The recent crisis in NATO concerning lending support to Turkey in anticipation of a war against Iraq was no doubt a major one. And as such it was a serious blow to those arguing for the ongoing and ever-continuing relevancy of the Alliance and its ‘successful’ adaptation in the post-Cold War era. It poses challenging and puzzling questions to the students of NATO, the most interesting one being: Why -- after having survived the postCold War identity crisis by successfully managing the challenge of the enlargement rounds, contributing to cooperative security in Europe through several programs, engaging in a constructive relationship with other regional and international organizations in a network of interlocking institutions, and extending its repertoire of missions -- was the institution deadlocked when it was called upon to assist a member in the face of an imminent threat to its security, which was in fact its traditional raison d’état?