But NATO’s performance and purpose in Afghanistan have been cloudy at best.

In 2006, NATO planned to relieve U.S. troops in Afghanistan of day-to-day operations, but to get all the nations involved, agreements had to be made with each one about the extent of its involvement within the country.

The result has been an inconsistent force, with troops from some countries bearing a large amount of work, while others are working in relatively safe, noncombative areas of Afghanistan. NATO nations are defending the current state of operations in Afghanistan by saying the U.S.‘s unpopularity makes it difficult for them to approve sending more troops.

But that is a cop-out answer to a question that NATO has been largely reluctant to answer. The threat that terrorism poses to the world is evident, but NATO’s inability to organize its members toward a goal puts its credibility into question.

Afghanistan brought to the surface the major problem with NATO. It’s a Cold War-era, watered-down organization struggling to find global support from those in line for its assistance as well as some nations that are part of it.

At a recent conference discussing the alliance’s role in Afghanistan, Gates said, “It raises the question: What would happen if the false success they proclaim became real success? ? Aside from the chaos that would instantly be sown in the region, success there would beget success on many other fronts as the cancer metastasized further and more rapidly than it already has.”

Gates’ vision is optimistic, but it will only materialize if NATO strives for a more cohesive effort.

NATO could have a hand in resolving global conflicts if it can justify its existence and outline its purpose and goals to encompass a broader spectrum beyond the issues in Afghanistan. Years ago, NATO targeted the USSR, and now it can’t be shortsighted by solely focusing on Afghanistan. For NATO to be a credible world organization in the eyes of the governments it seeks to protect, it should base its actions on policies that look at not only the world’s current terrorism scares, but also potential future threats.

Along with the U.S., NATO is the other pillar supporting the effort in Afghanistan, therefore the alliance can’t afford to fumble in its efforts to stop violence and restore peace.

The United Nations isn’t the only world organization capable of stepping in when governments go sour. NATO can have a slice of the world-peace pie if its policies can back up its actions.