IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v25y2008i3p224-243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alliances, Institutional Design, and the Determinants of Military Strategy

Author

Listed:
  • Geoffrey P.R. Wallace

    (Department of Government Cornell University Ithaca, New York, USA, gw46@Cornell.edu)

Abstract

This paper argues that the institutional design of alliances is a crucial but often neglected factor in the study of military strategy. Highly institutionalized alliances are found to be a strong determinant of a state's choice of strategy, while other forms of alliances turn out to have little impact. I posit that the level of institutionalization exhibits this effect because of the greater number of channels through which leading states can influence the strategies of their smaller allies and coordinate overall alliance strategy. By incorporating this externally driven process, the results also begin to call into question several previously cited factors affecting the choice of military strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Geoffrey P.R. Wallace, 2008. "Alliances, Institutional Design, and the Determinants of Military Strategy," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 25(3), pages 224-243, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:25:y:2008:i:3:p:224-243
    DOI: 10.1080/07388940802218978
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/07388940802218978
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/07388940802218978?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandler,Todd & Hartley,Keith, 1999. "The Political Economy of NATO," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521630931.
    2. Brett Ashley Leeds & Sezi Anac, 2005. "Alliance Institutionalization and Alliance Performance," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 183-202, July.
    3. Sandler, Todd & Hartley, Keith, 1999. "The Political Economy of Nato: Past, Present, and into the 21st Century," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1441, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Tannenwald, Nina, 1999. "The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non-Use," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(3), pages 433-468, July.
    5. Brett Ashley Leeds, 2003. "Do Alliances Deter Aggression? The Influence of Military Alliances on the Initiation of Militarized Interstate Disputes," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(3), pages 427-439, July.
    6. Brett Leeds & Jeffrey Ritter & Sara Mitchell & Andrew Long, 2002. "Alliance Treaty Obligations and Provisions, 1815-1944," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 237-260, July.
    7. Ikenberry, G. John & Kupchan, Charles A., 1990. "Socialization and hegemonic power," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 283-315, July.
    8. Tomz, Michael & Wittenberg, Jason & King, Gary, 2003. "Clarify: Software for Interpreting and Presenting Statistical Results," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 8(i01).
    9. Koremenos, Barbara & Lipson, Charles & Snidal, Duncan, 2001. "The Rational Design of International Institutions," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 761-799, October.
    10. Bearce, David H. & Flanagan, Kristen M. & Floros, Katharine M., 2006. "Alliances, Internal Information, and Military Conflict Among Member-States," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 595-625, July.
    11. Gheciu, Alexandra, 2005. "Security Institutions as Agents of Socialization? NATO and the ‘New Europe’," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(4), pages 973-1012, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aaron Rapport & Brian Rathbun, 2021. "Parties to an alliance: Ideology and the domestic politics of international institutionalization," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(2), pages 279-293, March.
    2. Jesse C. Johnson, 2016. "Alliance treaty obligations and war intervention," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(5), pages 451-468, November.
    3. Jesse C. Johnson & Brett Ashley Leeds & Ahra Wu, 2015. "Capability, Credibility, and Extended General Deterrence," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 309-336, March.
    4. Jesse C Johnson & Stephen Joiner, 2021. "Power changes, alliance credibility, and extended deterrence," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(2), pages 178-199, March.
    5. Anderton,Charles H. & Carter,John R., 2009. "Principles of Conflict Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521875578, December.
    6. Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, 2009. "Introduction to CMPS Special Issue Building Synergies," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(2), pages 115-119, April.
    7. Brett Ashley Leeds & Michaela Mattes, 2007. "Alliance Politics during the Cold War: Aberration, New World Order, or Continuation of History?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(3), pages 183-199, July.
    8. Kobi Kagan & Alon Levkowitz & Asher Tishler & Avi Weiss, 2009. "Evaluating Strategic Arms Limitation Agreements, With Applications To The Israeli-Syrian And The North Versus South Korean Conflicts," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 95-121.
    9. Paul Poast, 2013. "Issue linkage and international cooperation: An empirical investigation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 286-303, July.
    10. Thomas Plümper & Eric Neumayer, 2015. "Free-riding in alliances: Testing an old theory with a new method," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(3), pages 247-268, July.
    11. Michail Ploumis, 2018. "A New Way Forward: Rebalancing the U.S. Security Cooperation with Greece in a Fast Changing Geostrategic Environment," Applied Finance and Accounting, Redfame publishing, vol. 4(1), pages 95-111, February.
    12. Roger Congleton & Andreas Kyriacou & Jordi Bacaria, 2003. "A Theory of Menu Federalism: Decentralization by Political Agreement," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 167-190, September.
    13. Megan Shannon, 2009. "Preventing War and Providing the Peace?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(2), pages 144-163, April.
    14. M. Dolores Gadea & Eva Pardos & Claudia Perez-Fornies, 2004. "A Long-Run Analysis Of Defence Spending In The Nato Countries (1960-99)," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 231-249.
    15. Rainer Schweickert & Inna Melnykovska & Ansgar Belke & Ingo Bordon, 2011. "Prospective NATO or EU membership and institutional change in transition countries," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 19(4), pages 667-692, October.
    16. Khusrav Gaibulloev & Todd Sandler & Hirofumi Shimizu, 2009. "Demands for UN and Non-UN Peacekeeping," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(6), pages 827-852, December.
    17. Ghislain Dutheil de la Rochère & Jean-Michel Josselin & Yvon Rocaboy, 2011. "The role of aggregation technologies in the provision of supranational public goods: A reconsideration of NATO’s strategies," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 85-103, March.
    18. Marek Dabrowski & Artur Radziwill, 2007. "Regional vs. Global Public Goods: The Case of Post-Communist Transition," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0336, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    19. Kyle Beardsley & Victor Asal, 2009. "Winning with the Bomb," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(2), pages 278-301, April.
    20. Brett V. Benson & Joshua D. Clinton, 2016. "Assessing the Variation of Formal Military Alliances," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(5), pages 866-898, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:25:y:2008:i:3:p:224-243. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.