Russia is challenging the West, destabilizing its neighbors
and interfering in foreign elections.
Some scholars say these Russian actions stem from a consequential decision
made in the nineties, a decision about the world's largest alliance.
The early years of the Cold War
were marked by growing mistrust and suspicion.
By 1949, the U.S.
feared the Soviet Union would invade Western Europe.
So it formed a military alliance with the democracies of Western Europe
to create a counterweight to the Soviet Union and to deter and,
if necessary, defend Western Europe from the Soviet Union.
Naito established a new balance of power in Europe.
The primary benefit to its members was collective security.
The idea that an attack against one ally was an attack on them all.
This protected weaker members from being singled out by the Soviet Union,
while also allowing NATO's members to pool and share their resources
so they can build more efficient and stronger military capabilities.
But it was about more than just defense.
Naito was an alliance of liberal democracies,
and it was supposed to build on common values and interests.
And the idea was interim for two world wars in Europe.
This was an attempt to say, Can we not be proactive?
Can we deter war rather than just fight them? In the name of peace,
West Germany was invited into NATO and joined in 1955.
In response, the Soviet Union formed the Warsaw Pact
with seven other communist countries in Eastern Europe, including East Germany,
establishing its own collective security arrangement.
It was not only an alliance but also a way for the Soviet
Union to exert control over those countries.
Basically, from the mid-fifties on, you had this total
stand off in Europe that continued during the Cold War,
where you had tremendous armaments on both sides posed against one another.
This tension lasted for decades until the Soviet Union started breaking apart.
In 1989, the Berlin Wall fell
and the unification of Germany soon followed with a major question
What a unified Germany be a member of Naito or would it be on its own?
Western and Soviet leaders negotiated over the issue
and agreed to allow a unified Germany into naito.
But there's still debate over what the terms of that agreement really were.
Some former officials claim that the Bush administration
made a promise to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev
that if he allowed a unified Germany to join Naito,
the alliance wouldn't expand any farther into Eastern Europe.
Other officials denied that such a promise was ever made.
Soon after German unification, both the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union
dissolved and President Boris Yeltsin became the leader of Russia,
the largest and most important successor country to the Soviet Union.
With the Cold War officially over.
Yeltsin wanted warmer relations with the West, and he promoted democracy
and market oriented policies in Russia.
But when former Warsaw Pact countries sought to join NATO,
Yeltsin sent letters to Western leaders warning that he was uneasy
with NATO membership expansion in Eastern Europe.
He feared that if NATO's expanded eastward,
it would threaten Russia's national security.
NATO summit was quickly approaching an alliance.
Leaders had major decisions to make.
Should NATO's expand its membership, and which countries should be invited to join?
Many in the Clinton White House and the State Department
supported expanding need a membership to Eastern Europe.
They argued that it would help those countries, providing them
with security while also promoting democracy and free market policies.
And they said it could give Naito a greater military advantage
if it ever came into conflict with Russia sometime in the future.
Yet there were some U.S.
officials in the State Department and Pentagon who opposed NATO enlargement.
They argued expanding Naito membership could overstretch the U.S.
military with new strategic commitments.
And they said it would isolate Russia, fueling anger among its people
and damaging the country's relationship with the United States.
In Europe, Some Naito leaders were concerned
about the United States taking a larger role, and they considered another approach
a face of European security that was more European
and less American might be something that would be more acceptable
to Russia and the countries of the former Soviet Union.
Amid the debate, the Pentagon started developing a new security plan
for Eastern Europe called the Partnership for Peace.
It was a military to military program intended to allow Naito Countries
to connect with former Warsaw Pact members, including Russia.
It was not an alliance and it did not provide collective security.
But it would have Naito Train and modernize Eastern European militaries,
and it fostered communication and understanding between former enemies.
In 1993, NATO's leaders needed to make a decision
Should the Partnership for Peace be an alternative to NATO membership
or the first steps to expanding membership in the alliance for some?
The answer could reshape the face of European
security and US-Russia relations for decades.