Green parties vs Nato: is the war over?

Green parties across Europe — historically figureheads of peace — have traditionally mobilised fiercely against Nato. Today, however, being Green in Europe and a faithful warden of peace is no longer necessarily at odds with supporting the defence military alliance.

Less clear however is if — and how — engaging with Nato could help Greens pursue their goals. 

A recent study conducted by the Green European Foundation (GEF) mapping green and progressive parties' positions towards Nato in several European countries, found out that eight out of the 10 parties interviewed — all belonging to different countries — are supportive of Nato membership, or at least accept it under the current security challenges. 

In the wake of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine and with defence high on the list of priorities of the European Union, it is only natural that green actors strive to influence Nato and steer it in a more progressive direction. 

It would be unwise to let conservative and militaristic voices be the only ones heard within an alliance that is considered one of the most important actors of Europe's security today. 

Plus, there is room for progressives to convey their demands. In recent years, Nato has started to broaden the way it looks at the origins of conflict. At COP28, Nato secretary general Jens Stoltenberg assured the public that climate change mattered for the alliance's security, thus “it matters for Nato”, he concluded. 

A long-awaited call by many Greens has in fact been to expand the notion of security beyond territorial considerations to include other dimensions such as economic, health or environmental security. Influencing the alliance's understanding of safety can be the soil in which to grow and expand green visions on defence. 

Likewise, Nato has repeatedly promised on delivering specific targets to reduce emissions by 2030. There is merit in welcoming any step towards a decarbonized society, however legally-binding obligations and reporting linked to emissions reduction in Nato are currently missing. As within other multilateral forums, Greens within the alliance could act as watchdogs against foot-dragging and greenwashing. 

However, there are tricky, ailing questions which will be harder to navigate.

Ideologically, Green and Nato stances on nuclear weapons — which sit at the core of each other's foundations — are at opposite corners of the ring. Greens’ historical anti-nuclear positions are incompatible with Nato's deterrence policy. 

Nato's position is that as long as nuclear weapons exist, Nato will remain a nuclear alliance. This has put Nato at odds with the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), arguing that it undermines broader disarmament efforts.

Holding Nato accountable

Even if there are cleavages within the green movement regarding nuclear disarmament, this still remains a core green priority. Thus, greens should not undermine their credibility in this matter, which makes them unique candidates to hold Nato accountable on committing to broader disarmament efforts. 

But how to influence the alliance? There are several ways to do so. Currently, Greens in Germany, Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands are joining forces to have Nato member states as observers at the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) high-level meetings.

Although France or the US remain reluctant, other Nato members — due to green party presence in government coalitions — choose to engage in NPT forums to foster openness to dialogue. 

The increased presence of Greens in the Nato Parliamentary Assembly is also important. This assembly has no formal power within Nato, but it is an open space for deliberation where nuclear disarmament, broader security and climate change can be put on the agenda. 

Last year, representatives from several Green and progressive parties from Belgium, Germany, and Iceland put forward an amendment to the Nato Parliamentary Assembly statement prior to the Vilnius Summit that took place in July.

The proposal, which included steps to foster arms control and nuclear disarmament, unsurprisingly did not pass. But the goal was to challenge the conservative narrative prevalent within Nato. And in that, they succeeded. 

Dismantling the doctrine of fear that has overshadowed global politics for decades is definitely a monumental task. But amid escalating threats, militarism and nuclear fanaticism, Greens should not resign themselves to crying silos, but rather, parachute into the core of existing institutions to defend an alternative vision of security and defence.