NATO’s institutionalization beyond mutual defense explains its persistence after its founding threat vanished.
Evidence
Traditional alliances, unlike NATO, do not share NATO’s development of norms and procedures beyond mutual defense. We have here one key feature, then, that might explain why NATO is a deviant case for neorealism. One of the variable features of a regime is its institutionalization (the degree to which its norms and practices are formalized within a particular structure and process). — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 107
Categorization
- ADDENDUM: Parallels the ‘institutions outlive their founding purpose’ theme in the reader’s reading purpose about NATO persisting after the Soviet Union disappeared.
- XREF: Connects to institutionalist theory of alliance persistence contrasted with neorealist alliance-death predictions. — connects to: Analysts expected NATO to die once its Soviet enemy vanished. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 12; NATO has expanded rather than dissolved after the Soviet threat ended. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 15; NATO reoriented itself after the Cold War and stayed valuable without a compelling threat — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 29 (+9 more)
Broader Connections
- NATO’s dense institutionalization beyond mutual defense is what made it survive its founding threat.
#corroborates(1.00) — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 107 - NATO survived the cold war’s end due to institutionalization, not merely threats
#corroborates(0.97) — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 152 - Alliances with developed organizations survive threats long after they vanish
#corroborates(0.80) — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 153 - Theoretical frameworks beyond realism are needed to explain NATO’s survival.
#expands(0.76) — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 149