>> Jim Lindsay: World politics is in constant flux. Power ebbs and flows across the globe.
But how quick are countries to change the direction of their foreign policy in response
to a shifting global landscape?
I’m Jim Lindsay, and this is Lessons Learned.
Our topic today is the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty in Washington, DC, on April
4, 1949.
In his Farewell Address to the nation in 1796, George Washington urged his countrymen to
have “as little political connection as possible” with Europe.
Thomas Jefferson gave similar advice in his inaugural address, recommending that the nation
avoid “entangling alliances.”
Two decades later, John Quincy Adams warned against “going abroad in search of monsters
to destroy.”
The advice that Washington, Jefferson, and Quincy Adams gave reflected pragmatism as
much as principle.
In the early 1800s, the United States was a weak country far from Europe.
It was not in a position to make much of a difference in European conflicts.
But even as the United States grew more powerful over the course of the nineteenth century,
the principle of standing apart from Europe remained strong.
When the United States broke its long-held taboo against becoming involved European affairs
with its entry into World War I, it pointedly did so as an “associated power” rather
than as an “allied” one.
When the war ended, American troops—and American attention—returned home.
Pearl Harbor drew the United States into another war in Europe.
But when World War II ended, the United States again looked to be retreating to Fortress
America.
The Truman administration cut the size of the U.S. military by nearly 90 percent.
None of the other victorious powers reduced their military forces nearly as rapidly.
But this time around would be different.
The Soviet Union’s belligerent words, and more importantly its belligerent actions,
alarmed Washington.
A turning point came in March 1948, when Moscow orchestrated the overthrow of Czechoslovakia’s
democratically elected government.
The coup d’etat, said President Truman, “sent a shock throughout the civilized world.”
Czechoslovakia certainly shocked Washington.
In June 1948, the Senate passed a resolution urging a military alliance with Europe.
The Senate resolution soon looked prophetic.
Two weeks after the vote, the Soviet Union blockaded West Berlin.
Over the next nine months, U.S. and European negotiators worked to reach an agreement that
would, in the famous words of Britian’s Lord Ismay, “keep the Russians out, the
Americans in, and the Germans down.”
They succeeded.
On April 4, 1949, the United States and eleven European countries met in Washington, DC,
to sign the North Atlantic Treaty and create the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, better
known as NATO.
The treaty’s critical provision was Article V. It holds that any attack on a NATO country
is considered to be an attack on them all.
For the first time in its history, the United States had made a peacetime military commitment
to Europe.
>> President Harry S. Truman: For us, war is not inevitable.
We do not believe that there are blind tides of history which sweep men one way or another.
In our own time we have seen brave men overcome obstacles that seemed insurmountable and forces
that seemed overwhelming.
Men with courage and vision can still determine their own destiny.
They can choose slavery or freedom, war or peace.
I have no doubt which they will choose.
The treaty we are signing here today is evidence of the path they will follow.
If there is anything certain today, if there is anything inevitable in the future, it is
the will of the people of the world for freedom and for peace.
>> Jim Lindsay: What is the lesson of the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty?
Just this: Countries at times do change the fundamental direction of their foreign policies,
but usually only after much delay and in response to epic events.
The United States abandoned its nineteenth century foreign policy only after two world
wars.
Old habits and ways of thinking die hard.
The question of whether changes in the global landscape require the United States to change
its foreign policy is alive and well today.
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul calls for returning to George Washington’s
foreign policy.
Neo-conservatives favor a more assertive foreign policy.
Liberal thinkers champion greater reliance on multilateral institutions and international
law.
The list of suggestions goes on.
All these different intellectual camps are united by one belief: That the strategy they
favor offers the United States the best chance to succeed in a world that looks very different
than the one that led to the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty.
So here’s a question to consider: Does the emergence of China, India, Brazil, and other
rising powers require a fundamental rethinking of American foreign policy?
I encourage you to weigh in with your answer on my blog, The Water’s Edge.
You can find it at CFR.org.
I’m Jim Lindsay.
Thank you for watching this installment of Lessons Learned.