Alliances, Credibility, and Peacetime Costs
- 1 June 1994
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Conflict Resolution
- Vol. 38 (2) , 270-297
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002794038002005
Abstract
Alliances are not perfectly credible. Although alliances raise the probability of intervention into war, many allies do not honor their promise in wartime. A formal model of alliances as signals of intentions to explore the credibility of alliances is presented. One state threatens another. A third state shares an interest with the second in preventing the demands of the first. A simple model of a crisis among these three is solved first without an alliance between the second and the third states. The author then allows them the chance to form an alliance before the crisis. Alliances have two effects: (1) the ability of the allies to fight together is increased, and (2) peacetime costs on the allies are imposed. The model with alliances produces a wide range of strategic behaviors. The implications of the model for the formation, credibility, and deterrent effects of alliances are broadly consistent with stylized facts in the literature.Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Rational Deterrence in an Imperfect WorldWorld Politics, 1991
- Reputation and legislative leadershipPublic Choice, 1987
- A Spatial Model of International ConflictAmerican Political Science Review, 1986
- Power, Alliance, and the Escalation of International Conflict, 1815-1965American Political Science Review, 1984
- Reputation and imperfect informationJournal of Economic Theory, 1982
- Attributes of National Alliance Membership and War Participation, 1815-1965American Journal of Political Science, 1980
- Choosing Sides in WarsInternational Studies Quarterly, 1979