Abstract
The shifting global geopolitics have led to a new security dilemma in Europe, especially in trans–Atlantic relations. NATO as the vanguard of the trans–Atlantic defense pact is faced with transitional conditions of non-conventional threats that return to conventional threats. Due to the shift in the new global order, these threats require a repositioning for NATO to counter the new security dilemma amidst shifting global geopolitics. By referring to the three asserted pillars–the return of conventional warfare on the European continent; a more assertive Russia in the European continent under Vladimir Putin; and the geopolitical of China's rise impacted trans–-Atlantic relations, as factors of the new securities dilemma in the context of trans-Atlantic relations, this research aims to analyze the impact of the new security dilemma amidst shifting global geopolitics toward the repositioning of NATO and its consequences on the trans–Atlantic relations using the integration of Mackinder’s Heartland Theory with Jervis’ Security Dilemma.
Bahasa Abstract
Pergeseran geopolitik global telah menimbulkan dilema keamanan baru di Eropa, khususnya dalam hubungan trans-Atlantik. NATO sebagai garda terdepan pakta pertahanan trans-Atlantik dihadapkan pada kondisi transisi ancaman non-konvensional yang kembali menjadi ancaman konvensional. Akibat pergeseran tatanan global yang baru, ancaman-ancaman tersebut membutuhkan reposisi bagi NATO untuk menghadapi dilema keamanan baru di tengah pergeseran geopolitik global. Dengan mengacu pada tiga pilar yang ditegaskan, yaitu kembalinya perang konvensional di benua Eropa, Rusia yang lebih tegas di benua Eropa di bawah kepemimpinan Vladimir Putin; dan geopolitik kebangkitan Tiongkok yang berdampak pada hubungan trans-Atlantik, sebagai faktor-faktor dilema keamanan baru dalam konteks hubungan trans-Atlantik, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis dampak dilema keamanan baru di tengah pergeseran geopolitik global terhadap reposisi NATO dan konsekuensinya terhadap hubungan trans-Atlantik dengan mengintegrasikan Teori Heartland Mackinder dengan Dilema Keamanan Jervis.
References
References
Books & Edited Books
Jervis, R. (1976). Deterrence, the Spiral Model, and Intentions of the Adversary. In Perception and Misperception in International Politics: New Edition (REV-Revised, pp. 58–114). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc77bx3.8
Jervis, R. (1976). Perception and the Level of Analysis Problem. In Perception and Misperception in International Politics: New Edition (REV-Revised, pp. 13–31). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc77bx3.6
Luttwak, E. N. (2001). The Operational Level. In Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace, Revised and Enlarged Edition (p. 112-115). essay, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Luttwak, E. N. (2001). Theater Strategy II: Offense and Defense. In Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace, Revised and Enlarged Edition (p. 147-152). essay, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Mackinder, J. H. (1919). Chapter Four: The Landsman’s Point of View. in Democratic Ideals and Reality. A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction by the Right Honourable Sir Halford J. Mackinder. essay, National Defense University Press.
Mladineo, S. V. (1919a). Introduction. In Democratic Ideals and Reality. Introduction, National Defense University Press.
Journals
Barry, B., Boyd, H., Giegerich, B., Gjerstad, M., Hackett, J., Michel, Y., ... & Tong, M. (2023). The Future of NATO’s European Land Forces: Plans, Challenges, Prospects
Choi, D., Bourgeois-Fortin, C., & Janke, S. (2022, March 9). China and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: Initial responses and implications. China Institute. https://www.ualberta.ca/china-institute/research/analysis-briefs/2022/ukraine.html
Goldstein, A. (2020). China's grand strategy under Xi Jinping: Reassurance, reform, and resistance. International Security, 45(1), 164- 201.
Gunter, M. (2022). Some Implications of Sweden and Finland joining NATO. The Commentaries, 2(1), 91-100.
Hall, J., & Sandeman, H. (2021, September). NATO and the Future Character of Warfare. LSE Research Online. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/114502/1/Hall_nato_and_the_future_of_warfare .pdf
Ismailov, E., & Papava, V. (2010). The heartland theory and the present-day geopolitical structure of Central Eurasia. Rethinking Central Eurasia, Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program, Johns Hopkins University.
Jaeger, M. (2022). US-Chinese Competition and Transatlantic Relations: Implications for Germany and Europe.
Johnson, J. (2017). Washington's perceptions and misperceptions of Beijing's anti-access area-denial (A2-AD) ‘strategy’: implications for military escalation control and strategic stability. The Pacific Review, 30(3), 271-288.
Monaghan, S., Elgin, K. K., & Moller, S. B. (2024, May 20). Understanding NATO’s concept for deterrence and defense of the Euro-Atlantic Area. CSBA.
Venier, P. (2004). Review of The Geographical Pivot of History and Early Twentieth Century Geopolitical Culture. The Geographical Journal, 170, 330–336
Yari, E. (2020). Putin and the annexation of Crimea to Russia; geopolitical analysis of Russia's action in annexation of Crimea peninsula. Human Geography Research, 52(2), 477-499.
Reports & Officials Publications
Friedman, G. (2024, February 13). Putin’s perspective on the Russia-Ukraine war. Geopolitical Futures. https://geopoliticalfutures.com/putins-perspective-on-the-russia-ukraine-war/
Ministry of Defence, U. K. (2023). (rep.). Defense’s Response to a More Contested and Volatile World. United Kingdom Ministry of Defence.
NATO. (2010, November 19). NATO Strategic Concept 2010. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). https://www.NATO.int/cps/en/NATOhq/topics_82705.htm
NATO. (2020). (rep.). “NATO 2030: United for a New Era (pp. 17–19)”. North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
NATO. (2021). NATO Warfighting Capstone Concept - NATO’s Act. NATO.
NATO. (2023). NATO Annual Tracking Research. Retrieved 2024, from https://www.NATO.int/NATO_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2023/3/pdf/230320-annual_tracker_report.pdf.
NATO. (2023, July). Funding NATO. NATO. https://www.NATO.int/cps/en/NATOhq/topics_67655.htm#management
NATO. (2024). NATO’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. NATO. https://www.NATO.int/cps/en/NATOhq/topics_192648.htm
NATO. (n.d.). Defence expenditure of NATO countries (2014-2023). https://www.NATO.int/NATO_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2023/7/pdf/230 707-def-exp-2023-en.pdf
NATO. NATO Strategic Concept 2022. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Brussels, Belgium. https://www.nato.int/strategic-concept/
New DCA of The United States and Papua New Guinea. United States Department of State. (2023). https://www.state.gov/the-united-states-and-papua-new-guinea-sign-new-defense-cooperation-agreement-and-an-agreement-concerning-counter-illicit-transnational-maritime-activity-operations/
Nimark, A. (2021). Putin’s “red line” over Ukraine: A new test of European and transatlantic resolve. CIDOB. https://www.cidob.org/en/publications/publication_series/opinion/2021 /putin_s_red_line_over_ukraine_a_new_test_of_european_and_transat lantic_resolve
OĞUZ, Doç. Dr. Ş. (2024, February 13). NATO, Russia, and nuclear weapons - ankasam: Ankara Center for Crisis and Policy Studies. ANKASAM. https://www.ankasam.org/NATO-russia-and-nuclear-weapons/?lang=en
Segura, C. (2024, March 18). NATO personnel are already in Ukraine for arms control, intelligence operations, and military training. EL PAÍS English. https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-03-18/NATO-personnel-already-in-ukraine-for-arms-control-intelligence-operations-and-military-training.html
Stoltenberg, J. (2020). (rep.). NATO 2030: United for a New Era (p. 15). North Atlantic Treaty Organization. 33.
Stoltenberg, J. (2023). (rep.). The Secretary General’s Annual Report 2022. North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Retrieved February 1, 2024, from https://www.NATO.int/NATO_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2023/3/pdf/sgar 22-en.pdf
Sweden in NATO. Regeringskansliet. (2024). https://www.government.se/government-policy/sweden-in-NATO/
U.S. Department of Defense. (2022, June 29). FACT SHEET - U.S. Defense Contributions to Europe. U.S. Department of Defense. Retrieved 2024, from https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3078056/fact -sheet-us-defense-contributions-to-europe/.
News Articles
Atwood, K. (2024, April 12). China is giving Russia significant support to expand weapons manufacturing as Ukraine War Continues, US officials say | CNN politics. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/12/politics/china-russia-support-weapons-manufacturing/index.html
Riley-Smith, B., & Barnes, J. (2024, April 3). Shapps: NATO states playing “Russian roulette” with a lack of defense spending. The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/03/shapps-we-cannot-play-russian-roulette-with-NATO-funds/
Recommended Citation
George, Daniel C. and Alverdian, Indra
(2025)
"Repositioning North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO): The New Security Dilemma on Trans–Atlantic Relations Amid Shifting Global Geopolitics,"
Journal of Strategic and Global Studies: Vol. 8:
Iss.
1, Article 4.
DOI: 10.7454/jsgs.v8i1.1164
Available at:
https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/jsgs/vol8/iss1/4
Included in
American Studies Commons, Arabic Language and Literature Commons, Arabic Studies Commons, Asian Studies Commons, Chinese Studies Commons, Eastern European Studies Commons, Economics Commons, European Languages and Societies Commons, Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons, International Relations Commons, Islamic Studies Commons, Japanese Studies Commons, Linguistics Commons, Near and Middle Eastern Studies Commons, Organization Development Commons, Scandinavian Studies Commons, Social Justice Commons, Sociology Commons, South and Southeast Asian Languages and Societies Commons, Strategic Management Policy Commons, Urban Studies and Planning Commons
