After more than half a century, NATO was finally turning itself into a framework for transatlantic action wherever European and American security interests demand it, the alliance's secretary-general, Mr Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, declared yesterday.
However, the results of the first day's negotiations at the NATO summit in Istanbul suggest there is some way to go.
Following the news that Iraq's new transitional government had been sworn in two days earlier than expected, NATO leaders issued a statement offering their "assistance . . . with the training of \ security forces".
The White House was quick to describe the statement as giving the Bush administration the international imprimatur he had sought for post-invasion operations in Iraq. But comments by French President Jacques Chirac late yesterday suggest he saw the summit as little more than the latest arena for the sparring contest that has pitted Paris against Washington since last year's war.
Saying that he was "opposed to a formal role for NATO inside Iraq", Mr Chirac told reporters that the presence of NATO troops risked being misunderstood by Iraqis. The negative consequences, he added, would "undoubtedly be much greater" than the benefits.
President of the European country most opposed to Turkish membership of the EU, Mr Chirac also took a swipe at Mr Bush's fondness, repeated on Sunday, for insisting that Brussels should give Turkey a date for accession proceedings later this year.
Mr Chirac was evidently irritated at this. "If President Bush really said that the way I read it, well, not only did he go too far but he went into a domain which is not his own," said Mr Chirac.
"It is like me trying to tell the United States how it should manage its relations with Mexico." Behind the grand-standing, though, there is plenty of evidence of compromise. Just two weeks ago, Mr Chirac had stated his opposition to "any meddling by NATO in the region." Yesterday his spokeswoman Ms Catherine Colonna signalled that France would be willing to train Iraqi paramilitaries, though she emphasised training would take place outside Iraq.
Despite French insistence, in public, that NATO's role in Iraq should be to federate the efforts of individual states working under their own flags, diplomats at the summit say that there is no doubt there will be a NATO flag in Iraq. One bluntly described Mr Chirac's speech as "playing to the gallery".
Yet it is Washington that has been forced to make far larger concessions. At a meeting of the G8 leading industrial nations earlier in June, President Bush sought NATO military involvement and debt relief for Iraq. His demands were rebuffed, first by France and Germany, and then by Turkey.
It remains to be seen how Iraqis will react to the watered-down help they have been offered. The original request for NATO involvement in Iraq came from the man who is now Iraqi Prime Minister, Mr Iyad Allawi.
Mr de Hoop Scheffer, meanwhile, is likely to be tearing out his hair. "NATO's political clout is directly related to its military competence," he said recently, complaining that individual states are not coming up with the men and machines the alliance requires to do its job.
His comments were largely in response to NATO's still very limited role in Afghanistan, a country gearing up for elections this September. Ten months into its peacekeeping operation there, the alliance only has a force of 6,500, of which barely 250 are based outside the capital Kabul. US forces, meanwhile, number more than 20,000.
Following requests from Afghan president, Mr Hamid Karzai, for more assistance, NATO has promised to bolster its contingent by 3,500.