What is NATO's Enlargement Process, which angers the Russians? (4)

In this first phase of NATO's enlargement process, the memberships of three countries, namely Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary, whose memberships were finalized as of 1997, were realized as expected during the Washington Summit in the 50th anniversary of NATO's establishment. Thus, the number of NATO member states reached 19.
the membership of Slovakia; It did not happen because of the repressive policy of Vladimir Maciar, who was in power at that time, in his country, which did not take into account the democratic values. Since it was evaluated by NATO that this country needed to make some further progress in the democratization process, it was left to the next process (DefenseNews, 2002, p.10).
On the other hand, the Baltic countries (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) did not receive a positive response at that time, for the time being, largely taking into account the wishes of Russia.
On the other hand, Romania and Slovenia, on the other hand, decided whether or not they would be included among the three countries whose membership was finalized through Washington discussions.
The second phase of the enlargement process was restarted with the activation of a Membership Action Plan covering 9 countries (Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia) at the Washington Summit in 1999. Austria, Finland and Sweden were also wanted to be included in these countries. The 'willingness' of these countries towards NATO membership has also increased in the public opinion of these countries. However, these countries; They did not show their will to be included in the NATO membership process, as they did not want to set aside their traditional 'neutrality policies'.
In the Membership Action Plan, which is proposed to guide the preparations of the countries willing to become a member of NATO in this regard, the activities required to reach the standards in the five areas determined for membership (Political and economic issues, Defense/Military issues, Resources, Security, Legal issues) are included. Countries willing to join the alliance (Aspirant Countries) have prepared their own national preparation programs according to this plan. Afterwards, joint activities started to be carried out with the participation of NATO countries and candidate countries in five fields of activity, which were determined by taking into account the Membership Action Plan and the National Preparation Plans of the candidate countries.
Candidate countries were required to pursue certain political objectives, including peacefully resolving border disputes (if any), with their neighbors, complying with democratic procedures, observing the rule of law, and ensuring democratic control of the armed forces. The Membership Action Plan has helped candidate countries adapt their armed forces to NATO principles and practices and prepare for the obligations and responsibilities of Alliance membership.
Meanwhile, in line with Turkey's views, the Alliance members confirmed at the Washington Summit that the door is open to all European democracies. In this direction, the first round of enlargement process was followed by the second one and Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia were also invited to NATO membership at the Prague Summit held on 20-21 November 2002.
In fact, the situation of 9 candidate countries was discussed at the Prague Summit. Macedonia and Albania; Considering their problems based on ethnic and political instability, their candidacy status was not accepted, and it was decided to reconsider their status in later periods. Macedonia and Albania, who could not get what they wanted during the membership process; They started to carry out their political, economic and military reforms more slowly than the Central and Eastern European countries. Meanwhile, Serbia and some former Soviet Bloc countries have made an effort to take part in the NATO membership process.
Albania and partly Macedonia faced a 'fluid' security problem in this region. As the security issue became a priority, this situation was inevitably reflected in the speed of reforming these countries. In 2001, there was a series of armed conflicts between Macedonian government forces and an armed group advocating institutional changes to the constitution. Albanians living in the northwest of Kosovo and Macedonia were in favor of a territorial integrity, which envisaged the eventual union with Albania, although not very clearly expressed. This internal turmoil caused Albania to be stuck in the obstacle of "solving the internal problem", which NATO deemed necessary before membership (Barany, 2003, p.5).
NATO sent troops to this region and contributed to the stability of the peace environment. The existence of similar problems was also valid for Macedonia. However, the conflicts in this region, which are closely related to both countries, have also adversely affected the NATO membership positions of these countries. When we compare these two countries with Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Slovenia, the mentioned countries are Albania and Macedonia. They have made significant progress (in all military, political and economic dimensions) compared to nya, and at the same time, they have obtained the status of strong candidates for NATO, since these countries have not experienced instability and conflicts.
However, there have been painful periods between NATO countries and the membership processes of new members in taking steps towards the realization of these memberships. Both the Alliance's enlargement policy and the question "What kind of NATO do you want?" In order to contain partial answers to the questions, the development of this process is briefly mentioned below.
In the mid-2000s, great steps could be taken in the enlargement process, 10 countries were NATO members, despite the conflicts with the RF, there was no risk of conflict contrary to fear, the cost of enlargement was very low, there was no conflict between central and eastern European countries, so enlargement It has been seen that the process has been realized successfully to a large extent (Jafarov, 2007).
On the other hand, NATO's geographical expansion process; The continuation of this organization as a mechanism that maintains military and political cooperation between the USA and Europe, the preservation of the USA as a means of penetrating European security, the consolidation of American presence and influence in Central and Eastern Europe, the double It has been interpreted as the consolidation of the military potential of the West against the possible Eastern threat in the post-polarity world. For some, NATO's enlargement policy has rekindled Russia's skepticism towards an encirclement against it. As a matter of fact, as we will mention later, it has been claimed that behind Russia's interventions in Georgia and Ukraine lies the "security dilemma" syndrome resulting from NATO's enlargement.
Meanwhile, the expansion of NATO's mandate to strategic concepts and the inclusion of new members in the Alliance, along with the partnership for peace mechanisms, have been used by the United States as an opportunity to expand the American military presence, facilities and bases into the territories of these countries. For example, before Bulgaria became a member of NATO, on 14 November 2001, as part of its membership process, it allowed US planes to use its airspace, which went to war in Afghanistan, and the construction of the Sarafova garrison in the meantime. In 2003, it consented to the establishment of two new American bases in the city of Burgas. A similar situation was valid for the Constanta base by Romania (Böme, 2012, p.133). The United States has used such pioneering contacts and base agreements as a tool to encourage the host country's NATO membership, and has also found a way to somehow establish a bilateral relationship with that country in advance of its own national interests.
The military bases established by the US in countries involved in NATO's expansion and Partnership for Peace mechanisms have been interpreted as an extension of the large-scale restructuring of the US military, not limited regional goals. USA; After the Cold War, he gradually reduced the number of soldiers in Germany, the center of the European Command, and in the surrounding countries from around 400 thousand to around 100 thousand. However, he considered it necessary to transfer some of these soldiers to newly built bases in the Balkans and the Persian Gulf. By 1995, the number of military facilities, bases and garrisons closed in Europe was 878. In its new restructuring, the USA determined main bases in various parts of the world in order to make power projections, and it was foreseen to transfer forces from these to other small-scale facilities and bases. The United States' ability to move into such a restructuring for financial and political reasons, first of all, was based on the highly developed strategic transportation facilities.
Let's go back to NATO's enlargement process. Except for Macedonia and Albania, all the remaining seven countries, as in Madrid, were accepted as candidate memberships and candidacy program, and with the studies carried out in this direction, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia became NATO members in March 2004. have been provided. Thus, the number of NATO members reached 26 in total.
The joining of the last seven new members to NATO has been seamless compared to the first round of enlargement. Meanwhile, the fact that Russia, which did not hide its discomfort with NATO's eastward expansion, opposed the three Baltic states' joining NATO for strategic reasons did not prevent these countries from becoming a part of the Alliance.
However, there has been a meaningless conflict within NATO on this issue for a very long time. Large European countries such as Germany and England wanted to give priority to the former great power of the region, the Russian Federation, and were not willing to operate a membership mechanism that would cause Russia's reaction. For this reason, NATO's growth with the participation of the Baltic countries is also necessary. they avoided being seen. Despite this, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were included in the NATO membership process during Clinton's second presidency. Subsequently, they joined the European Union together with Poland (Carsen, 2004, p.228).
Meanwhile, the old dividing lines in the Baltic have also been overcome. By the mid-2000s, the question marks about whether new dividing lines were created against the Russian Federation, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova and Caucasian countries (Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan) were intensified (Carsen, 2004, p.228).
The alliance's enlargement policy and process had an impact on the Russian Federation as well, and it was expected that there would be mobilizations in the Russian domestic policy, especially in terms of democratization efforts in this country.