Paul Poast Profile picture
Jan 22, 2022 28 tweets 12 min read Read on X
The Ukraine crisis has folks questioning @NATO's post-Cold War expansion into Eastern Europe, especially former Soviet Republics (namely the Baltic states of 🇪🇪🇱🇹🇱🇻).

So how exactly did the Baltics get into NATO?

[THREAD] Image
Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia are currently the only former Soviet Republics in @NATO. They became members in 2004, along with Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Image
Regardless of whether there was a promise to never move NATO "one inch" eastward after the Cold War, neither the Soviets or the Americans, in 1990, likely envisioned NATO expanding into former Soviet Republics.
amazon.com/Not-One-Inch-P…
Russian President Boris Yeltsin had made Russia's opposition to such extreme expansion very clear. In a 1995 speech, he said:

"Those who insist on an expansion of NATO are making a major political mistake. The flames of war could burst out across the whole of Europe." Image
More explicitly, he said,

“I’m against NATO enlargement. When NATO approaches the borders of the Russian Federation, you can say that there will be two military blocs, and this will be a restoration of what we already had.”
US President Bill Clinton seemed to echo that message:

“We’re trying to promote security and stability in Europe. We don’t want to do anything that increases tensions” Image
But when the Baltic states gained independence from Russia in 1991, NATO membership was immediately a policy goal.

Indeed, the Lithuanian President was so bold as to directly "apply" for NATO membership via a letter (which had never been done).

(👇 is from the NATO archives) Image
As then Lithuania Minister of Defense Audrius Butkevičisus said in a later interview:

“What we needed was a vision for the impossible” Image
Fortunately for the Baltics, they were not alone in their desire to improve their security and *possibly* join @NATO (though no promises).

The Nordic countries, especially @NATO
member Denmark, was keen to help. Image
Denmark, along with the other Nordic countries, signed the "Mariehamn Declaration" in November 1991.

Below is an image of the Finnish version of the declaration (via the Finnish Parliament archives) Image
The declaration stated: “The Nordic countries should actively seek to influence European and other developments. . . in the Baltic Sea and Baltic region”

In other words, the former Soviet Republic Baltic states couldn't be left out on their own. Image
Denmark, as both a Nordic state and a @NATO
member, took the lead (particularly Danish Foreign Minister, Uffe Ellemann-Jensen)

The goal was for the Baltics, if possible, to enter @NATO. Image
Since immediate NATO membership was closed, a first step would be for the Baltics to demonstrate their "value added" as members.

By the mid-1990s, due to the Balkan Wars, NATO was focusing on deploying Peacekeeping operations. ImageImage
This presented an opportunity. Denmark, with help from the other Nordic Countries and a few other nations (namely the UK), Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania formed the Baltic Peacekeeping Battalion (BALTBAT). Image
BALTBAT allowed the Baltic states to accomplish three objectives.

First, it allowed them to receive Western supplies to begin rebuilding their military forces. As Garry Johnson, Commander-in-Chief of Allied Forces Northern Europe, said:

"They were starting from zero" Image
Second, it allowed the Baltics to gain training in an area that could be perceived as valuable to NATO (& also valuable to Russia, as maintaining peace in the Balkans was a priority). Indeed, their first deployment was alongside Denmark. Image
Third, it "signaled" to @NATO, namely the USA, that the Baltics could be "good citizens" if allowed in @NATO. As a 1999 editorial in the Norwegian paper @Aftenposten remarked, "BALTBAT almost functions as a preparatory school for NATO membership"
This set the stage for the Baltics to enter the "Partnership for Peace" and then the "Membership Action Plan" Image
Following the 9/11/2001 attacks on the United States and the start of the War in Afghanistan, the Baltics were eager to participate in ISAF ImageImage
So at the Prague NATO summit in 2002, the 19 NATO members voted to bring in the Baltic states. Here is the announcement in the official post-summit press release. Image
In some ways, the Baltic states pursued the same strategy as Turkey in the 1950s: take costly actions to demonstrate willingness to be a good NATO ally (which @mephenke describes in her book)
amazon.com/Constructing-A…
All of the above helped the US to no longer be concerned about Russian reactions to Baltic accession to NATO.
Indeed, US officials had changed their view on the issue by the late 1990s. As US deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott remarked during a 1997 speech at @Stanford:

“Quite bluntly, the Russians need to get over the neuralgia on this subject [of Baltic membership]" Image
So that's how the Baltics "got in". As @AndrisBanka wrote in @WarOnTheRocks back in 2019: "The Baltic countries played their hand expertly"
warontherocks.com/2019/10/the-br…
A little help from Denmark, some fortunate circumstances, and a lot of foreign policy initiative made it possible for the Baltic states to be the first (and, in my view, the last) former Soviet Republics to enter NATO.

[END]
Addendum: If you think you've heard me tell this story before, I have!

It was part of my #NATO7for70 series back in 2019...
...it was the key case in my 2018 book with @jurpelai...
amazon.com/Organizing-Dem…
...and I had a chance to talk about it on the @Freakonomics podcast! Honestly, I just like saying "BALTBAT" :)
freakonomics.com/podcast/speak-…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Paul Poast

Paul Poast Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ProfPaulPoast

Sep 7
Which of these two men is most responsible for World War II?

Short answer: not Churchill

Long answer: [THREAD]
Image
Image
To be clear, in this thread I am dealing with the onset of the war in Europe. The War in Asia was just as important and obviously connected to Europe. But that is for another thread. For now, I do highly recommend Paine's book "The Wars for Asia"

amazon.com/Wars-Asia-1911…
The historiography on WWII is massive. But in terms of responsibility for the war's origins, there are essentially two extreme views.

Call them the Mueller Thesis and the Taylor Thesis
Read 19 tweets
Aug 17
Solving the "Europe Problem" has vexed US foreign policy since the beginning.

[THREAD] Image
As I wrote last week, a key trait of US "grand strategy" since the founding of the Republic was "Go West" either by expanding US territory west or seeking to maintain trade with China.

But the other key trait of US grand strategy has been to keep the European powers from standing in the way.
Read 14 tweets
Aug 10
Since the founding of the republic, US foreign policy has been about one thing:

Go west (and don't let Europe get in the way).

[THREAD] Image
I'll write more about "don't let Europe get in the way" in another 🧵. This one will focus on the "Go west" part (which will also touch on the Europe part).
One could go so far as to argue that the Republic itself was founded because of a desire to go west. Specifically, the colonials were forbidden to go west of the 1763 Proclamation line. Image
Read 20 tweets
Jun 15
When you hear "Liberal International Order", just think "the G-7, for better and for worse"

[THREAD] Image
While some scholars and policy makers like to speak of the "Liberal International Order" as the collection of post-World War II international institutions....
cambridge.org/core/journals/…
...the phrase itself is much more recent in origins, largely a product of the mid-1990s. Image
Read 19 tweets
Jun 8
Are the "opportunity costs" of arming Ukraine too high?

Short answer: no

Long answer: compared to what?

[THREAD]
For those not aware, I am asking this question because of a new International Affairs piece that makes the argument "yes, they are too high"

academic.oup.com/ia/advance-art…
Overall, their argument is that the resources going towards Ukraine would be better allocated to address other pressing global challenges.
Read 24 tweets
Jun 1
In international politics, population is destiny.

[THREAD] Image
As I wrote in my latest for @WPReview, shifting patterns in population growth will inevitably influence international politics.
worldpoliticsreview.com/global-demogra…
This isn't a new idea. It's one found in classic works on change in world politics.

amazon.com/War-Change-Wor…
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(