{"title":"冷战可信性","authors":"R. Kuo","doi":"10.11126/stanford/9781503628434.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The second case highlights how Middle East and Southeast Asian countries pushed the United States to create NATO-like security institutions in their regions early in the Cold War. These countries evaluated American reliability based on alliance emulation: only strategies matching NATO’s design signaled commitment. Washington’s refusal to adopt the Atlantic Alliance’s strategy in other alliances undermined efforts to demonstrate resolve and consolidate power against the Soviet Union.","PeriodicalId":166648,"journal":{"name":"Following the Leader","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cold War Credibility\",\"authors\":\"R. Kuo\",\"doi\":\"10.11126/stanford/9781503628434.003.0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The second case highlights how Middle East and Southeast Asian countries pushed the United States to create NATO-like security institutions in their regions early in the Cold War. These countries evaluated American reliability based on alliance emulation: only strategies matching NATO’s design signaled commitment. Washington’s refusal to adopt the Atlantic Alliance’s strategy in other alliances undermined efforts to demonstrate resolve and consolidate power against the Soviet Union.\",\"PeriodicalId\":166648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Following the Leader\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Following the Leader\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11126/stanford/9781503628434.003.0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Following the Leader","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11126/stanford/9781503628434.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The second case highlights how Middle East and Southeast Asian countries pushed the United States to create NATO-like security institutions in their regions early in the Cold War. These countries evaluated American reliability based on alliance emulation: only strategies matching NATO’s design signaled commitment. Washington’s refusal to adopt the Atlantic Alliance’s strategy in other alliances undermined efforts to demonstrate resolve and consolidate power against the Soviet Union.