In many aspects, political theory forms a subjective structure of this abstract science. Perhaps, it is due to the fact that unlike natural sciences or mathematics, social sciences often lack the privilege of testing the theories in absolute and unadulterated conditions. Nonetheless, such nature of the science allows for a certain degree of flexibility, when applying political theories to real-world phenomena. Alliances and coalitions in international relations form the backbone of the theory, concerning IR scholars with two main questions: Why do alliances and coalitions form? And, what keeps alliances and coalitions together? As the core of my research, I examined NATO, as the most prominent and long-lasting alliance of our time, through the prism of alliance formation and cohesion theory introduced by George Liska. In particular, I explored the evolution of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization over the term of its existence, and sought to determine whether Liska's principles still apply to the contemporary situation, and in particular, how may the variables have altered the application of this scholar's theory to our future understanding of alliances. In its essence, this is a comparative study of the same alliance during the different stages of its existence. In particular, the comparison dissects such aspects of alliance theory as alignment, alliance formation, efficacy, and reasons for possible dissolution. As a result, the study led to a conclusion, that despite the permutations around and within NATO, the basic realist principles that may explain the mechanism of this alliance's formation and cohesion still apply to the contemporary organization.

This thesis contributes to our understanding of cognitive interoperability by explor-ing barriers, facilitators, and contextual factors to create a framework. With the ad-vent of the cognitive domain in warfighting, the adversary pursuit of military strate-gic advantage through cognitive science demands that we seize the initiative and seek cognitive superiority with allies and partners. Prior research acknowledges the importance of human interoperability but is limited to singular studies at the opera-tional and national level. This thesis shifts focus to the military strategic and multi-national level to uncover cognitive and cultural inhibitors and enablers of cognitive interoperability. The empirical data is drawn from a distinct case study that examines senior military officers during a combined exercise. The analysis explores compe-tencies that foster strategic empathy and collective intentionality with identity and human connectivity as major catalysts. Individuals are agents who collectively con-struct cognitive interoperability, setting conditions for cognitive dominance in future military competition.

Since the end of the Cold War, modern Russian and Chinese relations have been characterized by strategic defense, economic, and diplomatic cooperation. This strategic cooperation has become increasingly coordinated, with the motives behind Russo-Sino cooperation increasingly becoming the focus of academic debate. While both states declare that it is not an “alliance,” other terms have been used, such as “alignment”. This concept has only recently gained greater academic attention. This paper presents a theoretical framework on alignment as a process and its constituent mechanisms. Drawing on neo-classical realism and alliance theory, this paper bridges theoretical IR concepts to empirical data, employing a case study methodology that utilizes congruence analysis. It highlights that alignment is a present feature of modern Russian-Chinese relations and it is driven by their perceptions of threat and the global and regional balances of power.

冷戰時期，蘇哈托所統治的印尼雖然標榜著不結盟運動，試圖在東西兩強的夾擊下另闢蹊徑。但是在同樣反對共產主義的主張下，印尼在這段時期，和美國建立起了相當友好的關係，包括軍事和經濟上的援助。在一個近年來已解密的文件中更顯示，福特總統以及季辛吉更曾經和蘇哈托有過正式及非正式的接觸，被認為是美國希望以對印尼軍政府的支持，換取其在反共同盟上的支持。 九十年代之後，印尼政府在人權問題上的處理失當，多次導致美國政府的不滿，進而暫停或取消對印尼的援助。在此事件上，美國國會更採取強硬的立場，要求美國政府必須更仔細而審慎的評估，對印尼的人權表現，是否有明顯的改善。 2001年的九一一事件，代表著美國政府外交政策的巨大改變，在對印尼的外交政策上也出現了明顯的變化。印尼為世界上最大的回教國家，其本身對美國較溫和的立場，使得美國政府在宣揚其反恐理念上，需要印尼的協助。而印尼本身與日俱增的戰略地位，如控制麻六甲海峽，龐大資源，以及在東南亞國協中的大國地位等，使美國政府不得不重新審視其對印尼的外交政策。 本論文主要在探討布希政府在九一一事變後，對印尼外交政策的特點，以及是否和過去出現不同之處。論文組織分為三個主要部分，分別為反恐、人權以及軍事合作。在理論架構方面，本論文借助Steven M. Walt(沃爾特)的同盟理論，希望能釐清兩國在反恐合作方面，是否已具備了同盟的性質。而其他同盟理論的重要內涵，如威脅平衡、意識型態、援助、滲透等，皆會被用來加強本文的論述。 研究發現，在沃爾特的同盟理論架構下，美國和印尼在反恐合作上，的確出現了有如同盟的密切關係。雖然彼此間不存在約束的同盟條約，然而，就同盟的實質而言，恢復的軍事關係和密切的反恐合作等，皆是同盟的重要指標。研究並發現，威脅平衡理論的確較合理的詮釋了美印兩國因反恐而強化的關係。而意識型態、援助和滲透等，對同盟的組成皆有一定程度的影響，但非強大的因素。 / During the Cold War, Indonesia was noted for its leadership in the Non-Alignment Movement, which distinguished itself from the two-polar world. However, the Suharto government had in fact built an amicable relationship with the U.S. under the flag of anti-communism. In the 1990s, due to the notorious human rights records, the U.S. had moved to cancel or suspend military and economic aid to Indonesia. The Congress and Senate of the U.S. took a hard-line stance in dealing with these problems. The 9/11 event marked a significant change in the U.S. foreign policy. As the biggest Muslim country in the world, Indonesia’s comparably moderate nature gains its importance for America in promoting anti-terror in Muslim world. Also, the growing strategic status, like the location in the Malacca Straits, vast resources and key status in ASEAN, necessitates the U.S. to reconsider its policy toward Indonesia. The thesis is primarily dedicated to analyze the Bush Administration’s foreign policy toward Indonesia after the 9/11 event. There are three main pillars in the thesis—anti-terror, human rights and military cooperation. Steven M. Walt’s famous Alliance Theory contributes the analytic framework to this thesis. Also, some other arguments of alliance theory like balance of threat, ideology, foreign aid and penetration will be utilized to deepen the analysis of this thesis. Under Walt’s alliance theory, in spite of the fact that there is no concrete alliance binding between these two countries, the resumed military relationship, and close anti-terror cooperation are all noted indicators that shows the U.S. and Indonesia act as alliance partners. This thesis also demonstrates that the balance of threat theory is a better analytic framework to explain the relationship between the U.S. and Indonesia. Ideology, foreign aid and penetration in this case surely affects the formation of alliance, however, they are not causes of it as Walt concludes.

„Weshalb gibt es keine NATO in Südostasien?“ – mit dieser Frage wird darauf verwiesen, dass die USA mit dem Beginn des Kalten Krieges auf dem amerikanischen Kontinent, in Europa, im Südpazifik, in Südostasien und im Mittleren Osten sicherheitspolitische Bündnisse etablierten, dass diese jedoch im Hinblick auf ihre Reichweite und bindende Kraft, ihre strukturelle Ausgestaltung und vor allem die im Bündnisvertrag eingegangenen Verpflichtungen gegenüber den Bündnispartnern höchst unterschiedlich waren. Während die USA im Rahmen des Nordatlantikpaktes (NATO) und des Vertrags über die Organisation der Amerikanischen Staaten (OAS) bereit waren, weitgehende Verpflichtungen einzugehen, war ihre Einbindung im pazifischen Raum im Bündnis mit Australien und Neuseeland (ANZUS) bzw. in Südostasien (SEATO) weit weniger verbindlich. Dem Bagdad-Pakt im Mittleren Osten, den sie zwar mitinitiierten, traten sie schließlich formal nicht bei. Innerhalb dieser Arbeit wird nachgewiesen, dass die bisherigen Allianztheorien diese unterschiedliche Politikkonzeption nicht erfassen können, da sie kulturelle Faktoren zu wenig berücksichtigen. Desweiteren wird aufgezeigt, dass die US-Allianzpolitik nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg von eben solchen kulturellen Faktoren wesentlich geprägt wurden, wobei insbesondere der Einfluss einer kollektiven Identität basierend auf Vorstellungen einer Überlegenheit der weißen Rasse, dem „White-supremacy-thinking“, in den Vordergrund gestellt wird. / „Why is there no NATO in South East Asia?“ – this question leads to an interesting observation. With begin of the Cold War, the United States were eager to build a chain of various alliance systems in the different region of the world. Their basic intention for developing this policy strategy was on the one hand to contain a further expansion of the communist block under leadership of the Soviet Union and on the other hand to bind the participating nations closer to themselves. In this way, in not even a decade there came into existence the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Organization of American States (OAS), the Australien-New Zealand-United States Pact (ANZUS), the South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Baghdad-Pact. But it is remakrable that although all these alliances were founded by the United States with similar intentions, their institutional design, their scope and the treaties itself differed a lot. While the United States, for example, were willing to enter into broad commitments within the NATO, they were much more hesitant to do the same within the SEATO. This work argues that traditional theories concerning alliances are not able to explain these different approaches because they neglect cultural factors as important variable. It is shown that cultural considerations played a preeminent role in the decision making process in the United States and that these cultural considerations were still heavily based on racially stereotypical thinking and the belief on „White Supremacy“.

No description available.