How NATO Decides: A Theory for How NATO Takes Collective Action in the 21st Century

Dial, Nathan E

doi:https://doi.org/10.21985/n2-gr4h-yh16

Work

How NATO Decides: A Theory for How NATO Takes Collective Action in the 21st Century

Public

Download PDF

Download All Files (.zip)

On 14 January 2017, President Donald J. Trump described the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as obsolete. During the first six months of his administration, President Trump discussed not honoring Article 5 commitments for NATO members who had not met the financial responsibilities outlined in the 2014 Wales Summit. His rhetoric created concern because it projects the sentiment: the costs of being in NATO are higher than the benefits.My research looks to answer the question: How does NATO select, create, and decide to pursue out-of-area activities in the 21st Century, and what mechanisms facilitate that process? Answering this series of questions will establish a process that reveals how allies find common interests, overcome domestic constraints, and navigate the bureaucracy to send sovereign national military resources abroad. Developing a theory that explains NATO’s process for out-of-area activity selection, development, and execution illuminates how NATO achieves consensus despite evolving from a 12-nation defensive alliance into a 30-nation security provider offers three significant additions. First, I create an integrated explanation model (IEM) called Embeddedness Theory that defines NATO’s decision-making process for selecting, developing, and deciding to pursue activities. By identifying the two groups of power players, the Quad, and Principals, my theory highlights crunch points that anticipate success or conflict within the alliance. Second, I illustrate how two mechanisms, Diplomatic Embeddedness, and Issue Embeddedness, combine to categorize allies into one of four groups qualitatively and quantitatively. Each category has characteristics that predict how allies facilitate or hamper consensus. Third, I demonstrate how to apply the theoretical framework by examining NATO’s out-of-area activities from 1995 to 2015. Using a mixed-method research design, I test Embeddedness Theory through small-n case analysis and interviews with NATO practitioners. The case analysis provides an opportunity to test theory via an analytical narrative and demonstrate the causal mechanisms that underpin NATO’s collective action process. The research reveals how the four decision elements can morph based on the issue. The typology laid out by Embeddedness theory stipulates four elements be present for out-of-area activities. They are overlapping interests in the Triumvirate, Zone of Possible Agreement (ZOPA) design by the Principals (Triumvirate plus Canada, Germany, and Italy), developing sufficient political will, and a dedication to building consensus. With this framework, practitioners, military officials, and diplomats can anticipate how NATO will make future decisions regarding out-of-area activities and apply the topology to various security issues. Embeddedness theory lays a foundation for future leaders to continue evolving the world’s greatest alliance throughout the 21st Century.

Creator