the West. The Atlantic Month-

Encyclopedia of United States National Security. (2005). Carter ly, 290(4), 42-44.

Doctrine. SAGE Publications. Retrieved from http://www.sa- Kupchan, C.H. (2002). The End of the American Era: US Foreign ge-ereference.com/view/nationalsecurity/n93.xml Policy and the Geopolitics of the Twenty-First Century. New

Escobar, P. (2002, December 4). The US and Eurasia: Theatrical York: Alfred A. Knopf. p. 62.

Militarism. Asia Times Online. Retrieved from https://asiati- LaFeber, W. (1989). The American Age. New York, NY: W.W. mes.com/2002/12/the-u-s-and-eurasia-theatrical-militarism/ Norton. Fang, J., Johnson, C., & Leeds, B. A. (2014). To concede or to re- Lemaître, F., & Ruisseau, N. (2023, April 9). China’s Xi throws sist? The restraining effect of military alliances. International support behind Putin during Russia visit. Le Monde. Organization, 68 (Fall 2014), 775-809.

Gills, B.K. & Frank, A.G. (1996). The Cumulation of Accumula- Lesser, I. O., Nardulli, B. R., & Arghavan, L. A. (1998). Sources

tion. In Frank, A.G. & Gills, B.K. (eds.), The World System. of conflict in the Greater Middle East. Santa Monica, CA:

Routledge, London, 86. RAND. (p. 171).

Grossman, M. (2002). American Foreign Policy for the 21st Lewis, W. H. (1995). The Growing Reach of Radical Islam. Joint

Century. Remarks to the Kansas City International Rela- Forces Quarterly, (8), 46.

tions Council, October 29 2002, Missouri. www.state.go- Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s

v/p/14810pf.htm. Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin. Foreign

Harman, C. (1999). A People’s History of the World, (s.544), Lon- Affairs, 93(5).

don: Bookmarks. Morgenthau, H. J. (1952). American foreign policy: A critical exa-

Hill, J., & Smith, K. E. (Eds.). (2000). European foreign policy: mination, 1952:5. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.

Key documents (p. 200, 217, 233-234, 243-244). London and Naqvi, M. (2023, March 16). Why India Walks a Tightrope Betwe-

New York: Routledge. en US and Russia. The Washington Post. https://www.washin-

Huntington, S. (1999). The lonely superpower. Foreign Affairs, gtonpost.com/world/2023/03/16/india-us-russia-tightrope/

78(2), 48. NATO Press Release (2004, June 28). Istanbul Summit Commu-

Huntington, S. P. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Af- niqué.

fairs, 72(3), 22-49. NATO Review. (1990, August). The future of the Atlantic Allian-

Ikenberry, G. J. (1999). Why export democracy? The Wilson Qu- ce. (38)4, 19-22.

arterly, 23(2), 60. NATO. (2006, September 21). NATO offers Intensified Dialogue

Ikenberry, G.J. (2004). “A Forward Strategy for NATO”, Christian to Georgia. NATO Update.

Science Monitor, 96(54). Newsweek. (1989, December 4). The collapse of communism:

Kagan, R. (2001). The World and President Bush. Survival, 43(1), Europe rethinks its security. (pp. 22-25).

15. Nogee, J. L., & Donaldson, R. H. (1988). Soviet foreign policy sin-

Kemp, G. and Saunders, P. (2003). America, Russia, and the Gre- ce World War II (3rd ed., s. 110). New York: Pergamon Press.

ater Middle East: Challenges and Opportunities. The Nixon O’Loughlin, J. (1996). Geo-Economic Competition and Trade

Center. Retrieved from http://www.nixoncenter.org/publica- Bloc Formation: U.S., German and Japanese Export 1968-

tions/USRussiainGME.pdf (p. 7). 1992. Economic Geography, 72(2), 133-156. Kissinger, H. (1989). Living with the inevitable. Newsweek, De- Oil & Gas Journal. (2003, December 22). Caspian Sea oil and gas: cember 4, 22-25. Output accelerates; new projects expected. Retrieved from

Kissinger, H. (1994). Diplomacy. Simon & Schuster. http://www.ogj.com/articles/print/volume-101/issue-51/

Kissinger, H. (1994). Expand NATO Now. The Washington Post, special-report-caspian-sea-oil-and-gas-output-accelera-

December 19. tes-new-projects-expected.html

Osgood, R. (1968). Alliances and American Foreign Policy. Balti- Taheri, A. (2003, April 11). Who is Next? No One and Everyone.

more, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press. Arab News.

Policy Planning Staff. (n.d.). Review of current trends, US foreign Terriff, T., Weber, M., Croft, S., & Howorth, J. (2001). European

policy (Vol. 1, Part 2, Document 4, 24, February 24, p. 524). Security and Defence Policy after Nice. The RIIA, Briefing Pa-

Foreign Relations of the United States. Washington, DC. per, New Series, No. 20, April 2001, 4.

RAND Corporation. (2019). Overextending and Unbalancing The Economist (2019, November 7The Economist (2019). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). Emmanuel Macron war-

Russia… (No. RR-3043-AF). ns Europe: NATO is becoming brain-dead. Retrieved from

Rawnsley, G. D. (1999). The campaign of truth: A populist pro- https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanu-

paganda. Cold-War propaganda in the 1950s (s. 31). London: el-macron-warns-europe-nato-is-becoming-brain-dead

Macmillan. The Guardian (2019, November 7The Guardian (2019). The source article does not provide a separate full bibliographic entry for this citation.). Macron criticised by US and

Reuters. (2008, April 11). Russia army vows steps if Georgia and Germany over Nato’ brain death’ claims. Retrieved from ht-

Ukraine join NATO. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/artic- tps://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/07/macron-c-

le/newsOne/idUSL1143027920080411 riticised-by-us-and-germany-over-nato-brain-death-claims

Reuters. (2022, September 7). India keen to bolster energy, ot- The Independent, (1990, July 7).

her ties with Russia, says Modi. Reuters. https://www.reuters. The Jakarta Post. (2023, April 4). Russian defense minister says

com/world/india/india-keen-bolster-energy-other-ties-wit- Finland joining NATO raises risk of conflict. https://www.

h-russia-says-modi-2022-09-07/ thejakartapost.com/news/2023/04/04/russian-defense-mi-

Ricks, T.E. (2000, May 27-28). Changing Winds of US Defense nister-says-finland-joining-nato-raises-risk-of-conflict.html

Strategy: Pentagon Is Shifting Attention to Asia. International The National Security Strategy of the United States of America.

Herald Tribune. (2002). Retrieved from https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&-

Roth, A. (2022, June 29). Putin issues fresh warning to Finland did=439174

and Sweden on installing Nato infrastructure. The Guardi- The New American. (2003, April 7). US bases in Eastern Europe?

an. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/29/pu- Vol.19, No.7.

tin-issues-fresh-warning-to-finland-and-sweden-on-instal- The New York Times. (1992, March 8). Excerpts from Pentagon’s

ling-nato-infrastructure Plan: Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival. Retrieved

Russett, B. M. (1971). An empirical typology of international mi- from https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/08/world/excerpts-

litary alliances. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 15(2), from-pentagon-s-plan-prevent-the-re-emergence-of-a-new-

262-289. rival.html

S. Federici and G. Cafentzis, “The War in Yugoslavia: NATO’s Real Thomas, B. (1969). UNO versus NATO. New World, May 1969:2.

Agenda”, Radical Philosophy Review, vol.2, no.1, 2000:35. Trauschweizer, I. (2016). Adapt and survive: NATO in the Cold

S. Hardy (Ed.), An Enlarged Europe: Regions in Competition?, War. In P. Mansoor & W. Murray (Eds.), Grand strategy and

Regional Studies Association with J. Kingsley Publishers, military alliances (pp. 166-194). Cambridge University Press.

London, 1995. Tuathail, G. O. (1996). Samuel Huntington and the “Civilizing”

Segal, G. (1998). Still a Fragile Power. New Political Economy, of Global Space. In G. O. Tuathail, S. Dalby, & P. Routledge

3(3), 442-444. (Eds.), The geopolitics reader (pp. 170-176). Routledge.

Sen, S. (2022, March 14). Why is India standing with Pu- Tyler, P.E. (1992, March 8). US Strategy Plan Calls For Insuring

tin’s Russia? Aljazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/opini- No Rivals Develop. The New York Times.

ons/2022/3/14/why-is-istandwithputin-trending-in United States Information Service. (1989). Official text: Address

Shlapentokh, D. (2001, July). Russian nationalism today: The to Berlin Press Club. The US Embassy, London, 9.

views of Alexander Dugin. Contemporary Review, 279(1625), Vass, A. (2002). Trade rules rigged in favour of the rich. British

29-37. Medical Journal, 324(7343), 937.

Shuja, S. (2004). The Bush Doctrine and the Emerging World Or- Vidal, G. (2002, October 27). The enemy within. The Observer.

der. National Observer, (59), 34. Western European Union Assembly General Affairs Committee.

Snyder, C. A. (1999). Regional security structures. In Contempo- (1967). A retrospective view of the political year in Europe

rary security and strategy (pp. 102-119). London: Macmillan. 1966. Retrieved from https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/letter_

Snyder, G. (1997). Alliance Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univer- from_us_president_lyndon_b_johnson_to_general_de_ga-

sity Press. ulle_22_march_1966-en-f85d2acd-3287-458e-9486-18a-

Stoltenberg, J. (2023, February 17). Doorstep statement by NATO 94773a09f.html

Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg ahead of the Munich Secu- Wright, G. (2003, June 4). Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil. The

rity Conference. Retrieved from https://www.nato.int/cps/en/ Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/

natohq/opinions_212035.htm world/2003/jun/05/iraq.oil