Theories predicting alliance demise need testable time frames for their claims.

Evidence

Neorealist arguments clearly say that alliances should form in response to power imbalances and threats. They do not, however, say how long it should be before an alliance forms or, conversely, how long it should be before this process reverses. As noted, general theories cannot be expected to predict specific events or dates. Yet, clearly, if we wish to test a theory’s predictions, we must make some effort to put temporal boundaries on theoretical predictions and look for emerging evidence of causal mechanisms. To do so in the case at hand, consider how quickly NATO was formed in the face of the Soviet threat and contrast that with how much time has passed since the demise of that threat. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 45

Categorization

• XREF: Directly relevant to how to test structural/neorealist theory claims about institutional persistence — methods parallel to how one tests evolutionary debunking or functionalist explanations generally. — connects to: Explaining alliance persistence requires nonrealist unit-level theory. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 16; Alliance theory predicts collapse once threats vanish. — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 14; Alliance theory has neglected why alliances persist and what happens when they become obsolete — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 31 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Theories must make testable predictions to be validated. #expands (0.88) — Hawking, Stephen, A Brief History of Time, 32
• Neorealist theories predict alliances collapse once their external threat fades. #exemplifies (0.82) — Robert B. McCalla, NATO’s persistence after the cold war, 37