联盟的脆弱性及其补救措施:追踪特朗普政府下库尔德人和韩国的放弃

IF 0.1 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
K. Ban
{"title":"联盟的脆弱性及其补救措施:追踪特朗普政府下库尔德人和韩国的放弃","authors":"K. Ban","doi":"10.14731/kjis.2021.08.19.2.167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Alliances serve as a security guarantor but this is not always the case in the sense that allies struggle with the of abandonment and entrapment. The U.S. abandoned its local ally in northern Syria, the Kurds, by withdrawing its soldiers in October 2019, allowing the Turkish military to bomb them. An asymmetric partner vows to ally with a strong partner even in a situation where the former is aware of the latter’s potential betrayal. This bond can only result in tragedy. Which condition makes abandonment and/or entrapment more likely? Two key variables serve as the mechanism for alliances between actors-power parity and the nature of the bond, both of which lead to four different outcomes. A symmetric and institutionalized alliance is the most stable and thus, least likely to result in abandonment and entrapment. By contrast, an asymmetric and non-institutionalized alliance is likely to be the most tragic. This analysis offers insight into political and policy implications. In particular, the lessons learned from the U.S.’s abandonment of the Kurds might help provide the Republic of Korea (ROK) to avoid this tragic step a scenario they experienced once before in 1950 shortly before the outbreak of the Korean War.","PeriodicalId":41543,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of International Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alliance Vulnerability and its Remedies: Tracing the Abandonment of Kurds and South Korea Under the Trump Administration\",\"authors\":\"K. Ban\",\"doi\":\"10.14731/kjis.2021.08.19.2.167\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Alliances serve as a security guarantor but this is not always the case in the sense that allies struggle with the of abandonment and entrapment. The U.S. abandoned its local ally in northern Syria, the Kurds, by withdrawing its soldiers in October 2019, allowing the Turkish military to bomb them. An asymmetric partner vows to ally with a strong partner even in a situation where the former is aware of the latter’s potential betrayal. This bond can only result in tragedy. Which condition makes abandonment and/or entrapment more likely? Two key variables serve as the mechanism for alliances between actors-power parity and the nature of the bond, both of which lead to four different outcomes. A symmetric and institutionalized alliance is the most stable and thus, least likely to result in abandonment and entrapment. By contrast, an asymmetric and non-institutionalized alliance is likely to be the most tragic. This analysis offers insight into political and policy implications. In particular, the lessons learned from the U.S.’s abandonment of the Kurds might help provide the Republic of Korea (ROK) to avoid this tragic step a scenario they experienced once before in 1950 shortly before the outbreak of the Korean War.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41543,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of International Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of International Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14731/kjis.2021.08.19.2.167\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of International Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14731/kjis.2021.08.19.2.167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

联盟是安全保障,但并非总是如此,因为盟友在与被抛弃和陷入困境的斗争中挣扎。美国于2019年10月撤军,放弃了其在叙利亚北部的当地盟友库尔德人,允许土耳其军方轰炸他们。一个不对称的伙伴发誓与一个强大的伙伴结盟,即使在前者意识到后者可能背叛的情况下。这种联系只会导致悲剧。哪种情况更有可能导致遗弃和/或诱捕?两个关键变量作为行为体之间联盟的机制——权力平价和联盟的性质,这两者都会导致四种不同的结果。对称的和制度化的联盟是最稳定的,因此,最不可能导致放弃和陷阱。相比之下,不对称和非制度化的联盟可能是最悲惨的。这种分析提供了对政治和政策影响的洞察。特别是,从美国放弃库尔德人的教训中吸取的教训,可能有助于大韩民国避免这一悲惨的步骤,这是他们在1950年朝鲜战争爆发前不久经历的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Alliance Vulnerability and its Remedies: Tracing the Abandonment of Kurds and South Korea Under the Trump Administration
Alliances serve as a security guarantor but this is not always the case in the sense that allies struggle with the of abandonment and entrapment. The U.S. abandoned its local ally in northern Syria, the Kurds, by withdrawing its soldiers in October 2019, allowing the Turkish military to bomb them. An asymmetric partner vows to ally with a strong partner even in a situation where the former is aware of the latter’s potential betrayal. This bond can only result in tragedy. Which condition makes abandonment and/or entrapment more likely? Two key variables serve as the mechanism for alliances between actors-power parity and the nature of the bond, both of which lead to four different outcomes. A symmetric and institutionalized alliance is the most stable and thus, least likely to result in abandonment and entrapment. By contrast, an asymmetric and non-institutionalized alliance is likely to be the most tragic. This analysis offers insight into political and policy implications. In particular, the lessons learned from the U.S.’s abandonment of the Kurds might help provide the Republic of Korea (ROK) to avoid this tragic step a scenario they experienced once before in 1950 shortly before the outbreak of the Korean War.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Korean Journal of International Studies
Korean Journal of International Studies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信