which led to the creation of NATO and sustained its unity for most of its 50 year old history suggests that they are no longer pre-sent and that attempts to prop up its tottering structure or to expand its role are not consistent with American vital interests.

It was in the geopolitical interests of the United States and its Western allies to create NATO in 1949. Twice in this century, American military intervention was necessary to counter the threat of German hegemony. After the end of the First World War, America withdrew into isolation. In 1945-1946, the great American army in Europe was rapidly demobilized. In 1947-1948, a series of events occurred which awakened Western Europeans and the United States to the threat posed by the Soviet Union. Europe was prostrate economically and vulnerable to the threat of communist subversion. The Europeans had begun to organize themselves economically with American financial assistance through the Marshall Plan. On March 17, 1948, Great Britain, France, Belgium, Netherlands and Luxem-bourg had taken the first steps toward a military alliance by signing the Brussels Treaty. Since the United States then

possessed a nuclear monopoly, American participation was essential to give any Western alliance substance. The answer was NATO which was signed in Washington on April 4, 1949 and wa

s ratified by the U.S. Senate on July 21 of that year by a vote of 82 to 13. Under Article 5 of the NATO treaty an armed attack on any of the original signatories (the Brussles Treaty five plus the United States, Canada, Denmark, Italy, Norway, and Portugal), was an attack on all and required them to act in their common defense. Greece and Turkey joined NATO in 1952, West Germany in 1955 and Spain in 1982.

A diplomat at century's end. (1996, 11 March) U.S. News &

Steel, R. (1996, 25 November). The hard questions. New

survive the war? Los Angeles Times, p. B7.

NATO at 50, at risk. (1999, 19 April). Los Angeles Times, p.

One of the factors keeping NATO alive is uncertainty over the intentions and tendencies of an unstable Russia. Advocates of re-taining the alliance, such as German Kamp (1995, Spring), observed that "the honeymoon in Russia's relations with the West is over" and that it is simple prudence for the West to keep its powder dry in the form of NATO (p. 121). Whatever happens in Russia, however, it is clear that the Russian threat to Western Europe, if one still exists, is remote. According to Kupchan (1996, May-June), "Russia is neither interested nor capable o