NATO’s post-cold-war peacekeeping let members act indirectly on concerns without leading.

Evidence

Since 1992, NATO has become very involved in planning for peacekeeping activities—which of necessity will involve a closer involvement with other international organizations and institutions than currently exists. NATO has also participated in carrying out UN mandates with respect to air and sea embargoes against the former Yugoslavia as well as military actions against Serb forces. This willingness to participate in peacekeeping activities signified a new departure for the alliance but is entirely consistent with our theoretical expectations, since it allows member states to be involved indirectly in something they have an interest in but do not want to lead. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 129

Categorization

• XREF: Offers a functional ‘why it survived’ mechanism that parallels the reader’s interest in institutional persistence. — connects to: NATO’s dense institutionalization beyond mutual defense is what made it survive its founding threat. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 107; NATO redefined the post-Soviet threat as indirect but real to justify persisting. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 86; Fear of public reaction to casualties shaped NATO’s Kosovo strategy (+1 more)

Related

• NATO redefined the post-Soviet threat as indirect but real to justify persisting. (similarity 0.90)
• NATO reoriented itself after the Cold War and stayed valuable without a compelling threat (similarity 0.86)
• Post-Cold War NATO’s core purpose is preventing renewed Russian control of Central Europe (similarity 0.84)
• NATO’s survival hinges on member states continuing to benefit from it (similarity 0.84)
• NATO survived the cold war’s end due to institutionalization, not merely threats (similarity 0.84)
• NATO stayed cohesive despite neorealist predictions of its collapse (similarity 0.83)
• NATO positioned itself among rival security organizations to prove its continued relevance (similarity 0.83)
• Theoretical frameworks beyond realism are needed to explain NATO’s survival. (similarity 0.83)
• Analysts expected NATO to die once its Soviet enemy vanished. (similarity 0.82)
• NATO’s expanded ties to outside organizations fit institutionalist expectations better than organizational ones. (similarity 0.82)
• NATO’s institutionalization beyond mutual defense explains its persistence after its founding threat vanished. (similarity 0.82)
• NATO has expanded rather than dissolved after the Soviet threat ended. (similarity 0.82)
• NATO officials reconceived the Soviet threat to justify continuing the alliance after its collapse (similarity 0.82)
• Alliances can persist and expand purposes after their founding enemy disappears (similarity 0.81)
• NATO publicly reframed post-Soviet risk as unforeseeable instability, not invasion. (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Post-Cold War NATO’s core purpose is preventing renewed Russian control of Central Europe #expands (0.80) — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 434
• Fear of public reaction to casualties shaped NATO’s Kosovo strategy #complicates (0.75)