IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v47y1993i02p207-233_02.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Arms versus allies: trade-offs in the search for security

Author

Listed:
  • Morrow, James D.

Abstract

Nations have two methods of increasing their security: building arms and forming alliances. Both methods present different political costs that must be incurred to raise security. Building arms requires shifting economic resources to the military. Forming alliances requires abandoning interests that conflict with those of the ally. Each of these strategies produces domestic opposition. A nation's response to a threat to its security must weigh the relative attractiveness of arms versus allies, both in terms of their effects on internal politics and on their external benefits. Three cases are examined in the light of this argument. The response of Austria and France to the unification of Germany in the 1860s is the central case. Theories of alliance formation based on neorealism and the offense-defense balance predict that Austria and France should have allied against the mutual threat of Prussia. This article argues that they did not form an alliance because arming separately presented lower political costs. World Wars I and II likewise are analyzed from the perspective of the argument above.

Suggested Citation

  • Morrow, James D., 1993. "Arms versus allies: trade-offs in the search for security," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 207-233, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:47:y:1993:i:02:p:207-233_02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818300027922/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John A. C. Conybeare, 1994. "Arms Versus Alliances," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(2), pages 215-235, June.
    2. Christopher R. Dittmeier, 2013. "Proliferation, preemption, and intervention in the nuclearization of second-tier states," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 25(4), pages 492-525, October.
    3. Idean Salehyan, 2010. "The Delegation of War to Rebel Organizations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(3), pages 493-515, June.
    4. Sameer Suryakant Patil, 2007. "India's China Policy in the 1950s," South Asian Survey, , vol. 14(2), pages 283-301, December.
    5. Glenn Palmer & J. Sky David, 1999. "Multiple Goals or Deterrence," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(6), pages 748-770, December.
    6. Spencer L Willardson & Richard AI Johnson, 2022. "Arms transfers and international relations theory: Situating military aircraft sales in the broader IR context," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 39(2), pages 191-213, March.
    7. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "Domestic reform as a rationale for gradualism in international cooperation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(3), pages 400-427, July.
    8. Nadiya Kostyuk, 2024. "Allies and diffusion of state military cybercapacity," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 61(1), pages 44-58, January.
    9. Benjamin E. Goldsmith, 2003. "Bearing the Defense Burden, 1886-1989," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(5), pages 551-573, October.
    10. Mihalache Oana-Cosmina, 2017. "NATO’s ‘Out of Area’ Operations: A Two- Track Approach. The Normative Side of a Military Alliance," Croatian International Relations Review, Sciendo, vol. 23(80), pages 233-258, November.
    11. Emerson Niou & Peter Ordeshook, 1998. "Alliances versus Federations: An Extension of Riker's Analysis of Federal Formation," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 271-288, December.
    12. Raymond Kuo & Brian Dylan Blankenship, 2022. "Deterrence and Restraint: Do Joint Military Exercises Escalate Conflict?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(1), pages 3-31, January.
    13. Steven E. Lobell, 2004. "Politics and National Security: The Battles for Britain," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(4), pages 269-286, September.
    14. Glenn Palmer & Archana Bhandari, 2000. "The Investigation of Substitutability in Foreign Policy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 44(1), pages 3-10, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:47:y:1993:i:02:p:207-233_02. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.