For the Balkans, the Summit’s decisions represent the source of a new threat, a consequence of the possible crash between the Albanese, Macedonian, Serbian and even Greek ethnical and cultural fundamentals that they stimulated

Albania considers the NATO Summit in Buchaest a success. Macedonia surely considers it a failure. For the Balkans, the Summit’s decisions represent the source of a new threat, a consequence of the possible crash between the Albanese, Macedonian, Serbian and even Greek ethnical and cultural fundamentals that they stimulated. The Caucasians concluded that hard times would come in the near future. For Ukraine, the Summit brought the hope for a solid national emancipation back due to the integration in a Euro-Atlantic family that resulted in the fact that the country’s unity and security will be found in the EU reforms, but not in the exaltation of the Orange revolution. The future of the Ukraine-NATO relations will depend less on the oracular formulas than on the tactical aspects of the future American and Ukrainian administrations.

The members who have to deal with non-conventional attacks that are not touched by the discouragement methods used in the Cold War see the Summit as a confirmation of the fact that even if security is indivisible, the American umbrella is partial. This reveals the fact that we are dealing with less engagement of the USA, which can result in a separation of the European security strategies from the transatlantic ones. Actually, it has been decided that the ones that were not covered by the anti-missile shield installed based on certain bilateral agreements with Washington can build their own compatible shields. Who will provide the money or the technology for that? NATO does not finance projects in the way the EU does. Therefore, the ones that feel vulnerable should find financial sources to de