NATO in a multipolar world: Expansion or declining relevance?

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was established in 1949, at the onset of the Cold War, as a military alliance aimed at containing the Soviet Union and promoting liberal democracy and capitalism. Originally comprising 12 founding members, NATO has since expanded its membership. During the Cold War, NATO’s primary objective was to counter Soviet […]

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was established in 1949, at the onset of the Cold War, as a military alliance aimed at containing the Soviet Union and promoting liberal democracy and capitalism. Originally comprising 12 founding members, NATO has since expanded its membership.

During the Cold War, NATO’s primary objective was to counter Soviet influence, often through proxy conflicts. In response, the Soviet Union established the Warsaw Pact, a military alliance headquartered in Poland, to serve as a counterweight to NATO. However, with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, leading to a shift in the global security landscape.

As part of the post-Cold War negotiations between Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and US President Bill Clinton, there was an informal understanding that NATO would not expand eastward into former Soviet-aligned states. This agreement facilitated German reunification, merging the previously divided East and West Germany under the Western bloc.

However, despite these assurances, NATO has since expanded into Eastern Europe, admitting former Warsaw Pact members such as the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, along with later additions like Albania and Croatia.

• Meningitis kills 26 in Kebbi
• Barau hails Tinubu for renaming Federal University of Education Kano after Maitama Sule

Russia has repeatedly warned that NATO’s eastward expansion poses a direct threat to its national security, particularly as discussions emerged about Ukraine potentially joining the alliance. This geopolitical tension culminated in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, aimed at preventing the country from aligning with NATO.

The relevance and future of NATO remain subjects of debate among international relations scholars and strategic analysts. The alliance has faced increasing scrutiny, particularly during the first term of US President Donald Trump, who questioned the financial burden placed on the United States. Trump argued that NATO member states should increase their defence spending, as the US was contributing approximately 50 per cent of NATO’s total defence budget while receiving little direct benefit. He even suggested that the US might reconsider its participation if member states failed to meet spending commitments.

Trump’s call for NATO members to allocate at least 5% of their GDP to defence came at a time when many countries were grappling with economic challenges and internal political instability. This raises critical questions:

Can NATO members afford to increase their defence spending amid economic hardships? Should the United States withdraw from NATO if it perceives the alliance as a financial burden? What is the future of NATO in a rapidly changing global order?

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently stated that the current global order no longer favours the United States. This statement prompts further inquiry: If the global order is shifting, who is shaping it, and how will NATO adapt?

Ukraine has been at the centre of NATO’s geopolitical challenges. Despite extensive military and financial support from the US and its allies, Ukraine has struggled to sustain its war effort against Russia. US Vice President J. D. Vance recently acknowledged that Ukraine is facing a manpower shortage and that continued support may be unsustainable. This has created tensions between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and US leaders, particularly after it signalled a potential halt in military aid.

With Ukraine’s battlefield momentum waning and NATO’s reluctance to escalate direct involvement, the alliance faces a critical juncture. If NATO continues expanding, it risks further provoking Russia and deepening global divisions.

Conversely, if NATO loses relevance, it could mark a shift toward a truly multi-polar world order, where regional powers dictate security dynamics rather than a single dominant alliance.

NATO’s future will be shaped by economic realities, shifting political priorities, and evolving global power structures. While the alliance remains a formidable military force, its long-term viability depends on whether it can adapt to the challenges of a multi-polar world.

The coming years will determine whether NATO continues expanding, maintains its current structure, or gradually declines in relevance amid a rapidly changing international order.

 

Baba Abdullahi Machina can be reached via [email protected]