LEADER 03703oam 22005294a 450 001 9910311931703321 005 20220314022754.0 010 $a0-8157-3258-9 035 $a(CKB)3710000001423688 035 $a(OCoLC)993176816 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse61058 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL5179979 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr11528282 035 $a(ScCtBLL)109e6463-b05f-4f53-8f0f-ac4494c95a93 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC5179979 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000001423688 100 $a20170707d2017 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcnu|||||||| 181 $2rdacontent 182 $2rdamedia 183 $2rdacarrier 200 10$aBeyond NATO $ea new security architecture for Eastern Europe /$fMichael E. O'Hanlon 210 1$aBaltimore, Maryland :$cProject Muse,$d2017. 210 4$dİ2017 215 $a1 online resource (171 pages) $cillustrations, maps 225 0 $aMarshall papers 300 $aIncludes index. 311 $a0-8157-3257-0 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aIntroduction and synopsis -- 1. How we got here -- 2. A primer on Europe's frontier states today -- 3. The case for a new security architecture -- 4. Constructing an East European security architecture. 330 $aIn this new Brookings Marshall Paper, Michael O'Hanlon argues that now is the time for Western nations to negotiate a new security architecture for neutral countries in eastern Europe to stabilize the region and reduce the risks of war with Russia. He believes NATO expansion has gone far enough. The core concept of this new security architecture would be one of permanent neutrality. The countries in question collectively make a broken-up arc, from Europe's far north to its south: Finland and Sweden; Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus; Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan; and finally Cyprus plus Serbia, as well as possibly several other Balkan states. Discussion on the new framework should begin within NATO, followed by deliberation with the neutral countries themselves, and then formal negotiations with Russia. The new security architecture would require that Russia, like NATO, commit to help uphold the security of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and other states in the region. Russia would have to withdraw its troops from those countries in a verifiable manner; after that, corresponding sanctions on Russia would be lifted. The neutral countries would retain their rights to participate in multilateral security operations on a scale comparable to what has been the case in the past, including even those operations that might be led by NATO. They could think of and describe themselves as Western states (or anything else, for that matter). If the European Union and they so wished in the future, they could join the EU. They would have complete sovereignty and self-determination in every sense of the word. But NATO would decide not to invite them into the alliance as members. Ideally, these nations would endorse and promote this concept themselves as a more practical way to ensure their security than the current situation or any other plausible alternative. 410 0$aMarshall papers. 606 $aBuffer states$zEurope, Eastern 606 $aNational security$zEurope, Eastern 607 $aEurope, Eastern$xForeign relations$zRussia (Federation) 607 $aRussia (Federation)$xForeign relations$zEurope, Eastern 615 0$aBuffer states 615 0$aNational security 676 $a355.031091821 700 $aO'Hanlon$b Michael E.$0552048 801 0$bMdBmJHUP 801 1$bMdBmJHUP 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910311931703321 996 $aBeyond NATO$92052524 997 $aUNINA