Why do states cooperate with NATO? : Threats, Interests and Status as Drivers in External States' Foreign Policymaking Towards the Alliance

Open Access

Abstract

This dissertation explores the origins of external states' behavior towards NATO. The Alliance has adopted cooperative security as a main task in its strategic concept of 2010 and has spun a network of official and informal partnerships across the globe in order to support its missions and legitimacy. However, not all states welcome NATO's engagement outside of its territory. Based on the realist school of international relations, this thesis tests how the variables threat perception, interest in the status quo or revisionism, and status competition can explain why some states cooperate with NATO while others position themselves against the Alliance. The analysis relies on qualitative case studies of the South American states Brazil and Colombia, a denouncer and supporter of NATO respectively. It concludes that external states' NATO policies are generally driven by maximizing power rather than relative security because partnerships do not entail mutual defense commitments. However, the study also suggests that security considerations prevail if states view their sovereignty at risk due to NATO's out-of-area engagements, a concern that touches upon the sensitive core of many states' strategies to ensure survival and development. In this case, states may simultaneously soft balance against NATO for security and bandwagon with the organization's members for profit. Given these complexities, neither Stephen Walt's Balance of Threat theory, nor Randall Schweller's Balance of Interests theory can fully explain external state behavior towards the transatlantic Alliance. The analysis also considers the role of status competition as an intervening variable, pointing out how the desire for status adds to the motivation for states to actively position themselves towards NATO. These results provide the basis for the study's policy recommendations for NATO to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of its efforts to build new partnerships by focusing on neutral states, rather than aiming to appease its critics.