The Continent or the “Grand Large”? Strategic Culture and Operational Burden-Sharing in NATO
Abstract
© The Author (2017). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International
Studies Association. All rights reserved. We argue that NATO allies exhibiting more
"Atlanticist" strategic cultures allocate a greater share of their defense resources
to Alliance priorities than those exhibiting "Europeanist" strategic cultures. Our
analysis builds on policy discussions regarding imbalances in burden-sharing in transatlantic
security. Scholarship in the fields of international security and political economy
offers plausible explanations for these imbalances, but does not address how allies
allocate resources within defense budgets and does not statistically test effects
of cultural variables on such decisions. Using evidence from 89 national security
strategy documents of 24 NATO allies, we argue that the more states' strategic cultures
tend toward Atlanticism, the more resources they allocated to military operations
during a period in which such operations were the Alliance's top priority. During
the height of NATO's "out of area" period from 2000 to 2012, there was a strong, positive
correlation between, on the one hand, Atlanticist language in such documents and,
on the other, allies' allocation of financial resources to military operations-as
opposed to personnel, infrastructure, or equipment.
Type
Journal articleSubject
burden sharingstrategic culture
NATO
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
operations
Atlanticist
Europeanist
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/17736Published Version (Please cite this version)
10.1093/isq/sqw039Publication Info
Becker, J; & Malesky, E (2017). The Continent or the “Grand Large”? Strategic Culture and Operational Burden-Sharing
in NATO. International Studies Quarterly, 61(1). pp. 163-180. 10.1093/isq/sqw039. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/17736.This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this
article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
More Info
Show full item recordScholars@Duke
Edmund Malesky
Professor of Political Science
Malesky is a specialist on Southeast Asia, particularly Vietnam. Currently, Malesky's
research agenda is very much at the intersection of Comparative and International
Political Economy, falling into three major categories: 1) Authoritarian political
institutions and their consequences; 2) The political influence of foreign direct
investment and multinational corporations; and 3) Political institutions, private
business development, and formalization.

Articles written by Duke faculty are made available through the campus open access policy. For more information see: Duke Open Access Policy
Rights for Collection: Scholarly Articles
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info