Introduction
It is hard to disagree that many historical events and processes may be challenging to analyze and understand because political motives, considerations, and outcomes require close examination. Therefore, several different approaches can be used when referring to a past period and the decisions it involved. For example, in post-Cold-War Euro-Atlantic relations, it is possible to apply the realist perspective, which will emphasize the conflictual, competitive, and strategic aspects.
Main body
First, it is essential to mention some important aspects of the mentioned theory. According to the Notre Dame International Security Center (2022), “realism says nation-states (or ‘states’) are the main characters in the unfolding tale of international relations” (para. 4). Noticeably, individual interests of other stakeholders, including people and businesses, are not in consideration during wars (Notre Dame International Security Center, 2022). Primarily the needs and interests of the nation as a whole are protected (Korab-Karpowicz, 2018). Further, E. H. Carr also notices that “pure realism can offer nothing but a naked struggle for power which makes any kind of international society impossible” (as cited in Kay, 2018, p. 2). In other words, conflictual and competitive sides of military conflicts or strategic decisions are highlighted by the perspective.
It is possible to say that after the Cold War ended, the states faced numerous issues and problems that somewhat defined the relationships between them. First, each country sought to achieve its objectives and receive more benefits in the formed situation, which, as indicated by the realist perspective, are always the motives of different states (Duffield, 2001). Thus, during the Cold War, the US had much power over Western Europe, and their alliance was mostly under America’s leadership (Gowan, 2003). After the conflict finished in the 1990s, the latter country decided to maintain its control over Europe, simultaneously turning its foreign policy towards Asia (Wivel & Mouritzen, 2004). As stated by Arbatova (2015), “the US pivot to Asia has raised European concerns about American commitments to collective defense” (p. 31). These and other factors made the Euro-Atlantic relations quite strained as each country wanted to maintain favorable terms of their collective action and decision-making and also strengthen its economic and political position at the expense of others.
At the same time, Euro-Atlantic relationships in the 1990s can also be described as a unity for mutual safety and ethical actions. Hamilton (2019) indicates that “the Alliance looked to such new missions as peacekeeping, peace-enforcing, crisis management, and humanitarian assistance” (p. 5). The end of the Cold War allowed NATO not only to better manage the relations between the allied countries but also to extend its control over non-aligned or neutral states (Lundestad, 2016). Numerous attempts to form new and effective cooperation took place, and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) was founded in 1997 (North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 2022). Overall, the latter serves as an indication of the state’s readiness to cooperate, analyze issues and barriers together, and share decision-making while still aiming to gain profit.
Conclusion
To conclude, one may say that from the realist perspective, Euro-Atlantic relations after the end of the Cold War seem to be a specific race in which all states sought to achieve their purposes. The US, Europe, and other countries faced numerous obstacles and issues during that period. However, they still united efforts and considered collaboration to be an effective way to develop and enhance their economic conditions.
References
Arbatova N. (2015). Euro-Atlantic Relations in the XXI century: Problems and scenarios. World Economy and International Relations, 59(11), 31-37.
Duffield, J. S. (2001). Transatlantic relations after the Cold War: Theory, evidence, and the future. International Studies Perspectives, 2(1), 93-115.
Gowan, P. (2003). Cooperation and conflict in transatlantic relations after the Cold War. Interventions, 5(2), 218-232.
Hamilton, D. S. (2019). Piece of the puzzle: NATO and Euro-Atlantic architecture after the Cold War. In D. S. Hamilton & K. Spohr (Eds.), Open door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic security after the Cold War (pp. 3-56). Philadelphia, PA: Foreign Policy Research Institute.
Kay, S. (2018). 21st century realism and the transatlantic security relationship [PDF document]. Web.
Korab-Karpowicz, W. J. (2018). Political realism in international relations. Web.
Lundestad, I. (2016). Turning foe to friend? US objectives in including Russia in post-cold war Euro-Atlantic security co-operation. The International History Review, 38(4), 694-718.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. (2022). Euro-Atlantic partnership. Web.
Notre Dame International Security Center. (2022). An introduction to realism in international relations. Web.
Wivel, A., & Mouritzen, H. (2004). The geopolitics of Euro-Atlantic integration. New York, NY: Routledge.