Abstract
Borderwork and its connection with strategic dilemmas have seldom been reflected in the academic literature on NATO. Territorial expansion of any international organisation is associated with constructing new borders, as the former internal and external differentiations need to be replaced. At the same time, new borders and related borderwork produce additional challenges in ensuring the new members are reined in, and the organisation is adapted to a new strategic environment. We argue this connection can be seen in the case of NATO expansion in the 1990s and early 2000s. A novel set of (re-)bordering practices was introduced, reflecting the longer border to be defended outwardly and inculcating the new differentiations on the inside. The installation of NATO-standard radios to supplement Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) systems on new members’ MiG-29 aircrafts, concerns over the Suwałki Gap, or accession’s democratic requirements illustrate this perspective. Such changes led not only to opportunities that NATO could pursue from its renewed geopolitical setting but also to a redefinition of challenges which required a more robust posture to deter adversaries and defend the expanded Alliance area. The presented paper thus identifies a connection between required bordering practices and the strategic dilemmas the Alliance had to face. In this regard, we use comparative analysis to examine the proposed relationship during and after NATO’s post-Cold War expansion and apply our findings to the potential integration of Finland and Sweden.