NATO's Article 5: Performative or Practical?

Abstract

The purpose of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has appeared anything but indisputable since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. While some scholars have argued that the Alliance needs to adapt to fit current global security issues, others have stated that it has become increasingly redundant. This thesis contributes to this discussion by revealing new perspectives on how Article 5 influences NATO’s relevance. So far, the legal clause behind ‘an attack against one is an attack against all’ has only been invoked after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 against the United States. The recent series of Islamic terrorist attacks in Europe since 2015 has not led to the same decision, despite their similarities. By using Securitisation Theory, this research compares the securitisation process after 9/11 to that of the 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris to identify four reasons that explain why this is the case for France. Based on the arguments brought forward, it can be concluded that Article 5 has predominantly been used as a performative symbol of deterrence rather than a practical device.