LONDON -- The appointment of George Robertson, formerly the British secretary of state for defense, as secretary general of NATO has rekindled discussion on a number of important defense issues facing Europe. Robertson should be able to influence the outcome, but decisions will largely rest with the governments of NATO countries.
The first need is to reclarify the role and objectives of NATO. As long as Russia has large numbers of nuclear weapons there remains a potential threat to peace, but the threat is of an entirely different order from what it was during the Cold War. There is no longer any likelihood that hordes of troops and armored divisions will pour across Europe in an effort to destroy NATO. Nor is there any current likelihood of a pre-emptive nuclear strike. But there remains the danger of a serious nuclear accident, of sabotage of Russian nuclear weapons and the leaking of nuclear supplies and knowhow to rogue regimes. The threat of extremist nationalists grabbing power in Russia cannot be ignored although there can be no certainty that they would be backed by Russia's weakened military.
The greatest threats come from political instability, perhaps resulting from economic distress, leading to civil war in parts of the former Soviet Union, and from ethnic and/or and religious rivalries and hatreds. In Europe the Caucasus and the Balkans look the most vulnerable. Even though NATO's remit remains Europe, the NATO powers are inevitably going to be involved in threats to the peace in the Middle East and to a lesser extent elsewhere.