This article examines the background to the provisions in the North Atlantic Treaty for the alliance's duration and member state withdrawal (Article 13). Studies of the Treaty have generally ignored Article 13 despite it being intensely debated during the treaty negotiations in 1948–1949. Addressing the views on duration and withdrawal that featured during these negotiations fills important gaps in the historical literature on the Alliance. In particular, understanding how consensus was reached on these clauses highlights the important role played by both strategic and domestic political considerations. In particular, the wording of the clause was directly linked with deterrence of military aggression and reassurance of Allies. It was also linked with the American preference for a treaty of relatively short duration, which was perceived to be a necessity in winning Senate ratification. In addition, this article traces a number of subsequent diplomatic controversies associated with Article 13, including the 1966 French withdrawal from the Alliance's integrated military structure and, more recently, President Donald Trump´s reported interest in a US withdrawal.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeffrey Michaels (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: