Russia’s conflict with Ukraine stems in part from the Kremlin’s concern that Kyiv is drawing too close to institutions such as the European Union and NATO. Throughout his campaign, President Donald Trump called into question the usefulness of today’s NATO and spoke of building a better relationship with Moscow. Advocating change, he has shaken trans-Atlantic bonds and arguably seen some results. Would the president be prepared to go further and suggest ending NATO expansion while seeking a new security architecture that might accommodate and reduce the risk of conflict with Russia? What would be the benefits and costs of such an approach?
On July 31, the Center for 21st Century Security and Intelligence at Brookings hosted an event focused on the future of NATO and the European security order. Brookings Senior Fellow Michael O’Hanlon, author of “Beyond NATO: A New Security Architecture for Eastern Europe” (Brookings Institution Press, 2017) was joined by Brookings Senior Fellow Steven Pifer, author of “The Eagle and The Trident: U.S.—Ukraine Relations in Turbulent Times” (Brookings Institution Press, 2017). Torrey Taussig, pre-doctoral research fellow at Brookings, moderated the discussion.
Director of Research - Foreign Policy
Co-Director - Africa Security Initiative
The Sydney Stein, Jr. Chair
Philip H. Knight Chair in Defense and Strategy
To subscribe or manage your subscriptions to our top event topic lists, please visit our event topics page.
For the past year, you've seen that perhaps no leverage that the US and the West thought it had — aid, sanctions, the freezing of Afghanistan's reserves — has really had an effect on Taliban behavior. The Taliban has essentially done what they had always done. The Afghan people have been in a humanitarian crisis because the Taliban hasn't budged.