Difficult decisions: Coercion in asymmetric security cooperation

How do minor states protect themselves against coercion from their major power allies? Asymmetric security cooperation is often reduced to tradeoffs between security and autonomy, but coercion is another factor that minor states fear while cooperating. Coercing partner states can take the form of major powers threatening or undertaking regime change, and minor states must weigh the benefits of cooperation against this risk. To this end, I suggest that minor states with anti-major power political oppositions cooperate more extensively with their major power partners than minor states with pro-major power oppositions. A pro-major power opposition provides opportunities for major powers to threaten or replace the incumbent regime; therefore, such minor states limit their cooperation out of fear of coercion. I employ original data on opposition characteristics to present evidence from security relations between the United States and 65 minor states during 1950–1991 to support the hypothesis.