A Political Role Suited to a New Era It is against this backdrop of earlier, successful adaptations, as well as the long sustainment of a vibrant political dimension to its work, that NATO enters a new and very different strategic environment in the period from now to 2030. But past adaptation is no guarantee of future success; to survive, and remain effective and relevant to the needs of its members, NATO must again adapt to changing strategic circumstances. In this new chapter of its existence, the foundational mission for NATO remains, as set out in the North Atlantic Treaty, to ‘safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilisation of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law… to promote stability and well-be- ing in the North Atlantic area… [and] to unite their efforts for collective defence and for the preservation of peace and security.’ Nor have the basic ingredients for this mission changed; they remain, as they were at the time of the Xxxxxx Report, military strength and political solidarity combined with pursuit of a long-term stable international environment. Mustering the necessary cohesion to support these purposes is, however, likely to be both more important and harder in the coming decade than it was in previous eras, not least because of the way different Allies prioritise multiple threats. Where NATO faced one big threat in the Cold War and no peer competitor in the immediate post-Cold War period, today it faces two systemic rivals, the enduring threat of terrorism, instability along NATO’s southern periphery, a dramatically changing technological landscape, numerous, vexing non-state threats, and man-made as well as natural risks. While these threats reaffirm NATO’s enduring purpose, their very plurality, and the differing weight that Allies attach to each, also makes the process of reaching consensus on priorities harder. Alongside this, there have at times been tensions and differences over underlying values which contribute to strained rela- tions between Allies. Political divergences within NATO are dangerous because they enable external actors, and in particular Russia and China, to exploit intra-Alliance differences and take advantage of individual Allies in ways that endanger their collective interests and security. This includes actions that are directly relevant to NATO’s traditional geographic and functional mission but also extends to the cyber, technological, and strategic-commercial realms—and ...
