In the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, NATO invoked the collective defense article of the Washington treaty for the first time in its history. The United States welcomed the Atlantic solidarity, but it did not involve the Alliance in major combat operations of the so-called war on terror either in Afghanistan or in Iraq. During the Bush presidency, indeed, NATO had been subordinated to the coalition of the willing format, which was more flexible and subjected to Washington’s needs and priorities. Anyway, Allied forces proved to be important in Afghanistan in the post-combat phases of the war on terror. Initially the NATO-led international mission ISAF was a source of convergence between the two sides of the Atlantic, but over the years it turned out to be a source of disagreement. The Obama presidency has shown several continuities with the previous administration, particularly for the marginal role reserved to NATO in combating first al-Qaeda, then the Islamic State. What’s next for NATO in the fight against terrorism when a new President will enter the White House in 2017? Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the frontrunners of the two parties, but while for the former NATO is apparently marginal, the latter has already dismissed it as outdated.
|Titolo tradotto del contributo||[Autom. eng. transl.] The role of NATO in the fight against terrorism according to the United States|
|Numero di pagine||26|
|Rivista||QUADERNI DEL DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE POLITICHE|
|Stato di pubblicazione||Pubblicato - 2017|
- Stati Uniti