Appendix A: Guidelines for Japan-U.S. Defense Cooperation (Abridged)

2021 ◽  
pp. 275-280
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Karsten Friis

Abstract How can we best analyze security subregions? The most commonly used theory of regional security in the discipline of international relations, the regional security complex theory, focuses on large regions, such as Europe, Asia, or the Middle East. It pays less attention to smaller regions within these. This is unfortunate, because the security dynamics of these subregions often are a result of more than their place in the larger region. At the same time, the security of subregions cannot be reduced to a function of the policies of the states comprising them either. In short, security subregions are a level of analysis in their own right, with their own material, ideational, economic, and political dynamics. To capture and understand this, we need an analytical framework that can be applied to security regions irrespective of where and when in time they occur. The aim of this article is to offer such an analytical framework that helps us theorize the forces forging regional security cooperation, by combining external push and pull forces with internal forces of pull and resistance. The utility of the framework is illustrated through the case of Nordic security cooperation. It allows for a systematic mapping of the driving forces behind it and the negative forces resisting it. The Nordic region thus becomes a meeting point between global and national forces, pushing and pulling in different directions, with Nordic Defense Cooperation being formed in the squeeze between them. Extrait Comment pouvons-nous analyser au mieux les sous-régions de sécurité? La théorie de sécurité régionale la plus communément exploitée dans la discipline des relations internationales, celle du complexe de sécurité régionale, se concentre sur de grandes régions, telles que l'Europe, l'Asie ou le Moyen-Orient. Elle accorde moins d'attention aux plus petites régions qui les constituent. Cela est regrettable, car les dynamiques de sécurité de ces sous-régions résultent souvent de bien d'autres facteurs que leur place dans la région. Dans le même temps, la sécurité des sous-régions ne peut pas non plus être réduite à une fonction des politiques des États qui les composent. En bref, les sous-régions de sécurité sont un niveau d'analyse à part entière, avec ses propres dynamiques matérielles, idéationnelles, économiques et politiques. Pour capturer et comprendre cela, nous avons besoin d'un cadre analytique pouvant être appliqué aux régions de sécurité, quels que soient le moment et le lieu où elles interviennent. Le but de cet article est de proposer un tel cadre analytique qui nous aide à théoriser les forces forgeant la coopération régionale de sécurité en alliant des forces externes de poussée et de traction à des forces internes de traction et de résistance. L'utilité de ce cadre est illustrée par le cas de la coopération de sécurité nordique. Il permet une cartographie systématique des forces motrices sur lesquelles elle repose et des forces négatives qui y résistent. La région nordique devient ainsi un point de rencontre entre forces nationales et internationales qui poussent et tirent dans différentes directions, la coopération de défense nordique se formant dans l'intervalle ainsi constitué. Resumen ¿Cuál es la mejor forma de analizar las subregiones de seguridad? La teoría sobre seguridad regional de uso generalizado en la disciplina de relaciones internacionales, la llamada Teoría de Complejos de Seguridad Regional, se centra principalmente en grandes regiones como Europa, Asia y el Medio Oriente y presta menos atención a regiones más pequeñas dentro ellas. Este aspecto es desafortunado, ya que la dinámica de seguridad de estas subregiones suele ser el resultado de otros factores además del lugar que ocupan dentro de estas regiones más grandes. Asimismo, la seguridad subregional tampoco puede reducirse a una función de las políticas de los estados que integran. En conclusión, las subregiones de seguridad merecen un nivel de análisis propio, con sus propias dinámicas materiales, conceptuales, económicas y políticas. Para captar y comprender esto, es necesario un marco analítico que pueda aplicarse a regiones de seguridad independientemente del lugar y el momento en el que suceden. Este artículo tiene como objetivo ofrecer ese marco analítico que ayude a teorizar los factores que forjan la cooperación de seguridad nacional al combinar factores externos de tensión y conciliación con factores internos de conciliación y resistencia. La utilidad del marco se explica a través del caso de la cooperación de seguridad nórdica. Permite realizar un mapeo sistemático de los factores subyacentes de impulso y los factores negativos de resistencia. La región nórdica, por tanto, se convierte en un punto de encuentro de los factores internacionales y nacionales de tensión y conciliación en distintas direcciones, y en el cual que se forma la cooperación nórdica de defensa.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Winger

Abstract In 2016, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte pledged to radically reorient Philippine foreign policy by separating from Manila's longtime ally the United States. Yet, this vaunted break with America has failed to manifest. Joint US–Philippine military activities have continued with President Duterte even singing the praises of his American partners. To understand how this about-face in Manila occurred, I conducted a detailed analysis of the first eighteen months of the Duterte administration. Drawing on primary sources and interviews with government officials from both countries, I argue that the continued vitality of the US–Philippine alliance stems not from disenchantment with China nor personal relationship between Duterte and Trump, but rather from an underlying institutional affinity engendered over decades of defense cooperation. Specifically, institutionalized cooperation within the alliance has cultivated a strong reservoir of support for the alliance within key institutions inside the Philippine government. This case not only highlights the development of the Duterte administration but also illustrates the wider ability of alliances to weather political discord by cultivating support within national bureaucracies.


Author(s):  
Joshua Alley

Abstract How does alliance participation affect military spending? Some argue that alliance membership increases military expenditures, while others contend that it produces spending cuts. I argue that deep formal defense cooperation modifies the impact of alliance participation on military expenditures and can explain increases and decreases in spending by small alliance members. Security-seeking junior members of deep alliances usually decrease military spending because these treaties are more credible. Joining shallow alliances often increases junior alliance member military spending, however. I test the argument by creating a latent measure of alliance treaty depth and using it to predict differences in how alliance participation affects military spending. The research design generates new empirical evidence linking alliance participation and percentage changes in state military spending from 1919 to 2007. I find that deeper alliance treaties tend to decrease military spending by junior alliance members, and shallow alliances often increase military spending. These results help scholars and policymakers better understand a central question about alliance politics that has been debated in scholarship for decades.


2019 ◽  
pp. 169-180
Author(s):  
Paul Poast

This concluding chapter summarizes the book's main claims and empirical findings, discussing the implications of these findings as well as directions for future research. At their heart, alliance treaties are about using military force. As such, war planning can be conceptualized as the core of alliance treaty negotiations. Equipped with this premise, the book argued that the key variable determining whether conditions are conducive to agreement is the compatibility of the participants' ideal war plans. These plans must be both operationally and strategically compatible. When war plan compatibility is low, the second key explanatory variable comes into play: the number of negotiation participants that have attractive outside options. The chapter then highlights how the arguments and evidence in the book indicate new research directions in four areas related to alliances: alliance treaty design, alliance reliability, NATO expansion, and the formation of defense cooperation agreements.


Korea 1991 ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 159-173
Author(s):  
William J. Taylor ◽  
Michael J. Mazarr

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document