Marynarka wojenna. 1945-1970 — 1971

Àëüáîì ïîñâÿùåí Âîåííî-ìîðñêîìó ôëîòó Ïîëüøè ñ 1945 ïî 1970 ãã. íà ïîëüñêîì ÿçûêå

Ïîäðîáíàÿ èíôîðìàöèÿ

Apprenticeship, Partnership,Membership. Twenty Yearsof Defence Development in the Baltic States — 2013

For Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, their proximity to the Russian Federation and fear of a possible resurgence of an existential threat from that direction meant that NATO membership was the issue of immediate urgency, with the guarantee of Article 5 as the ultimate shield. But NATO itself was not united in viewing enlargement as necessarily to be desired. At the political level the initial views of member states varied from strongly supportive to, at best, lukewarm. Many senior NATO military figures warned that an enlargement of the Alliance would weaken its core defence capability. The Nordic neighbours argued that national security could be preserved without the need to join an alliance and were ambivalent about extending the reach of NATO to the Russian border. Russia itself fought hard to prevent this happening.While the high-level arguments were debated, and the case eventually won, a process of security sector reform had to be worked out and put in place in readiness for meeting the standards of the EU and NATO. This was particularly challenging for the Baltic states, who had not just to reform existing organisations, but to create and then harmonise new defence structures.

Ìåñòîíàõîæäåíèå èçäàíèÿ: Çàë ëèòåðàòóðû íà èíîñòðàííûõ ÿçûêàõ

Ïîäðîáíàÿ èíôîðìàöèÿ