Read on Twitter
@SecPompeo wants a "new alliance of democracies".
Can this happen after 3+ years of @realDonaldTrump berating traditional US allies?
Absolutely! IR scholarship shows that forming alliances has little to do with being friendly.
[THREAD] https://twitter.com/latimes/status/1286783974421954561">https://twitter.com/latimes/s...
Can this happen after 3+ years of @realDonaldTrump berating traditional US allies?
Absolutely! IR scholarship shows that forming alliances has little to do with being friendly.
[THREAD] https://twitter.com/latimes/status/1286783974421954561">https://twitter.com/latimes/s...
To be clear, @SecPompeo used the term "alliance" in a loose way. He& #39;s talking about democracies banding together on a host of issue areas to counter China. That& #39;s not "technically" an alliance, which is limited to just military affairs.
But @SecPompeo seems to imply that military cooperation is a key part of this "alliance".
This is sensible given the recent aggression China has shown vis-a-vis its neighbors, as discussed in @foreinpolicy by @lindseywford & @JulianGewirtz https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/18/china-india-aggression-asia-alliances/">https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/1...
This is sensible given the recent aggression China has shown vis-a-vis its neighbors, as discussed in @foreinpolicy by @lindseywford & @JulianGewirtz https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/18/china-india-aggression-asia-alliances/">https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/1...
So the question becomes: can the US renew military cooperation with various allies and possibly bring in new allies? 
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="🤔" title="Denkendes Gesicht" aria-label="Emoji: Denkendes Gesicht">
It& #39;s good for https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="🇺🇸" title="Flagge der Vereinigten Staaten" aria-label="Emoji: Flagge der Vereinigten Staaten"> that SecPompeo had this revelation. As @MiraRappHooper lays out in her new book, alliances have been central to US security since World War II. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674982956">https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.p...
And creating mission-specific coalitions has been a favorite means for the US to carry out military operations, as @sekreps explains https://www.google.com/books/edition/Coalitions_of_Convenience/wsAVDAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=sarah+kreps,+coalitions&printsec=frontcover">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
Indeed, @Olivier1Schmitt shows that US "junior partners" really do "count" https://www.google.com/books/edition/Allies_that_Count/J-VaDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=allies+that+count&printsec=frontcover">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
But things could become tricky because there are currently a lot of hard feelings... https://twitter.com/KSchultz3580/status/1286673450866634753">https://twitter.com/KSchultz3...
...and questions about US intentions. https://twitter.com/McFaul/status/1286698203547447296">https://twitter.com/McFaul/st...
Such perceptions are understandable, as US allies have had to put up with years of this... https://www.france24.com/en/20191203-trump-criticises-european-allies-ahead-of-nato-s-70th-anniversary-summit">https://www.france24.com/en/201912...
...and this.... https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/11/15/trump-administration-demands-south-korea-pay-more-for-us-troops/4200210002/">https://www.usatoday.com/story/new...
....and this (you get the idea). https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/390527-canada-as-a-national-security-threat-to-the-united-states">https://thehill.com/opinion/n...
That& #39;s not to mention scrapping agreements that were valued by a host of potential US partners, such as the TPP https://www.rand.org/blog/2017/03/strategic-consequences-of-us-withdrawal-from-tpp.html">https://www.rand.org/blog/2017...
Nevertheless, forming an "alliance of democracies" seems quite possible despite the hard feelings.
Why? Three reasons:
1) Alliances are about common threats.
2) Alliances often form b/w states that don& #39;t get along.
3) Alliance formation is often "transactional"
Why? Three reasons:
1) Alliances are about common threats.
2) Alliances often form b/w states that don& #39;t get along.
3) Alliance formation is often "transactional"
First, one of the key findings of the alliance literature is that common threats bring states together. This a big part of the argument in @stephenWalt classic book... https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Origins_of_Alliances/cbFbAAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
...and is why, as @resnick_evan shows, states have often formed "alliances of convenience": the enemy of my enemy is my friend. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Allies_of_Convenience/7ol-DwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
Second and sticking with idea of "enemy of my enemy is my friend", states with a long history of animosity have been brought into alliance.
This is a key part of the argument made by Patricia Weitsman in her seminal book... https://www.google.com/books/edition/Dangerous_Alliances/sdNYUKqpl2gC?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
...and developed further by @djpressman in his @CornellPress book https://www.google.com/books/edition/Warring_Friends/o3MOQIsGsGcC?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
Third, the creation of alliances, whether formal via a treaty or informal in terms of a coalition, is highly transactional: they are the result of "exchange", not necessarily "like mindedness"
@tongfi_kim details the "market" for partners with respect to formal alliances... https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Supply_Side_of_Security/dyOfCwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
... while @mephenke details the role of these transactions in creating mission-specific coalitions https://www.google.com/books/edition/Constructing_Allied_Cooperation/97ytDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
To be clear common threats, looking past animus, & offers of "goodies" do not guarantee anything.
There are still reasons for skepticism. It& #39;s still possible that the "alliance of democracies" won& #39;t form, won& #39;t be sustained, or won& #39;t be meaningful.
There are still reasons for skepticism. It& #39;s still possible that the "alliance of democracies" won& #39;t form, won& #39;t be sustained, or won& #39;t be meaningful.
First, there is hard bargaining involved in creating the partnership...and that bargaining can indeed fail, as I detail in my new @CornellPress book https://www.google.com/books/edition/Arguing_about_Alliances/kbR8DwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
Second, we& #39;ve long known that hard bargaining will continue even after the countries have become allies, either formally... https://www.google.com/books/edition/Alliance_Politics/dlHcxUrjPB4C?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
...or in mission-specific coalition (see @thescottwolford& #39;s book) https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Politics_of_Military_Coalitions/OJqNCgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
Third, just because states form an alliance, they might choose to keep the terms of agreement rather vague, as @bvbenson details https://www.google.com/books/edition/Constructing_International_Security/Svp_k7UNlq8C?hl=en&gbpv=0">https://www.google.com/books/edi...
On balance, while creating an "alliance of democracies" won& #39;t be easy, it could happen even with @realDonaldTrump in office.
[END]
[END]
