The European Union & NATO - Case Study Example

 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 3 Introduction 4 The European Union (EU) 6 The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 10 The Fall of Communism: NATO & the EU 12 A Common Security Strategy 17 Dual Process of Enlargement 20 Concluding Remarks 23 Bibliography 25 ABSTRACT: The European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization are multilateral organizations representing transnational constituents which transcend both the European peninsula and the dual Atlantic coasts. Each was established in the aftermath of the Second World War and gradually evolved during the course of the Cold War. Seeking to understand the emergence as well as the sustainability of each of these organizations, this essay will address the parallel paths and trajectories assumed by both the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. With a primary focus on the post-Cold War period, this article will chart the resilience of each organization in the face of monumental geopolitical change, the common ties that bond both the EU and NATO in the post 9/11 world and the enlargement strategies adopted by each international body. We will then conclude with a concise overview of the issues raised and will summarize the research with an eye to our focus, the parallel paths of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Introduction The countries of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (as well as NATO itself) are divided by the Atlantic Ocean, the second largest of the world’s oceanic divisions and the historic route between the “Old World” and the “New World”. Established in the wake of the Second World War, the European Union (formerly the European Economic Community) is a supranational multilateral organization which generates an estimated 30% of the world’s total Gross Domestic Product.1 In addition to being an economic powerhouse, the European Union represents near total European integration in the political, judicial, social and economic spheres. Of equal transnational potency, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is an international collective defence organization with members straddling both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. NATO arose in response to the threats emanating from the East, particularly from the Soviet Union at the start of the Cold War. Although initially largely a political organization, NATO has evolved to become a military powerhouse with an increasingly strong deterrent. Accordingly, the combined spending on defence of the countries of NATO is estimated at 70% of total defence spending globally. The European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization represent multilateralism and the evolution of Western diplomatic organization at its very best.2 Seeking to address the organizational structure and overarching goals of these two multinational organizations, this essay will focus on commonalities between the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in an effort to better our understanding of how these two supranational organizations relate to their members, each other, as well as the wider international community. With a focus on parallel paths, this assignment will pay particular attention to the commonalities and the communal ties that bind the European Union and the Atlantic Alliance together. We will begin with a concise yet comprehensive overview of the both the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Following this, we will thoroughly address the evolution of NATO and the EU following the collapse of state-led communism in Eastern Europe. The ramifications of this incredible and for some, unimaginable, fact will be analyzed in depth with respect to both the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. This will be followed with a comprehensive analysis of security arrangements and the parallel trajectories of the security situation in Europe as well as abroad for the EU and the Atlantic Alliance. While security and defence remain the core attributes and raison d’être of NATO, security and defence are recent concerns for the EU. With a particular focus on European and North Atlantic security in the post-9/11 world, this section will elaborate further upon the joint threats and security challenges facing these two multinational bodies. Following this section on security and the evolution of the security needs and concerns for both organizations, we will then turn to an analysis of enlargement and the growth of each organization. Thus, we look at the ever-increasing demand for growth, the trajectory in which each organization has grown and finally, the results, both stated and unintended, of enlargement. We then conclude with a broad overview of the issues analyzed with an eye to the future integration of these important transnational and multilateral organizations. The European Union The European Union (EU) is a supranational body composed of constituent member states, found largely on the European peninsula. Democracy, negotiation, and collective decision-making through multilateralism are all inherent attributes of the modern EU. As a multinational organization, the EU represents various national interests within an overarching political framework. The EU is an international organization which operates on the basis of negotiation between member states and relies on collective decision-making to achieve its ends. Members are joined together and bound by treaties signifying their participation within the larger EU political framework. The political decisions of member-states are thus constrained by their allegiance and signatory status to overarching EU treaties.3 Today, membership in the European Union is actively sought by nearly all countries on the European peninsula as well as by one country straddling both Europe and Middle Asia (Turkey). Although there were initially only five members of the precursor to the European Union (Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands and West Germany), there are presently 27 countries in the EU and they are, in alphabetical order, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, the Republic of Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and finally, the United Kingdom. Countries currently seeking membership in the EU include parts of the former Federal State of Yugoslavia as well as Turkey. A political and economic powerhouse, this intergovernmental organization is estimated to account for up to 30% of the world’s total Gross Domestic Product4. Although it has not always been the case, modern-day Europe is characterized by a unifying democratic political culture. While the concept of democracy originated on its shores, the philosophy of democratic governance was challenged in 20th century Europe by authoritarian political movements, including fascism (expressed by Nazi Germany & Mussolini’s Italy), and communism (as exemplified in Eastern Europe during the Cold War). With Allied victory in World War II and the recent collapse of the Soviet Union, democracy – in varying degrees– is now a universal trend amongst European states. In fact liberal democracy, best expressed by the states of Western Europe with entrenched democratic traditions, is quickly becoming the standard for the continent. Democratic norms and rules have subsequently been established through a pan-European legal framework, the European Union.5 The Treaty of Rome, signed in March of 1957, proposed a common European economic market throughout the European Economic Community. Historically-speaking this was perhaps the most important precursor to the integration of Europe today. Recent treaties, including the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Treaty of Nice, and the failed EU Constitution all followed the precedent set more than 40 years ago in Rome. Despite some controversies, democracy remains alive and well within the EU political framework. In fact, the recent failure to implement a Constitution for Europe affirmed the democratic underpinnings of the Union and proved that debate and collective decision making are inherent components of the working European Union.6 The Maastricht Treaty (1993) creating the European Union, replaced the European Community, and paved the way for further economic, social and political integration within Europe. This integration was strengthened through the implementation of three institutional pillars: 1) European Communities; 2) Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), and 3) police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters as well as the acceptance of a single currency, the Euro. In addition to the three pillars, the acceptance of the Euro as an official currency of members of the so-called “Eurozone” strengthened economic bonds between member states. Following negotiations in the Dutch city of Maastricht, the Treaty of Amsterdam (1999) represented a further evolution of collective decision making amongst EU members.7 Described as a “confederated state”, the European Union represents an evolution of the European democratic tradition. Europe is the cradle of modern democracy and modern European states have successfully maintained a democratic tradition for centuries (Tilly rightful demonstrates entrenched liberal democracy using the case of Britain).8 Despite claims that legislation enacted in Brussels bypasses the rights of individual states, the opposite is true. All states within the union participate in its decision making processes.9 The European Union is arguably the world’s most successful attempt at regional integration. The motto of the EU is “unity in diversity” and collective bargaining, negotiation and a plurality of opinion are attributes of today’s EU. The European Union represents democracy at work and recent treaties obligating all members to abide by common standards in the political and social realms affirm a common standard among the states of Europe. In fact, “by agreeing to pursue that interest within an organization as constraining as the European Union, the member-states have recognized the ultimate superiority of multilateral, as opposed to unilateral, decision making and action in a variety of policy arenas”. Accordingly, multilateralism, democracy, and collective decision making are at the heart of today’s European Union.10 The North Atlantic Treaty Organization The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a military alliance which was established by the North Atlantic Treaty following World War II in 1949. The Atlantic Alliance is headquartered in Brussels, Belgium and represents collective defence integration on both sides of the Atlantic. NATO was initially composed of 10 founding members in the wake of the Soviet-induced Berlin Blockade, including countries of Europe (Belgium, France, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark and Iceland) and two countries from North America (Canada and the United States). Today, NATO is composed of 26 countries and in alphabetical order they are Bulgaria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and finally, the United States. Of incredible magnitude, the combined defence spending of the countries of NATO is estimated at 70% of total global defence spending.11 NATO was established after the Second World War in response to fears of encroachment by the increasingly powerful USSR. Between 1948 and 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created and included the participation of 10 European countries as well Canada and the United States, representing North America. While the initial impetus for the growth of this organization was the Soviet Berlin Blockade in 1948, a North Atlantic Treaty was signed by the original member states in Washington, DC on April 4th 1949, thus committing its members to collective defence. Accordingly, What catalyzed NATO was a strong desire to link Europe and North America in response to the Soviet threat. NATO mollified European concerns about a potential German threat; contributed to a greater sense of Western European unity and security; provided a mechanism for the United States to participate in European economic and military recovery.12 As a collective defence organization, NATO grew and evolved to ensure the geopolitical stability and physical security of its member states. Growing in tandem with changes to the international system including the Korean War, the Cuban missile crisis, bipolarity and an arms race on the extreme poles of the Cold War, NATO has evolved tremendously over the past sixty-odd years. The dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991 effectively removed NATO’s adversary from the equation and put the future existence of this organization into doubt. The following section describes the incredible fall of communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and discusses the importance of this event on both the EU and NATO, with particular emphasis on the ramifications this “calamity” had for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The Fall of Communism: NATO & the EU The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 signaled the end of the Cold War and the defeat of the communist command system at the hands of capitalist-inspired liberal democracy. While applauded from all four corners of the globe, the end of the Soviet Union and the threat of nuclear war posed quite a dilemma to members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. In fact, NATO went through an existential crisis and faced the prospect to becoming obsolete. Despite this, NATO has shown its resilience and remains a potent force almost 19 years after the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe. Although the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe affected the European Union in very different ways, the demise of totalitarian rule on the periphery of the countries EU will be explored with an eye to its impact on the European Community. It goes without saying that the collapse of communism had potentially far more disrupting effects to the organizational structure and very raison d’être of NATO. It is for this reason that we must first turn to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in our analysis of the collapse of communism from 1989 to 1991. While enthusiastically welcomed by every single member of North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 1989, the fall of the Soviet Union posed a severe threat to the very core of NATO. Is it fair to say that the threat was existential? Absolutely. NATO was created in response to the military threat emanating from East Europe and the Soviet Union. As a collective defence organization, NATO evolved in response to threats and challenges from the East and with the fall of communism, it lost its very raison d’être. The challenges posed by the collapse of state-led communism in Eastern Europe and the USSR were existential indeed. While NATO was initially established to link Europe and North America in an alliance in response to the Soviet threat, Throughout the next forty years as NATO’s membership, organizational structure, and list of responsibilities grew, two essential facts remained constant: NATO focused on the Soviet threat, and it performed both military and nonmilitary functions for its members. Though the degree of threat varied over that time, the threat was always present.13 The Warsaw Pact was a defence organization of communist states signed in Warsaw, Poland in 1945. Established in response to the introduction of West Germany into NATO, the Warsaw Pact sought to provide collective defence and coordinated military support to the countries of the Soviet block (including Eastern and Central Europe. Although differing in terms of organization and command structure, in term of content the Warsaw Pact could be seen as the Soviet-inspired equivalent of NATO. Following the collapse of state-led communism in Eastern and central Europe, the Warsaw Pact was officially abrogated in 1991. NATO, sure of its place and continued utility following the fall of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of state-led communism in Europe and the abrogation of the Warsaw Pact, successfully integrated former Warsaw Pact members into its collective defence and military alliance. In fact, on March 12 1999 Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic joined NATO as full members. There is more than a little irony in the fact all three countries - Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic (albeit as the former state of Czechoslovakia) – were founding members of the Warsaw Pact back in 1945 and of course, this Pact was named for the city in which it was signed, in Poland. Five years later, in March of 2004 former Warsaw Pact members Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia were admitted into the NATO community, bringing the total former Warsaw Pact membership of NATO to nine. In addition to absorbing the former membership of its nemesis, NATO has proven its utility in a post-Cold War world through further integration and new challenges.14 Both NATO and the EU embraced the fall of communism and the eventual abrogation of the Warsaw Pact in 1991, although this effectively removed NATO’s nemesis from the Cold War conflict and seriously put the future of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization into doubt. While the ramifications of this event were undeniable for NATO, how did the European Union respond to the collapse of Soviet-led communism in Eastern Europe and the former USSR? EU constituent states universally welcome the collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent reform of Eastern and Central Europe. While praising the end of the socialist experiment on the shores of the continent and encouraging the full democratization of the former satellite states of the Soviet block, European Union policymakers also welcomed the collapse for a variety of other reasons. For EU policymakers and tacticians, Eastern Europe presented a series of opportunities. Newly embracing capitalism and the democratic ideals of the West, states of the former Soviet empire were, for EU policymakers, an emerging opportunity. Yes, Eastern and Central Europe represented growth for the EU. Growth in an organizational sense but also more importantly an opportunity for growth in the economic sphere. Pressing initial concerns included the dismantling of the oppressive authoritarian state structures of the past but once that was complete, visionary members of the European Union saw an untapped resource and excellent opportunity for economic growth in the countries which had rid themselves of the last vestiges of communism. In this sense, Eastern and Central Europe were to become markets for goods produced in the West, workers from the East were thus conceived of as potential laborers in a transcontinental and integrated economy and the markets of Poland, Hungary, the Ukraine and the former states of the Yugoslav Federation were seen as potential homes for the soon-to-be minted Euro. Thus, in 2004 the European Union embraced members of the former Soviet block and began its biggest enlargement to date with the acceptance of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia into the Union (Malta and Cyprus also joined that year). Finally, on the first day of the New Year in 2007, Bulgaria and Romania became the newest members of the EU and Slovenia officially adopted the Euro as its national currency. The concept of opportunity, as characterized by future enlargement - which we will see again later - was how the European Union saw the collapse of the Soviet Union and the democratization of Eastern Europe.15 A Common Security Strategy In December of 2003, the European Council of the European Union adopted the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), a sober assessment of the security situation in the post 9/11 world and a proactive attempt to enhance international security. Understanding that EU member states face common security challenges and that the most dangerous threats facing Europe today are the same that the United States has had to confront post 9/11, the CFSP represents the most clear European strategy to combat global terrorism. Accordingly, this document makes explicit the transatlantic threats posed by international terrorists and necessitates an active role for the European Community in combating terrorism. Sadly, the Madrid bomb attacks (March 11 2004) and the London bombings (July 7 2005) respectively brought home just how real and sustained the terror threat is to the democracies of Europe. Understanding that Europe is not immune to attacks from Islamic fundamentalists and terror in general, the Common Foreign and Security Policy reaffirms the commitment of EU member states, in conjunction with their NATO allies, to work together in the spirit of global security. A major component of the CFSP is the need to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ensure forth righteously that these weapons do not land in the hands of terrorists bent on wreaking havoc on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. Furthermore, the adoption of the CFSP recognizes that failed states and regional conflict can also provide haven for terrorist and seeks to address these issues accordingly. The adoption of the Common Foreign and Security Policy clearly brings the European and North American perceptions of threat closer together and is “an immensely valuable contribution to the transatlantic security relationship”.16 NATO is an important safeguard of transatlantic defence and during the 1990s, the most important issue facing the transatlantic defence community was the question of whether or not NATO would act outside of its traditional scope or sphere of operations and play a role in establishing security beyond the territory of its member states. Following the violent break-up of the Yugoslav Federation, the peace operation undertaken by NATO in Bosnia and Herzegovina forcefully demonstrated that NATO would act outside of its traditional sphere of operations to ensure that civil war on the periphery of its member states would not threaten the security of its European members nor those of the European Union. Later, the decision by NATO to send AWACS to patrol the skies of the United States that fateful morning of September 11, 2001, emphatically demonstrated that NATO would protect not only the skies of Europe but also North American ones as well. Accordingly, the decision by NATO to lead Afghanistan’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003 showed just how willing this organization, composed of Europeans and North Americans, is to confront and combat the threats of the world, wherever they may be. Stressing the importance of NATO’s role in Afghanistan, former NATO secretary general Lord Robertson stated “If we fail, we will find Afghanistan on all of our doorsteps…”.17 The European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) works to unify the concerns of NATO with the challenges facing the European Union. In line with NATO’s engagement in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the CFSP accepts preventative engagement and understands the need to be proactive in dealing with the threats of global terror. As long as terrorism continues to threaten both Europe and North America, NATO remains the primary institution through which common defence is provided. Although officially two separate organizations with differing mandates and agendas, the European Union and NATO actually have a complimentary relationship when it comes to security and securing North America and Europe from the threats of tomorrow. While mandated to protect its constituent members, the Atlantic Alliance, as was proven in the former Yugoslavia, can play a proactive role in preserving peace in Europe as well as abroad. Thus, an arm of the EU, the European Defence Agency, can work in tandem with NATO in ensuring peace and prosperity throughout the Atlantic region. From a pure security perspective, these two organizations now work to compliment and reinforce each other. Dual Process of Enlargement NATO and the European Union are each in a process of enlargement, both choosing to increase their memberships and capabilities in response to new global realities in the post-Cold War and post-9/11 world. In fact, the Atlantic Alliance and the EU are undertaking parallel processes of enlargement. In both instances, the enlargement is eastward, towards the eastern fringes of Europe and the former satellite states of the Soviet Union. Enlargement – by the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance and the European Union – is likely to transform and fundamentally alter both the political and economic landscapes of modern Europe. NATO expanded its base significantly following 9/11 and although the European Union is also undergoing a process of expansion, it is fair to say that overall, European integration is a much slower process than the attainment of membership in the Atlantic Alliance. Ascension is how new membership into one of Europe’s most exclusive and sought-after multilateral organizations, the European Union, is described. Ascension is the process by which enlargement occurs and where new members are admitted into the EU club. Although the precursor to the European Union started out with only 6 states, there are now 27 member states – more countries are in the arduous ascension process to one day obtain full membership – and as a reflection of the diversity within a United Europe, there are presently 23 official languages of this multilateral body. In similar fashion to NATO, the EU experienced a crisis of sorts following the collapse of its social and economic rival in the East. Since the fall of the Soviet Block, the EU has undertaken steps to integrate the collective defence of its member states and has, rather controversially at first, established a single market currency for much of the region when it integrated the Euro in 2002. Presently there are 15 countries who use the Euro as their official currency. Seeking economic opportunity following the collapse of the Eastern block, the EU sought ways to integrate members of the former communist world into their collective organization. The Copenhagen Criteria (1993) was established as a set of democratic and capitalist credentials which needed to be implemented in order for a country to obtain EU membership. Accordingly, the Maastricht Treaty (1992) had stipulated the conditions for future enlargement. Following the end of the Cold War, the first countries to accede into the union were Austria, Finland and Sweden. The first members of the former Soviet Block to be embraced in the EU were the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia, who were accepted into the Union in 2004 (Malta and Cyprus also joined that year). This particular enlargement was the largest EU ascension ever. Bulgaria and Romania later followed on the first day of 2007. Official candidates for future enlargement are Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Western Balkan States (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Serbia) and finally Turkey. Of note, although Turkey applied for membership more than twenty years ago; its EU membership application continues to remain in doubt.18 NATO is currently composed of 26 countries and the combined defence spending of the countries which make up NATO today is estimated to be upwards of 70% of total global spending on defence. NATO enlargement, in the face of the defeat of its primary adversary embodied in the Soviet Union, the Eastern Block and the Warsaw Pact, has been eastward with a strong strategic shift towards integrating its former nemeses into the Atlantic Alliance. Following the official abrogation of the Warsaw Pact in 1991, NATO has played a decisive role in ending conflict in the Balkans, proving that it can be a force to be reckoned with outside of the territory of its members. Furthermore, NATO airplanes patrolled North American airspace the afternoon of September 11, 2001 proving that the Alliance can serve and protect on both sides of the Atlantic. Establishing a new diplomatic foothold and ensuring a place for itself in the post-Cold War world, NATO successfully integrated former Warsaw Pact members into its collective defence and military alliance. In 1999, Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic were admitted into NATO as full members and five years later, by 2005, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia were admitted into the NATO community, bringing its total former Warsaw Pact members to nine. Thus, while integrating its former archrivals into the Alliance and successfully evolving as a transnational collective defence body, NATO has again proven its utility in a post-Cold War. Importantly as well, both the expansions of NATO and the EU have largely been eastward, embracing former members of the Soviet block19. Concluding Remarks As growing multilateral organizations with increasing influence on the international stage, the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have established themselves as key players in the post-Cold War and post-9/11 world. Each has sustained the collapse of state-sponsored communism in Europe and has remained resilient in the face of tremendous geopolitical chance. Although they differ in many respects, the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have taken parallel paths and have evolved under a similar trajectory. Whether it was reinventing themselves in the post-Cold War world, establishing mutual security guarantees following 9/11 or integrating former members of the Soviet block into their ranks, both NATO and the EU have followed surprisingly similar paths. By developing in tandem, the Atlantic Alliance and a United Europe have shown strength and sustainability on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean and will continue to grow, side by side. Bibliography Ando, S (1993). Preparing the Ground for an Alliance Peacekeeping Role. NATO Review. 41(2): 33-52. Almond, G.A, Dalton, R.J & Powel Jr., G.B. (2002). European Politics Today, 2nd edition. New York: Longman. Alvarez, J.E. (2006). International Organizations: Then and Now. The American Journal of International Law.100(2): 324-347. Bereuter, D. (2004) NATO and the EU Security Strategy. Oxford Journal on Good Governance, 1(1):21-27. Bloom, M (2005). Dying to Kill. New York: Columbia University Press. Brown, M. E. (1995). The Flawed Logic of NATO Expansion. Survival, 37(1): 34-52. Fierke K.M., Wiener A (1999). Constructing institutional interests: EU and NATO enlargement. Journal of European Public Policy. 6(5): 721-742. Finnemore, M. (1996). Norms, Culture and World Politics: Insights from Sociology's Institutionalism. International Organization, 50, 325-47 Holst, J.J. (1992). Pursuing a durable peace in the aftermath of the cold war. NATO Review. 40(4): 9-13. MacGwire, M. (1998) "NATO expansion: 'A policy error of historic importance", Review of International Studies. 24(1): 23-42. McCalla, R. (1996). NATO's Persistence after the Cold War. International Organization. 50(3): 445-475. Preston, Christopher (1997) Enlargement and Integration in the European Union, New York: Routledge. Sloan, S. (1994) "Transatlantic relations in the wake of the Brussels summit", NATO Review. 42(2): 27-31. Sloan, S. (1995) "U.S. Perspectives on NATO's Future," International Affairs, 71(2): 217-246. Solesby, T. (1978). Helsinki to Belgrade – and beyond’, NATO Review 26(3): 16–22. Stankevicius, C. (1996). NATO enlargement and the indivisibility of security in Europe: a view from Lithuania’, NATO Review 44(5): 21–5. Tilly, C. (1993). European Revolutions. London: Blackwell. Warleigh, A. (2004). European Union: The Basics. New York: Routledge. Wood, S. and Quaisser, W. (2008). The New European Union: Confronting the Challenges of Integration. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers/ Worner, Manfred (1994). Shaping the alliance for the future. NATO Review, 42(1): 3-6. . Read More