NATO stayed cohesive despite neorealist predictions of its collapse

Evidence

A closer look, however, shows that beneath its disputes, NATO remains robust and healthy. Member states have cut military spending and troop commitments but, with what have turned out to be a few minor exceptions, only in the context of overall alliance agreements and negotiations. Despite initial concerns, the “renationalization” of member states’ foreign and military policies (making policy decisions on a strictly national basis) has not progressed very far and the integrated command structure, under American command, remains without serious challenge. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 57

Categorization

• XREF: This is the empirical core the reader’s question is built around: identity/institution persisting and even consolidating after its founding enemy dissolved. — 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; A theory must explain overall outcomes, the standard neorealism fails. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 149; NATO redefined the post-Soviet threat as indirect but real to justify persisting. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 86 (+4 more)

Related

• NATO redefined the post-Soviet threat as indirect but real to justify persisting. (similarity 0.90)
• NATO’s dense institutionalization beyond mutual defense is what made it survive its founding threat. (similarity 0.89)
• Theoretical frameworks beyond realism are needed to explain NATO’s survival. (similarity 0.89)
• NATO survived the cold war’s end due to institutionalization, not merely threats (similarity 0.89)
• An alliance persists when its founding enemy vanishes. (similarity 0.88)
• NATO’s institutionalization beyond mutual defense explains its persistence after its founding threat vanished. (similarity 0.88)
• NATO officials reconceived the Soviet threat to justify continuing the alliance after its collapse (similarity 0.87)
• NATO has expanded rather than dissolved after the Soviet threat ended. (similarity 0.87)
• Alliance cohesion theories predict NATO should have dissolved after the Soviet threat vanished (similarity 0.87)
• Alliances can persist and expand purposes after their founding enemy disappears (similarity 0.86)
• NATO’s survival hinges on member states continuing to benefit from it (similarity 0.86)
• High institutionalization distinguishes NATO from traditional alliances. (similarity 0.86)
• A theory must explain overall outcomes, the standard neorealism fails. (similarity 0.85)
• Deeply institutionalized alliances outlast ad hoc ones against realist expectations (similarity 0.85)
• NATO reoriented itself after the Cold War and stayed valuable without a compelling threat (similarity 0.85)

Broader Connections

• NATO redefined the post-Soviet threat as indirect but real to justify persisting. #expands (0.85) — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 86
• Post-Cold War events largely followed predictions derived from civilizational identity #contradicts (0.85) — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 80
• Post-Cold War NATO planning redirected from East to southern threats #expands (0.80)
• 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
• Systemic realism and active political commitment can coexist rather than exclude each other #corroborates (0.75)