NATO-U.N. Cohesion

Leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, in Washington to mark the 50th anniversary of the alliance, moved over the weekend to reshape its goals and responsibilities in a changing world. They were spurred largely by the crisis in Yugoslavia and the difficulties that the conflict has presented in NATO’s relationships with Russia, the United Nations and other power centers.

While President Clinton, NATO generals and Washington’s closest allies in Europe continued to stand strongly behind the decision to continue the air war against Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic’s brutal regime, others pointed to the inevitable: If the Kosovar refugees are to return to their homes, ground troops will have to assure their safety, and that raises the question of which countries’ troops and how large a force.

When that time comes, alliance officials now concede, the presence of Russians in the peacekeeping force seems most likely to deliver the promise of a safe and orderly withdrawal of Yugoslav army units from Kosovo. It would also help build trust, often bruised, between NATO and Moscow. This is a time for the Western alliance to review the potential benefits of working with Russia on European problems, particularly in Balkan crises where Russia’s Slavic influence counts highly.

Another key focus of the NATO meetings was the alliance relationship with the United Nations, which has been mainly on the periphery in the Yugoslav crisis. NATO command has followed its own course on Kosovo without waiting for a U.N. imprimatur, a strategy that can dangerously marginalize some outside powers.

That approach invites conflict that neither the United Nations nor NATO needs. NATO is a military force, sometimes fractious, always American-led. The U.N. Security Council is a deliberative body with the power to raise peacekeeping forces to separate potential combatants, but not in NATO’s league.

The frictions were apparent over the weekend, and NATO wisely tipped its hat to the U.N. charter, which has been effective in numerous crises over the United Nations’ own half-century of diplomatic and military endeavors. French President Jacques Chirac, whose country has often been at odds with its NATO allies, stepped forward to assure those concerned about potential NATO-U.N. controversy in the Yugoslav crisis that a weekend alliance communique affirmed the primacy of the United Nations in global security matters.

These assurances and others during the weeklong NATO summit raise hopes that military and diplomatic powers will stick to the goal in Kosovo, returning refugees to their homes and giving them protection under international supervision. Many issues are yet to be resolved, and few can go forward while Milosevic defiantly refuses to withdraw his troops from the province. But he should see from the events in Washington that there are no soft spots left to probe in the alliance.