Abstract
After the Cold War long-established norms, traditions and institutions are undergoing profound changes. Few, if any, institutions have responded by changing as profoundly as the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). This post-bipolar transformation was manifested in March 1999 when NATO, without the explicit consent of the United Nations (UN) Security Council, intervened militarily in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. This operation should not, however, be seen as the initiation of a period of change in the Alliance, but rather as the concrete manifestation of a transformation which started 10 years earlier. The aim of this thesis is to investigate how the security posture of NATO has changed in the 1990s, and to what degree this transformation has created a situation where member-states have started to envision different roles for the Alliance.
NATO has traditionally been seen as a military defence organisation constituting a bulwark against external challengers. As a result actors have interpreted the role of NATO according to a statist-military definition of threat, mirroring a particular conception of security. However, because NATO in the 1990s has cast its conceptual net wider, ascribing both to collective defence and collective security, the potential for internal diversity has increased. In the investigation of whether NATO has become increasingly diverse in the 1990s the thesis has focused on the USA, Germany and Norway. Based on the institutional affiliation, geographical position and technological evolution of these countries, the thesis has outlined how they have responded to external pressure. The focus is consequently not on the internal policy-making processes of individual member-states, but rather sees the state as the agency level within a more encompassing North Atlantic system of states.
The thesis has Constructivist theory as its point of departure. In an attempt to transcend the traditional theoretical boundary between the rationalists and the reflectivists the Copenhagen School of International Relations is moved to the forefront. Particular attention is given to how the international environment reflects social as well as material factors. Furthermore, material, subjective and inter-subjective aspects will be seen as working together in the construction of the social reality. Security agendas are a reflection of how centrally placed actors refer to the concept, and speech-acts are therefore central for understanding the evolution of security agendas. Consequently, transformation in international relations is not primarily a response to changes in the material world, but rather a response to changes in how actors perceive what is out there .
The overall conclusion of the thesis is that NATO should be seen as a malleable instrument. It serves the needs of its members by adapting to the changing conceptions of its form and function. Furthermore, the USA has the power to win compliance with its thinking, and the official posture of NATO therefore to a large extent reflects the security perception of central US actors. The support for this posture coming from Germany and Norway should therefore not be seen as reflecting homogeneity in terms of perception of threat and security, but more as a rhetorical consensus. The thesis also outlines how the USA, Germany and Norway have approached security differently depending on their contextual setting, and as a result have envisioned different roles for NATO. Overall the Alliance has therefore become more diverse in the 1990s, but has nevertheless managed to retain a façade of unanimity as a result of the US power to win compliance with its thinking.