Tripwires and Alliance Reassurance: An Exchange – The Authors Reply

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Security Studies Pub Date : 2022-08-08 DOI:10.1080/09636412.2022.2140599
Brian Blankenship, Erik Lin-Greenberg
{"title":"Tripwires and Alliance Reassurance: An Exchange – The Authors Reply","authors":"Brian Blankenship, Erik Lin-Greenberg","doi":"10.1080/09636412.2022.2140599","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"cent) of US military events in Asia fall into Blankenship and Lin-Greenberg’s worst category—transient demonstrations. These operations—like FONOPS, routine operations through the Taiwan Strait, and flyovers around the North Korean Peninsula—supposedly demonstrate low resolve and low capability. It is an intriguing, and researchable, policy question about why the United States would choose to focus so much of its efforts on precisely the types of activities that Blankenship and Lin-Greenberg argue do little to reassure allies, and thus do little to deter adversaries. After all, most of the activities that fall within the authors’ reassurance typology are not primarily meant to reassure at all, but to deter. This inconsistency raises the additional question of whether the purpose of the military activity determines whether it signals high resolve and/or capability.","PeriodicalId":47478,"journal":{"name":"Security Studies","volume":"31 1","pages":"750 - 756"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2022.2140599","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

cent) of US military events in Asia fall into Blankenship and Lin-Greenberg’s worst category—transient demonstrations. These operations—like FONOPS, routine operations through the Taiwan Strait, and flyovers around the North Korean Peninsula—supposedly demonstrate low resolve and low capability. It is an intriguing, and researchable, policy question about why the United States would choose to focus so much of its efforts on precisely the types of activities that Blankenship and Lin-Greenberg argue do little to reassure allies, and thus do little to deter adversaries. After all, most of the activities that fall within the authors’ reassurance typology are not primarily meant to reassure at all, but to deter. This inconsistency raises the additional question of whether the purpose of the military activity determines whether it signals high resolve and/or capability.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
绊网与联盟保证:一种交流——作者回复
布兰肯希普和林-格林伯格认为,美国在亚洲的军事行动中,有25%属于最糟糕的一类——短暂示威。这些行动——比如航行自由行动(FONOPS),通过台湾海峡的常规行动,以及围绕朝鲜半岛的飞越行动——被认为是低决心和低能力的表现。布兰肯希普和林-格林伯格认为,美国为什么会选择将如此多的精力集中在那些既无法安抚盟友,也无法威慑对手的活动上,这是一个有趣的、可研究的政策问题。毕竟,大多数属于作者的安抚类型的活动主要不是为了安抚,而是为了阻止。这种不一致提出了另一个问题,即军事活动的目的是否决定了它是否表明高度决心和(或)能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Security Studies
Security Studies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Security Studies publishes innovative scholarly manuscripts that make a significant contribution – whether theoretical, empirical, or both – to our understanding of international security. Studies that do not emphasize the causes and consequences of war or the sources and conditions of peace fall outside the journal’s domain. Security Studies features articles that develop, test, and debate theories of international security – that is, articles that address an important research question, display innovation in research, contribute in a novel way to a body of knowledge, and (as appropriate) demonstrate theoretical development with state-of-the art use of appropriate methodological tools. While we encourage authors to discuss the policy implications of their work, articles that are primarily policy-oriented do not fit the journal’s mission. The journal publishes articles that challenge the conventional wisdom in the area of international security studies. Security Studies includes a wide range of topics ranging from nuclear proliferation and deterrence, civil-military relations, strategic culture, ethnic conflicts and their resolution, epidemics and national security, democracy and foreign-policy decision making, developments in qualitative and multi-method research, and the future of security studies.
期刊最新文献
Buying Survival: Why Do Leaders Hire Mercenaries? The Market for Foreign Bases Is multi-method research more convincing than single-method research? An analysis of International Relations journal articles, 1980–2018 International Security and Black Politics: A Biographical Note Toward an Institutional Critique How Central is Race to International Relations?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1