• By
  • Naftali Bendavid

As the North Atlantic Treaty Organization prepares to wind down its mission in Afghanistan, more people are asking what exactly is the point of NATO, especially in an era without the Soviet Union.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, NATO’s secretary general, tried to answer that question Thursday in a speech on the alliance’s future, calling NATO “the foundation on which any ally or group of allies can build their response to any crisis.”

But what about Syria? NATO has had a marginal role in responding to that crisis — mainly providing a venue for consultation and vowing to defend Turkey. Still, Mr. Rasmussen began by decrying Syria’s recent use of chemical weapons as “a war crime.”

NATO was created in 1949 at the dawn of the Cold War to provide a common defense against the Soviet Union. Not only does the Soviet Union no longer exist, but a NATO-Russia Council has been formed for the two sides to work together.

Mr. Rasmussen acknowledged the threats have changed. “It is no longer sufficient to line up tanks along our borders to patrol and protect them,” he said in his talk at Carnegie Europe in Brussels. “Today’s threats, and tomorrow’s, often come from the other side of the world, even from cyberspace.”

The secretary general, whose term ends in July 2014, said the 28-nation alliance can still provide for consultation between allies, command-and-control operations, common standards and procedures, and joint military and peacekeeping experience.

Those advantages, in turn, prepare the allies for crises, Mr. Rasmussen argued.

But the Syria crisis in many ways illustrates NATO’s limitations. Despite a near-consensus that the regime of Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons to kill more than 1,400 of his own people, NATO allies disagreed on what action to take.

The international response rested instead on discussions among individual countries, including the United States, France and Russia. Similarly, when rebel guerrillas threatened Mail earlier this year, France intervened alone.

In addition to Afghanistan, NATO currently has operations in Kosovo, Turkey and the Baltics. It also runs anti-terrorism patrols in the Mediterranean and a piracy-fighting mission off the Horn of Africa.

“This clearly demonstrates that NATO remains an essential source of stability in an unpredictable world,” Mr. Rasmussen said.

But he said NATO must change to remain relevant, remaining alert to issues like cyberspace, missile defense and intelligence gathering. And he referred indirectly to another criticism of NATO—that the United States bears a disproportionate share of its costs, making NATO more of an American offshoot and less of a true alliance.

“I believe that European nations can and should do more to match America’s commitment,” he said. “A strong NATO needs a strong Europe – with strong capabilities, strong defense industries, and strong political commitment.”