The Politics of Protection: NATO’s Collective Defense Principle under Article 5
This Article is written byB Kripiya Sharma and Dr Samta Kathuria, a student of Lovely Professional University in the 5th year of BA.LLB (hons).
Europe was destroyed both economically and emotionally after World War II. The era was different, its trust between nations fragile, and the new fear of military aggression loomed large with the rise of the Soviet Union. Twelve countries in 1949 signed the North Atlantic Treaty to form NATO – an alliance based on collective security and on democratic freedoms, democracy, freedom of speech, and protective reciprocity.
The concept of collective defence is at the heart of NATO’s founding treaty. It still is a very special philosophy that blends members and forces them to support each other and brings them together inside the Alliance. And collective defence is at the heart of the Alliance – an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies.
The principle of collective defence is enshrined in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. NATO has standing forces on active duty that contribute to the Alliance’s collective defence efforts permanently.
Article 5 – Importance and Interpretation
Article 5: “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith/non plus therefrom individually and in concert with the other parties such as Any such armed attack and all measures resulting therefrom shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the action necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
Which means essentially this: that if any NATO member is attacked, all other members will treat it as an attack against themselves and act − including taking armed measures − to restore and maintain the safety of the North Atlantic region.
In plain words, it’s a mutual defense pact: “You protect me, I protect you.”
But this doesn’t consider an automatic declaration of war, as every member chooses its method of responses~ politically, militarily, or even via humanitarian assistance.
This article is supplemented by Article 6, which states:
Article 6
“To the end of Article 5, armed attack on one of more of the Parties is considered to consist of an armed attack:
- on the soil of either of the Parties in Europe or North America, or on the Algerian Departments of France, or on the soil of Turkey, or of the Islands which are included within the jurisdiction of either of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
- regarding the forces, ships, or aircraft of any of the Parties, while in or above these territories or any other region in Europe where occupation forces of any of the Parties were present on the date the Treaty became effective or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic region north of the Tropic of Cancer.”
When was Article 5 invoked?
Article 5 has been invoked just once — following the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States in 2001. On 11 September 2001, the United States experienced severe terrorist attacks. The Strategic Concept of the Alliance from 1999 had already recognized terrorism as a threat to NATO’s security. The Alliance’s response to 9/11, however, saw NATO engage actively in the fight against terrorism, launch its first operations outside the Euro-Atlantic area and begin a far-reaching transformation of its capabilities. Moreover, it led NATO to invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty for the very first time in its history.[1]
It wasn’t a war between states, but an attack by non-state actors — a situation the original drafters in 1949 couldn’t have imagined. Yet NATO stood united. Military, intelligence, and logistical assistance were provided by allies within 24 hours. It was a milestone: NATO was not a Cold War alliance anymore; it became a world security force to counter contemporary dangers such as terrorism.
Measures taken to support the US by NATO
- To further develop intelligence-sharing and cooperation, bilaterally as well as in the relevant NATO fora, on threats by terrorism and counteractions to these threats;
- Individually or jointly, as the case may be and in accordance with their capabilities, to assist the Allies and other countries which are or may be subject to increased terrorist threats as a result of their support for the campaign against terrorism;
- to take necessary measures to provide increased security for facilities of the United States and other Allies on their territory;
- to backfill selected Allied assets in NATO’s area of responsibility that are required to directly support operations against terrorism;
- to provide blanket overflight clearances for the United States and other Allies’ aircraft, in accordance with the necessary air traffic arrangements and national procedures, for military flights related to operations against terrorism;
- to provide access for the United States and other Allies to ports and airfields on the territory of NATO member countries for operations against terrorism, including for refueling, in accordance with national procedures;
- that the Alliance is ready to deploy elements of its Standing Naval Forces to the Eastern Mediterranean in order to provide a NATO presence and demonstrate resolve;
- that the Alliance is similarly ready to deploy elements of its NATO Airborne Early Warning Force to support operations against terrorism.
CONCLUSION
The principle of collective defence by NATO in Article 5 is one of the strongest symbols of unity in international security. It is a symptom of mutual commitment (that an assault against any one is an assault against all) which rests on trust and deterrence and collaboration. However, in the modern age of cross-breed attacks, cyber warfare and geo-political changes, this principle is being put to the test. Protective politics today require not only military force, but also balance and diplomatic as well as moral clarity. Finally, the success of NATO will be determined to the extent to which it will be able to reshape this collective shield to new realities and maintain solidarity that has characterized it in the past 70 years. Because when one stands for all, protection becomes more than politics — it becomes purpose.
