NATO and Syrian Crisis: Crisis Management or Non- Intervention

Crises are an integral part of the international system. Even during the Cold War that was expected there was a peaceful world, we witnessed many crises. Therefore, crisis management aiming at preventing the intensification and expansion of crises has taken a significant importance. When crises occur, some actions are taken by effective actors including states and organizations such as NATO. NATO has tried to define crisis management functions for itself to maintain it survival. Its cooperation with the Security Council in accordance with the chapter eight of the Charter and its role in various crises were in the same direction. However, its failure to play a role in the Syrian crisis raises the question that which factors influence it in playing a role in the crises. In response to this question, the author makes the hypothesis that the role of NATO in crisis has been affected by past experience and the policies of great power. The findings of this research indicates that limited achievements, the costs of previous interventions, the requirement to obtain a permit from the UN Security Council for intervention and obstacles in its way have led that NATO adopts a policy of non-intervention in this crisis and don't play an active role in crisis management.