​

With its roots tracing back to the aftermath of World War II, NATO has always been the counterweight to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, its presence the US and Western Europe’s answer to the Warsaw Pact. Even after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the rest of the Iron Curtain, it still plays a major role in shaping the dialogue in today’s geopolitical landscape, for conflicts still arise in various countries and territories that necessitate its involvement. As reflected in NATO’s motto – “animus in consulendo liber” or “a mind unfettered in deliberation” – active cooperation, collective defence, and unyielding deterrence are at the heart of its strategies.

Topic A: Reviewing membership

As NATO continues to evolve, the question of membership has become increasingly complex and politically charged. The expansion of the military alliance, particularly in regions with historical tensions and ongoing conflicts, has sparked debates on security guarantees, diplomatic consequences, and the potential risks of overextension. While enlargement has strengthened NATO’s influence, it has also raised concerns about provoking adversarial states and straining existing resources.

Topic B: Evaluating the GDP defense quota

Another crucial topic under discussion is NATO’s 2% GDP defense spending guideline – a policy that has been both a cornerstone of Alliance commitments and a point of contention among member states. The requirement for members to allocate at least 2% of their GDP to defense spending has been a subject of ongoing debate, particularly as global economic conditions are becoming more volatile than ever. While some argue that such a level of defense spending is necessary to deter threats and uphold NATO’s collective defense principle under Article 5, others contend that rigid financial obligations place undue strain on smaller economies and hinder domestic development.

The world is in discord more than ever. May NATO find the balance?