Linking Domestic and International Sources of Alliance Formation

9515149吉利根是用于解释国际关系的主导理论(新现实主义)，它在国际体系的狗咬狗世界中找到了国家安全决策的主要来源。这一理论的核心是这样一种信念，即国家的国际行为是由无政府主义体系中国家自我保护的指令驱动的。然而，在国内政治研究中，主要的方法是认为政治决定是由政客继续掌权的愿望驱动的。这项调查结合了这些洞察力，根据制定国家政策的政客的政治生存来模拟国家的国际行为。这种模式融合了现实主义和国内关切，因为政客们必须担心外国军事威胁到他们政权的生存，以及来自国内竞争对手争夺权力的内部威胁。研究人员认为，制度保存的约束比单独的国际无政府状态的约束更具约束力，这种结合的视角解释了系统性方法所解释的行为，以及新现实主义无法解释的情况。正式的模型产生了关于国际行为许多方面的具体和可证伪的主张，但调查人员打算将重点放在大多数新现实主义模型的核心行为上--安全联盟的形成。通过汇编考虑加入联盟的国家的经济、军事和政治特征的现有数据，以及收集有关感知的国内和国际威胁等参数的新信息，调查人员评估了制度保持模型在解释联盟形成模式方面的实力。***

9515149 Gilligan The dominant theory used to explain international relations (neo-realism) finds the primary source of national security decisions in the dog-eat-dog world of the international system. At the core of this theory is the belief that the international behavior of states is driven by the dictates of national self-preservation within an anarchic system. In studies of domestic politics, however, the dominant approach is to think of political decisions as driven by politicians' desire to stay in power. This investigation combines these insights by modeling the international behavior of the state in terms of the political survival of the politicians who make national policy. This model incorporates both realist and domestic concerns, as politicians must worry about foreign military threats to their regime's survival as well as internal threats from domestic rivals for power. The researchers argue that the constraints of regime preservation are much more binding than the constraints of international anarchy alone, and that such a combined perspective explains the behaviors accounted for by a systemic approach as well as those cases neo-realism can not explain. The formal model generates specific and falsifiable claims regarding many aspects of international behavior, but the investigators intend to focus on a central behavior for most neo-realist models - - security alliance formation. By compiling existing data on the economic, military, and political characteristics of nations considering joining an alliance, as well as gathering new information on parameters such as perceived domestic and international threat, the investigators evaluate the strength of a model of regime preservation in explaining patterns of alliance formation. ***