By Sami Kohen
Britain`s The Guardian yesterday mentioned an old joke sometimes heard in NATO circles. Of course NATO normally stands for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. During times of crisis, diplomats and newspapers say these initials really mean `Now Almost Totally Obsolete.' Today, this joke is being made about sending additional soldiers to Afghanistan. Is the 57-year-old NATO becoming obsolete or losing its old power? NATO was founded when the Cold War broke out, and it defined its duty and function until the collapse of the Berlin Wall very clearly. Its aim was to establish a deterrent to Soviet expansionism, protect security in the North American-Europe region (including Turkey), and ensure solidarity and cooperation among the allies in military and political areas. After the end of the Cold War and breakup of the Soviet Union, NATO expanded and moved the limits of its mission outside Europe. Following its various missions in the Balkans, it carried out its `cross-border' operation in Afghanistan. NATO undertook the UN task of putting a multinational peacekeeping force in this country.
Actually, NATO got good results in such duties as keeping the peace in Afghanistan and leading the country's reconstruction. However, when the Taliban, which is dominant in southern Afghanistan, recently started to be seen in other regions, the situation changed. This time NATO became the target with the US, and the forces in the south were insufficient and helpless in this guerilla war. In this case, NATO political and military leader requested `additional force' (at least 2,500 soldiers). However, the allies aren't willing to make such a contribution. As a matter of fact, most rejected this request. Of course, there are various factors behind this reluctance. Many European countries, under public pressure, don't want to endanger their soldiers. Afghanistan is a dangerous battle zone now. In addition, most Europeans consider it a `US' war' and don't want to be involved in it anymore. Turkey also doesn't want to send additional soldiers. For Ankara, there are various reasons. Actually, Turkey's military presence in Afghanistan is based on a definition of its duty already agreed on. It foresees placing Turkish soldiers in certain places (not the south) with a certain mission. Moreover, Turkey agrees with its European allies and doesn't want to endanger its soldiers. Many people in Turkey are saying this: `The West hasn't done anything to help us fight terrorism, so why should meet its request?' Whatever the reasons, NATO's reluctance about additional soldiers in Afghanistan shows that the alliance's `cross-border missions' and `new roles' should be thoroughly examined. Otherwise NATO could really become obsolete.