The multitude and diversity of the new military conflicts that have captured the international scene in recent years have produced strong reverberations over the way the coordinated response of the International Organizations has been built. In an unstable geopolitical context, with increasingly strong and visible tensions in the international arena, the sources and the root causes of mercenaries and mercenary-related activities proved a turning point, lending new meanings to violating human rights.

NATO had been addressing a range of emerging threats for quite some time, yet it had done so in a compartmentalised way, without clear-cut political guidance or thorough conceptual underpinning. The 2010 Strategic Concept signalled a change, however, as it provided NATO with a wide-ranging mandate to address these challenges in a more systematic way.

Born in 1945 out of the ashes of the Second World War, the United Nations Organization was created – in the words of Dag Hammarskjold, its second Secretary-General – “not to lead the mankind to heaven but to safe humanity from hell”.

Creating conditions for peace, NATO becomes an unlikely catalyst for women’s inclusion in the Afghan peace talks. As the intra-Afghan peace negotiation first term draws to a rejuvenation, Afghan women should take stock of the post-war aftermath and apply lessons learned from the Suffragettes one hundred years ago.

Quo vadis NATO? An equally natural, suitable and, at the same time, difficult question. Natural, because one of the golden rules of managing any organization is the one which imposes the permanent monitoring of its standing, status, and direction of evolution. Suitable, since the organization just celebrated 70 years since the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty, and difficult because we are living interesting times both outside NATO as well as inside the Alliance.

The significance of the transatlantic link in the architecture of the European security has been, over the years, a subject for debate for both the member states and the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament. As in most cases, when important aspects regarding European defence and security are debated at the level of the European Union, opinions differ - from completely supporting the transatlantic link, to ensuring European security by its member states alone, by means of the Common Security and Defence Policy. These debates are the more relevant nowadays, when the European Union is more determined than ever in its evolution to build a security and defence profile that depicts the institution as guarantor of European security.

As mentioned in the previous article - The Transatlantic Link - Current and Future Significance Part 1 – Challenges and Opportunities (Geostrategic Pulse, no. 274/May-June 2019), the author continues his view on the transatlantic link focusing on NATO’s role in European defence.

The transatlantic link is a complex and dynamic concept that covers all aspects of the relations between North America and Europe: military, security, political, economic, social etc. Practically, every component of what we call international relations finds itself in the transatlantic link. This is the reason why this concept can only be understood if analyzed thoroughly, while focusing on all aspects involving the security and defence of the Euro-Atlantic area (often called the transatlantic region), as well as on the contribution of the transatlantic community to international peace and security.