Abstract
Scholars of international communication recognize that strategic narratives are important for policymaking (Miskimmon, O’Loughlin, & Roselle, 2013) and scholars studying alliances suggest that communication is central to the formation and maintenance of alliances (Weitsman, 2010). This essay addresses how strategic narratives affect US alliance behavior—and hence international order—in two specific ways. First, alliance behavior can be affected by other allies’ narratives as demonstrated in the case of military intervention in Libya in 2011. Here the evidence suggests that the UK and France were able to use strategic narratives to influence the decision of the US to agree to military intervention in Libya by using narratives that could evoke a fear of abandonment. Second, alliance cohesion can be affected by narrative contestation by non-allies as demonstrated in the case of the Ukrainian crisis in 2014. Russia has used strategic narratives in a new media environment in an attempt to elicit a fear of entrapment to counter the US attempts to coordinate alliance support for economic sanctions. In both cases, distinguishing between system, identity, and policy narratives give us a deeper understanding of narrative contestation today. This analysis adds to our understanding of the factors that affect alliances set within a new media environment characterized by a proliferation of sources and outlets and thus a more horizontal structure of information exchange.
Highlights
The study of alliances is central to international order as alliances speak to the ability of states to cooperate, during conflict (Snyder, 1997; Weitsman, 2004, 2010)
Much of the literature on alliances in international relations concentrates on alliance formation and utilizes a realist lens that emphasizes the distribution of power within the system and resulting behavior such as balance, tethering, and bandwagoning (Walt, 2011)
The cases were chosen because Snyder’s (1997) theory about the alliance security dilemma suggests that in the case of Libya, one would expect to find UK and French strategic narratives that foster a fear of abandonment among US policymakers, and that in the case of Ukraine, one would expect Russian strategic narratives that support a fear of entrapment among EU member states
Summary
The study of alliances is central to international order as alliances speak to the ability of states to cooperate, during conflict (Snyder, 1997; Weitsman, 2004, 2010). The literature does suggest that communication is central to the formation and maintenance of alliances, and this essay seeks to address how strategic narratives function in alliance relationships today This analysis, focuses on the (re)construction of alliances, and speaks to Weitsman’s point that in regard to research on alliances “constructivist and identity-based arguments are becoming more prevalent and will likely continue to be an important research focus in the coming years” (Weitsman, 2010). Politics and Governance, 2017, Volume 5, Issue 3, Pages 99–110 cision to support the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 that established a no-fly zone in Libya In this case France and the UK were successful in projecting a strategic narrative that suggested that the US would be isolated, if not abandoned, if the Obama administration opposed the resolution. This case highlights how Russia’s strategic narrative sought to foster a fear of entrapment by Western allies, especially among specific countries, primarily in Eastern Europe
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
