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
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
To be clear, @SecPompeo used the term "alliance" in a loose way. He's talking about democracies banding together on a host of issue areas to counter China. That'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/
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/
So the question becomes: can the US renew military cooperation with various allies and possibly bring in new allies? 
It's good for 
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
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
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
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
But things could become tricky because there are currently a lot of hard feelings... https://twitter.com/KSchultz3580/status/1286673450866634753
...and questions about US intentions. https://twitter.com/McFaul/status/1286698203547447296
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
...and this.... https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/11/15/trump-administration-demands-south-korea-pay-more-for-us-troops/4200210002/
....and this (you get the idea). https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/390527-canada-as-a-national-security-threat-to-the-united-states
That'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
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'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'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
...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
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
...and developed further by @djpressman in his @CornellPress book https://www.google.com/books/edition/Warring_Friends/o3MOQIsGsGcC?hl=en&gbpv=0
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
... 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
To be clear common threats, looking past animus, & offers of "goodies" do not guarantee anything.
There are still reasons for skepticism. It's still possible that the "alliance of democracies" won't form, won't be sustained, or won't be meaningful.
There are still reasons for skepticism. It's still possible that the "alliance of democracies" won't form, won't be sustained, or won'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
Second, we'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
...or in mission-specific coalition (see @thescottwolford's book) https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Politics_of_Military_Coalitions/OJqNCgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
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
On balance, while creating an "alliance of democracies" won't be easy, it could happen even with @realDonaldTrump in office.
[END]
[END]
