Download

Download Full Text (654 KB)

Description

Winston Churchill famously quipped, “There is only one thing worse than fighting with allies, and that is fighting without them.” Today, the U.S. has the largest network of alliances of any nation. America’s allies provide it with a marked advantage over its adversaries including basing rights, transit points, and a forward presence. Compared to going it alone in a conflict, allies bring legitimacy and help share the burden. Following the Cold War, U.S. allies, particularly NATO members, have deployed troops in support of operations that have lasted years — even decades. Why did they stay engaged for so long? Would they be willing to do the same in future wars, especially if they appear to be unpopular non-existential conflicts like Iraq? How can the U.S. provide political cover to allied decision-makers so that they are better able to justify participation in US-led operations to their domestic audiences? Once a conflict is underway, a perceived lack of progress along with the increasing human and material costs often erode domestic support leading to an early allied withdrawal. U.S. leaders must understand how different domestic factors influence an ally’s behavior in order to cultivate and sustain allied support for conflict participation.

Publication Date

2-5-2025

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5038/RMJS9902

GNSI Decision Brief: Keeping Allies in the Fight: Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq

Share

COinS