In early February 1998, Canada and Denmark agreed to the candidate states' entry. NATO officials wish to admit the three candidates in April 1999. An alternative view is that Russia remains a potential threat, and that enlargement will secure for the alliance a significant presence in a strategically important area, thereby limiting Moscow's potential sphere of influence. Failure to expand the alliance would leave central European states anxious over potential border and minority issues with neighboring countries. Enlargement will sustain U.S. leadership in Europe.
Collective defense remains the core of the alliance.
Extending it to qualified new members will deter aggression in a traditionally unstable region. Each new member need develop only that part of its military that serves overall alliance purposes, and will benefit from a NATO military infrastructure linking it to countries committed to collective defense. U.S. and western defense industries will benefit by securing markets for their armaments in the newly allied states. There is no threat to any current ally or candidate state, and no need therefore to expand NATO's collective defense commitments. Enlargement will create new dividing lines in Europe by putting Russia on guard against an alliance moving into its traditional areas of influence.