Documents in the NTIS Technical Reports collection are the results of federally funded research. They are directly submitted to or collected by NTIS from Federal agencies for permanent accessibility to industry, academia and the public.  Before purchasing from NTIS, you may want to check for free access from (1) the issuing organization's website; (2) the U.S. Government Printing Office's Federal Digital System website; (3) the federal government Internet portal; or (4) a web search conducted using a commercial search engine such as
Accession Number ADA583993
Title Alliances and Legitimacy: Walking the Operational Tightrope.
Publication Date May 2013
Media Count 86p
Personal Author C. G. Hawn
Abstract For centuries, nations have formed alliances to harness the power of collective military might. Whether by necessity or desire, they have done so to successfully wage war and pursue common interests. It is a practice dating back to the 5th century B.C., when Athens and Sparta each vied for the loyalties of other, less powerful Greek nation-states. One of the major insights to emerge from the Peloponnesian War was not just the value of alliances to aggregate power in support of national interests, but also the notion that might made right. That is, the mighty, by virtue of their coercive capacity, dictated the terms of legitimacy. Over time, though, legitimacy came to be defined by much more than military might. From the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 to the end of the Second World War in 1945, legitimacy evolved into a highly complex notion predicated on a myriad of factors that would gradually have increasing influence on the path to war and its subsequent conduct. For the United States, alliances and legitimacy represent essential ingredients in its amalgamation of national power. For the U.S. military specifically, they are force enablers and force multipliers. Alliances serve to augment U.S. combat power, enable access into impermissible regions, and ultimately provide additional means to achieve operational objectives that, in turn, support strategic interests. Legitimacy provides the credible backdrop to justify U.S. military actions abroad. This alone may conserve combat power for more essential tasks by securing early and lasting compliance in the operational environment. However, a significant challenge emerges when America's strategic partnerships appear to contradict its claims of legitimacy. How does the United States navigate an operational environment characterized by contradictory alliances that potentially undermine U.S. military legitimacy.
Keywords Anti-access area denial environments
Foreign military sales
Foreign policy
International relations
Joint military activities
Legitimating authority
Military assistance
Military forces(United states)
Military legitimacy
Military operations
Military power
Political alliances
Principles of joint operations
South korea
Strategic partnerships
United kingdom
United nations
United states government

Source Agency Non Paid ADAS
NTIS Subject Category 92 - Behavior & Society
74 - Military Sciences
74G - Military Operations, Strategy, & Tactics
Corporate Author Army Command and General Staff Coll., Fort Leavenworth, KS. School of Advanced Military Studies.
Document Type Technical report
Title Note Monograph.
NTIS Issue Number 1402
Contract Number N/A

Science and Technology Highlights

See a sampling of the latest scientific, technical and engineering information from NTIS in the NTIS Technical Reports Newsletter

Acrobat Reader Mobile    Acrobat Reader