Статті в журналах з теми "Coalition war"
Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Coalition war.
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Coalition war".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
1
Phillips, Julianne, and Scott Wolford. "Collective Deterrence in the Shadow of Shifting Power." International Studies Quarterly 65, no. 1 (January 21, 2021): 136–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaa095.
Анотація:
AbstractTwelve of twenty-six war-winning coalitions since 1815 have seen at least two members go to war against one another after victory. What separates durable and fragile war-winning coalitions? To answer this question, we analyze a game-theoretic model of shifting intra-coalition power and collective deterrence. We show that (1) shifting power within war-winning coalitions can undermine commitments to the postwar settlement, but (2) revisionist threats from a powerful defeated side can enhance the credibility of commitments within the winning coalition, securing peace when intra-coalition war would otherwise be inevitable. We also recover these patterns in empirical models of the outbreak of war between former coalition partners: shifting power within a coalition is associated with increased probabilities of intra-coalition war, but only when the defeated side is not too powerful. A common enemy can thus preserve peace between former partners who would otherwise go to war over the terms of shared victory.
2
Ahn, Jeongeun. "Formation and Prospects of the Coalition of North Korea, China, and Russia: Is It an Inevitable Consequence of the New Cold War? Is It a Temporary Adhesion?" East and West Studies 36, no. 1 (March 20, 2024): 147–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.29274/ews.2024.36.1.147.
Анотація:
This study analyzes the North Korea, China, and Russia coalition amidst complex global crises like the US-China strategic competition, the US-Russia crisis, and the North Korean nuclear issue, using coordination games and problems as analytical tools. In the ‘New Cold War’ context, they identify a focal point, form coalitions, and coordinate strategies based on reactive anti-US policies and confrontations with coalitions involving ROK, the US, and Japan. However, differing perspectives on the ‘New Cold War’ and external factors leading to divergent focal points resulted in strategic uncertainty. Forming a stable grand coalition as an institution is challenging, and there is a risk of abandonment when forming a specific coalition based on interests. Moreover, the emergence of spoilers within the coalition breeds apprehension among other nations, rendering the coalition unsustainable. Consequently, the sustainability of the North Korea-China-Russia coalition diminishes, fostering ongoing non-cooperative behavior amidst a temporary phase of adhesion.
3
Morey, Daniel S. "Centralized command and coalition victory." Conflict Management and Peace Science 37, no. 6 (July 15, 2020): 716–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0738894220934884.
Анотація:
Building upon research that found that coalitions are more likely to win wars, recent work has sought to differentiate effective from ineffective coalitions. Much of this work focuses on characteristics of member states and not the coalition itself. This paper takes a first step in exploring how the structure of a coalition contributes to its performance. Specifically, coalitions vary in how much control members must transfer to the coalition. Some coalitions form weak command structures with states maintaining primary control while other coalitions form a strong centralized command. The impact of command structure on coalition performance is vital to understanding the success and failure of coalitions. Highly centralized command structures allow states to overcome the problems associated with coalition warfare and achieve victory. Empirical evidence supports this claim; the odds of victory increase as states surrender more control to the coalition. These findings provide direct advice to policy makers considering forming a coalition. The implications of this research extend to the alliance literature and the war bargaining literature, which tend to assume either that wars are dyadic or that states can seamlessly aggregate military capabilities.
4
Graham, Benjamin A. T., Erik Gartzke, and Christopher J. Fariss. "The Bar Fight Theory of International Conflict: Regime Type, Coalition Size, and Victory." Political Science Research and Methods 5, no. 4 (October 1, 2015): 613–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2015.52.
Анотація:
Studies of regime type and war show that democracies tend to win the wars they fight, but questions remain about why this is the case. A simple, if underappreciated, explanation for democratic success is that democracies fight alongside larger and more powerful coalitions. Coalition partners bring additional material capabilities and may also provide intangible benefits to the war effort, such as increased legitimacy or confidence. Democracies may also find it less costly to join coalitions, as democratic war aims may be easier to apportion among the victors without diluting the spoils. Evaluating our hypotheses in a sample of all wars (or all militarized disputes) during the period 1816–2000, we find that democracies fight alongside larger coalitions and that states fighting alongside larger coalitions are more likely to win major contests. Coalition size subsumes most (and in some specifications all) of the direct effect of regime type on victory.
5
Cappella Zielinski, Rosella, and Ryan Grauer. "Organizing for performance: coalition effectiveness on the battlefield." European Journal of International Relations 26, no. 4 (February 10, 2020): 953–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354066120903369.
Анотація:
States often fight side-by-side on the battlefield. As detailed in our new dataset, Belligerents in Battle, 178 of the 480 major land battles fought during interstate wars waged between 1900 and 2003 involved at least one multinational coalition. Though coalition partners fight battles together to increase their odds of securing specific objectives, they vary significantly in their capacity to do so. Why? Drawing on organization theory insights, we argue that coalitions’ variable battlefield effectiveness is a function of interactions between their command structures and the resources each partner brings to the fight. Coalitions adopting command structures tailored to simultaneously facilitate the efficient use of partners’ variably sized resource contributions and discourage free-riding, shirking, and other counterproductive actions will fight effectively; those that employ inappropriate command structures will not. Evidence from Anglo-French operations during World War I and Axis operations during World War II strongly supports our claim. For scholars, our argument and findings about the importance of military organizational dynamics for the operation and performance of coalitions raise important new questions and provide potential insights about coalition formation, duration, and termination. For practitioners, it is significant that, since 1990, 36 of 49 of major battles in interstate wars have involved at least one coalition and the majority of those coalitions have been, like the cases we study, ad hoc in nature. Understanding how command arrangements affect performance and getting organization right at the outset of wars is increasingly important.
6
Henke, Marina E. "Buying Allies: Payment Practices in Multilateral Military Coalition-Building." International Security 43, no. 4 (April 2019): 128–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00345.
Анотація:
Many countries serving in multilateral military coalitions are “paid” to do so, either in cash or in concessions relating to other international issues. An examination of hundreds of declassified archival sources as well as elite interviews relating to the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Iraq War, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization operation in Afghanistan, the United Nations–African Union operation in Darfur, and the African Union operation in Somalia reveals that these payment practices follow a systematic pattern: pivotal states provide the means to cover such payments. These states reason that rewarding third parties to serve in multilateral coalitions holds important political benefits. Moreover, two distinct types of payment schemes exist: deployment subsidies and political side deals. Three types of states are most likely to receive such payments: (1) states that are inadequately resourced to deploy; (2) states that are perceived by the pivotal states as critical contributors to the coalition endeavor; and (3) opportunistic states that perceive a coalition deployment as an opportunity to negotiate a quid pro quo. These findings provide a novel perspective on what international burden sharing looks like in practice. Moreover, they raise important questions about the efficiency and effectiveness of such payment practices in multilateral military deployments.
7
Kegler, Michelle C., Ana Dekanosidze, Arevik Torosyan, Lilit Grigoryan, Shaheen Rana, Varduhi Hayrumyan, Zhanna Sargsyan, and Carla J. Berg. "Community coalitions for smoke-free environments in Armenia and Georgia: A mixed methods analysis of coalition formation, implementation and perceived effectiveness." PLOS ONE 18, no. 8 (August 3, 2023): e0289149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289149.
Анотація:
Effective models for aligning public health and civil society at the local level have the potential to impact various global health issues, including tobacco. Georgia and Armenia Teams for Healthy Environments and Research (GATHER) is a collaboration between Armenia, Georgia and U.S. researchers involving a community randomized trial testing the impact of community coalitions to promote smoke-free policy adoption and compliance in various settings. Community Coalition Action Theory (CCAT) was used to guide and describe coalition formation, implementation and effectiveness. Mixed methods were used to evaluate 14 municipality-based coalitions in Georgia and Armenia, including semi-structured interviews (n = 42) with coalition leaders and active members, coalition member surveys at two timepoints (n = 85 and n = 83), and review of action plans and progress reports. Results indicated successful creation of 14 multi-sectoral coalitions, most commonly representing education, public health, health care, and municipal administration. Half of the coalitions created at least one smoke-free policy in specific settings (e.g., factories, parks), and all 14 promoted compliance with existing policies through no-smoking signage and stickers. The majority also conducted awareness events in school, health care, and community settings, in addition to educating the public about COVID and the dangers of tobacco use. Consistent with CCAT, coalition processes (e.g., communication) were associated with member engagement and collaborative synergy which, in turn, correlated with perceived community impact, skills gained by coalition members, and interest in sustainability. Findings suggest that community coalitions can be formed in varied sociopolitical contexts and facilitate locally-driven, multi-sectoral collaborations to promote health. Despite major contextual challenges (e.g., national legislation, global pandemic, war), coalitions were resilient, nimble and remained active. Additionally, CCAT propositions appear to be generalizable, suggesting that coalition-building guidance may be relevant for local public health in at least some global contexts.
8
Stanley, Elizabeth A. "Ending the Korean War: The Role of Domestic Coalition Shifts in Overcoming Obstacles to Peace." International Security 34, no. 1 (July 2009): 42–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/isec.2009.34.1.42.
Анотація:
Bargaining models of war suggest that war ends after two sides develop an overlapping bargaining space. Domestic mechanisms—domestic governing coalitions, a state's elite foreign policy decisionmaking group, and their role in ending interstate war—are critical in explaining how, when, and why that bargaining space develops. Through preference, information, and entrapment obstacles, wars can become “stuck” and require a change in expectations to produce a war-terminating bargaining space. A major source of such change is a shift in belligerents' governing coalitions. Events in the United States, China, and the Soviet Union during the Korean War illustrate the dynamics of these obstacles and the need for domestic coalition shifts in overcoming them before the conflict could be brought to an end.
9
Saylor, Ryan, and Nicholas C. Wheeler. "Paying for War and Building States." World Politics 69, no. 2 (March 6, 2017): 366–408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0043887116000319.
Анотація:
Many scholars believe that intense warfare propelled state formation in early modern Europe because rulers built tax institutions to pay for wars. Scholars likewise cite milder geopolitical pressures to explain the lackluster state building in the developing world. The authors analyze episodes of ferocious warfare in and beyond Europe and find that despite similar fiscal strains, not all governments built strong tax institutions to service wartime debt. When net creditors in a country's credit market were part of the ruling political coalition, they pressed governments to diversify taxes and strengthen fiscal institutions to ensure debt service. But when net debtors held political sway, governments were indifferent to debt servicing and fiscal invigoration. Coalitional politics can help to explain why mounting debt-service obligations led to fiscal institution building in some cases, but not others. The analysis highlights how the private economic interests of ruling coalition members can affect state building.
10
Schweizer, Karl. "The Perils of Coalition War." European Legacy 17, no. 7 (September 10, 2012): 940–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2012.724010.
11
Meyer, David, and Catherine Corrigall-Brown. "Coalitions and Political Context: U.S. Movements Against Wars in Iraq." Mobilization: An International Quarterly 10, no. 3 (October 1, 2005): 327–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.17813/maiq.10.3.f8u6t4u2708kw442.
Анотація:
Although social movements in the United States are staged by coalitions, the politics of movement coalitions and the internal and external factors that affect their formation, maintenance, and dissolution are understudied. Here, we use the 2002-2003 movement against the impending war in Iraq to refocus analytical attention and sharpen theory on social movement coalitions. We contend that external circumstances, or political opportunities, are critically important factors that affect the propensity of social movement organizations to cooperate in common cause. Further, we contend that cooperation among groups can best be seen as variable, rather than dichotomous, and argue that political context affects the extent of cooperation among cooperating groups. We examine the importance of political context through a comparison of the first and second Gulf Wars. The decision of social movement organizations to join a coalition is akin to the process whereby individuals join social movements, involving an assessment of costs, benefits, and identity. As the political context changes, the costs and benefits are assessed differently and, for this reason, actively engaged coalitions are difficult to sustain over a long period as circumstances change. By looking at the antiwar movement generally, and the Win Without War coalition in particular, we show that cooperation was born in the second Gulf War out of the political opportunities presented by the George W. Bush's administration. We conclude with a call for more research on social movements as coalitions.
12
Khaliullin, Karim Rishatovich. "ANTI-NAPOLEONIC CAMPAIGNS OF 1805–1807 AND THE MILITARY THEME IN RUSSIAN POETRY." Russkaya literatura 3 (2021): 142–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.31860/0131-6095-2021-3-142-155.
Анотація:
The article analyzes the connections between the offi cial rhetoric and the poetry on Napoleonic War of 1805–1807 in the Russian Empire. During the fi rst period of the war (War of the Third Coalition), only a handful of poems was published, whereas the second period (War of the Fourth Coalition) produced a much bigger volume of verse. The author suggests that the quantitative difference in the poetical output between these two phases of the War is directly related to the strategy of the offi cial rhetoric, since in the beginning of the War of the Third Coalition Emperor Alexander I did not publish a special manifesto (just the Recruitment Ordinance) while after the beginning of the War of the Fourth Coalition three Emperor’s manifestos were released. These documents shaped an ideological coordinate system in which the poets were able to produce new texts.
13
Suprun, M. N. "Svalbard in the Strategy of the Great Powers During the Second World War (1939– 1945)." Modern History of Russia 13, no. 1 (2023): 8–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/spbu24.2023.101.
Анотація:
The article deals with the place of Svalbard in the strategy of opposing coalitions during the Second World War in the various stages of the war. Since 1939 until the Tehran Conference, the main strategy of the Anti-Hitler Coalition had been the British strategy of “tightening the ring”. Therefore, the Arctic in the frame of this strategy was considered to be an important segment of the “ring”, and Svalbard — as the ice shore of the “channel” through which the route of the northern convoys ran, and the main battles of the war at sea took place. With the adoption of the new coalition strategy of “direct action” in 1943, the role of Svalbard changed accordingly. In the global warfare strategy, this role became auxiliary. At the same time, as the war was nearing its end, the archipelago obtained a special significance in the national defense doctrines of the circumpolar states as well as in the post-war world order, in particular, in the Soviet doctrine of “creating a belt of friendly states” and in the Norwegian strategy of “building bridges”. In accordance with the changes in the main coalition strategy and national doctrines of the Arctic states, the article examines military operations in the archipelago as well as the policy of these states towards Svalbard at the end of war. In this regard, it is noted that during those military operations not only the liberation of the Norwegian territory was accomplished but also a direct military cooperation between Norway and the USSR. On the basis of the recently declassified documents, the author examines the role of Svalbard in the constructing of the post-war Europe, in particular, in solving the so called “Polish question”, in abandoning operation “Unthinkable”, and in establishing a zone of “limited forms and purposes for military activity” in Northern Norway bordering the USSR.
14
Weisiger, Alex. "Exiting the Coalition: When Do States Abandon Coalition Partners during War?" International Studies Quarterly 60, no. 4 (August 30, 2016): 753–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqw029.
15
Balogh, Péter. "Cooperation in conflict." Belvedere Meridionale 30, no. 4 (2018): 108–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.14232/belv.2018.4.7.
Анотація:
Social embeddedness may ensure a facilitating context for cooperation and the opportunity of individual actors to harmonize their interests. In a corresponding social setting coalitions can be formed that have the potential to support goal-attainment. By outlining a brief theoretical frame we intend to apply the concept of social embeddedness and cooperation in the rather specific field of international conflicts. We introduce two case studies investigating the structure of the global coalition of the war on terrorism, and the long-term trends of terrorist attacks and the international cooperation network of terrorist organizations. Based on the results of the case studies we seek to shed some light empirically on the patterns and outcomes of cooperation and coalition building.
16
de Mesquita, Bruce Bueno, James D. Morrow, Randolph M. Siverson, and Alastair Smith. "Testing Novel Implications from the Selectorate Theory of War." World Politics 56, no. 3 (April 2004): 363–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/wp.2004.0017.
Анотація:
The authors tested five novel hypotheses derived from the selectorate theory of war with data for up to about 140 states and spanning the years 1816–1993. The hypotheses point to subtle differences in selection effects across regime types that should operate during crises that fall short of war and also during wars. Leaders who rely on a large coalition (such as democrats) to remain in office are shown to be more selective than their small-coalition counterparts in their willingness to fight wars when the odds of victory are not overwhelming. They are also more selective than their small-coalition counterparts in their willingness to take part in disputes that fall short of war when the odds are not exceptionally favorable. However, they are less selective about this form of participation than they are about war. Small-coalition leaders show no such selectivity in their preparedness to engage in disputes short of war or in war as a function of their odds of victory. These results hold whether the odds of victory are assessed continuously or whether they are based on a specific threshold. The authors also find, in keeping with the selectorate theory, that if a war fails to resolve quickly, democrats try harder than autocrats to win. And when the war is over, democrats demobilize much more slowly than autocrats.
17
Jarrett, Nathaniel W. "False Start: Britain and Coalition Warfare in 1794." War in History 24, no. 2 (March 30, 2017): 134–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0968344515624459.
Анотація:
This article analyses Britain’s struggle to conduct warfare as a member of a coalition during the first war against Revolutionary France. It focuses on Anglo-Austrian planning in the winter of 1793–4 and the effort to implement these plans in the spring of 1794. Scholars have attributed the coalition’s defeat in Flanders to Austro-Prussian distractions in Poland and the botched British attempt to supersede this through subsidies. In contrast, this article illustrates that delays in planning, preparations, and operations hamstrung the coalition’s 1794 campaign in Flanders in the spring, before the diplomatic and military reversals of the summer.
18
GOODIN, ROBERT E., WERNER GÜTH, and RUPERT SAUSGRUBER. "When to Coalesce: Early Versus Late Coalition Announcement in an Experimental Democracy." British Journal of Political Science 38, no. 1 (December 7, 2007): 181–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007123408000094.
Анотація:
In multi-party democracies, several parties usually have to join together in coalition to form government. Many aspects of that process have been fairly fully investigated, others less so. Among the latter is the timing of the formation and announcement of coalitions.While the dominant popular image may be one of parties meeting together after the election to hammer out a coalition agreement, pre-election coalitions of one sort or another are actually quite common. In almost half of the elections in OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries since the Second World War, at least one pair of parties had pre-announced their intention to join together in government. A quarter of governments formed were based wholly (and another quarter in part) on pre-election agreements.To date, such studies as there have been of pre-election coalitions have concentrated primarily on system-level explanations – features of the electoral system (majoritarian or proportional, and so on) that make such arrangements more or less likely.3 Here we shall instead look more at the agent-level logic of ‘early’ (pre-election) versus ‘late’ (post-election) coalition formation, from the point of view of voters and parties.hypotheses concerning coalition timingIn the tradition of Downs and Riker and their coalition-theorist progeny, we shall assume that voters are interested primarily in getting policies adopted which are close to their ‘ideal points’ in policy space, and that parties are interested primarily in winning office to implement policies as close as possible to their ‘ideal points’ in policy space. That leads parties to strive for ‘minimal connected winning coalitions’: ‘connected’ in the sense that they link parties adjacent in policy space; ‘minimal’ in the sense that they involve the party's sharing power with the fewest parties backed by fewest voters that it can and still win.
19
Haxha, Elsa. "American Misions in Albania during World War II." Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 8, no. 1 (January 26, 2017): 322–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2017.v8n1p322.
Анотація:
Abstract As is known historically, part of the World Anti-Fascist Grand Coalition was also another great ally, United States. Even the allies had issued the Declaration of December 1942, for recognition of the anti-fascist resistance of the Albanian people, as well as Great Britain and the Soviet Union, making it part of the International Coalition and part of his war against the common enemies nazi and fascists. Nevertheless, beyond the lack of these interests, the Americans under the World Anti-Fascist Grand Coalition few months after the british began in the tiny Balkan military missions, although few toward British ally.
20
Heibach, Jens, and Tereza Jermanová. "Coalition Maintenance during Democratization: Comparative Insights from Tunisia and Yemen." Middle East Law and Governance 15, no. 3 (April 4, 2023): 345–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18763375-20231398.
Анотація:
Abstract In light of the oft-cited benefits of power sharing, this paper compares two cases of coalition governments that emerged from domestically initiated transition processes in the Arab world: the Tunisian Troika (2011–2014) and the Yemeni Coalition Government (1993–1994). While the former facilitated Tunisia’s democratization, the latter’s disintegration contributed to the 1994 war and Yemen’s authoritarian backsliding. It asks why coalition cooperation endured in Tunisia but not in Yemen, exploring intra-elite relations, the power dynamics at play, as well as elites’ motivations in launching and maintaining cooperation. The paper reveals that both coalitions’ internal functioning was hampered by adverse power configurations and ideological differences. In Yemen, intra-elite relations were further impaired by mutual distrust. Crucially, a history of sustained partnership along with normative commitment to the idea of power sharing, existent in Tunisia and not in Yemen, explains why cooperation within the Troika remained solid amid unfavorable circumstances.
21
Hrenchir, M. J. "Coalition Defection: The Dissolution of Arab Anti-Israeli Coalitions in War and Peace." History: Reviews of New Books 32, no. 1 (January 2003): 28–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03612759.2003.10527688.
22
Böhmelt, Tobias. "Disaggregating Mediations: The Impact of Multiparty Mediation." British Journal of Political Science 41, no. 4 (May 12, 2011): 859–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007123411000135.
Анотація:
This article disaggregates coalitions of third-party mediators and examines their effectiveness in interventions. First, it is argued that there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between the size of a mediating coalition and mediation effectiveness. Secondly, mediators sharing a history of conflict and distrust will transfer their past relationships to a mediation attempt, making it less effective. Consequently, states sharing friendly and co-operative ties with each other are more successful in managing conflicts. Finally, a coalition of mediators that is largely democratic should be more effective due to a shared culture of peaceful conflict resolution, inclusivity and increased communication flows. The empirical analysis using data from the Issues Correlates of War Project for 1965–2000 largely provides support for the theory.
23
Tolstov, S. "The Political and Military Alliances and Coalition Relations Before and During the Second World War: Nature, Modality and Peculiarities." Problems of World History, no. 1 (March 24, 2016): 79–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.46869/2707-6776-2016-1-5.
Анотація:
The problem of allied cooperation and formation of multilateral coalitions takes an important place in the diplomatic history of 1920-1940s’. This article presents an attempt to analyze the structural and motivational factors that influenced the establishment and functioning of the alliance and coalition relations between the leading powers of the time. In the context of multipolar international system peace and stability could be preserved by arrangements of collective security against aggression and hegemonism, or by the balance of power and effective alliances. None of these structural mechanisms could prevent the aggression of the Berlin-Rome “axis” created in the mid-1930s. The political and ideological contradictions and attempts to appease the Nazi regime at the expense of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe led to the defeat of the Anglo-French coalition in the first phase of the Second World War. The creation of the “second” anti-Hitler coalition was based on the common threat to humanity from the aggressive bloc. However, both the creation of the League of Nations and the United Nations Organization later failed to create effective mechanisms able to ensure collective defense against aggression and violation of international peace.
24
Terraine, John. "Lessons of coalition war: 1914 and 1939." RUSI Journal 134, no. 2 (June 1989): 57–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071848908445368.
25
Lesser, Ian O. "Coalition dynamics in the war against terrorism." International Spectator 37, no. 2 (April 2002): 43–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03932720208456974.
26
Partridge, Hilary. "The Italian General Elections: Something New or More of the Same Thing?" Politics 14, no. 3 (December 1994): 117–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9256.1994.tb00010.x.
Анотація:
Since the Second World War, Italy has been ruled by shifting coalitions dominated by the Christian Democrat Party to the exclusion of the main opposition, the Communist Party. The continuity in power of the government coalitions and inter party/faction negotiations created the conditions for the abuses of state resources which came to light with the investigations of the Milan magistrates. Electoral reforms intended to break the stranglehold of the ‘partyocracy’ by encouraging the formation of two main alternative political blocs have been implemented. However, the 1994 elections have returned a right wing coalition to power, and the opposition remains deeply divided.
27
Warwick, Paul V. "Coalition Government Membership in West European Parliamentary Democracies." British Journal of Political Science 26, no. 4 (October 1996): 471–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007123400007572.
Анотація:
The results of a quantitative investigation into the factors affecting coalition government membership in West European parliamentary democracies are reported in this article. Using a new data set covering the post-war era to 1990, separate logistic regression analyses are performed to determine what influences the odds of becoming the government ‘formateur’ and the odds of becoming a coalition partner. In addition, Laver and Shepsle's portfolio allocation theory is subjected to testing. Among the independent variables considered are a party's size, its previous experience in government, its willingness to trade off policy for office, and its ideological position in the parliamentary party system. The findings point to the important roles played by the formateur's preferences and by the need to build workable coalitions, given party-system constraints. They also suggest several criteria that ought to, but often do not, guide formal theory-building.
28
Berg, Carla J., Regine Haardörfer, Arevik Torosyan, Ana Dekanosidze, Lilit Grigoryan, Zhanna Sargsyan, Varduhi Hayrumyan, et al. "Examining local smoke-free coalitions in Armenia and Georgia: context and outcomes of a matched-pairs community-randomised controlled trial." BMJ Global Health 9, no. 2 (February 2024): e013282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013282.
Анотація:
IntroductionLocal coalitions can advance public health initiatives such as smoke-free air but have not been widely used or well-studied in low-income and middle-income countries.MethodsWe conducted a matched-pairs community-randomised controlled trial in 28 communities in Armenia and Georgia (N=14/country) in which we helped establish local coalitions in 2019 and provided training and technical assistance for coalition activity promoting smoke-free policy development and enforcement (2019–2021). Surveys of ~1450 households (Fall 2018, May–June 2022) were conducted to evaluate coalition impact on smoke-free policy support, smoke-free home adoption, secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe), and coalition awareness and activity exposure, using multivariable mixed modelling.ResultsBivariate analyses indicated that, at follow-up versus baseline, both conditions reported greater smoke-free home rates (53.6% vs 38.5%) and fewer days of SHSe on average (~11 vs ~12 days), and that intervention versus control condition communities reported greater coalition awareness (24.3% vs 12.2%) and activity exposure (71.2% vs 64.5%). Multivariable modelling indicated that intervention (vs control) communities reported greater rates of complete smoke-free homes (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 1.55, 95% confiedence interval [CI] 1.11 to 2.18, p=0.011) and coalition awareness (aOR 2.89, 95% CI 1.44 to 8.05, p=0.043) at follow-up. However, there were no intervention effects on policy support, SHSe or community-based activity exposure.ConclusionsFindings must be considered alongside several sociopolitical factors during the study, including national smoke-free policies implementation (Georgia, 2018; Armenia, 2022), these countries’ participation in an international tobacco legislation initiative, the COVID-19 pandemic and regional/local war). The intervention effect on smoke-free homes is critical, as smoke-free policy implementation provides opportunities to accelerate smoke-free home adoption via local coalitions.Trial registration numberNCT03447912.
29
Brown, Chris. "Moral Agency and International Society." Ethics & International Affairs 15, no. 2 (September 2001): 87–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.2001.tb00360.x.
Анотація:
There is no body that has the legal right to exercise agency on behalf of international society (IS), even though the notion of “society” encapsulated in IS is, in principle, close to that conveyed by bodies such as clubs and associations that can be represented by, for example, a board of directors or governing committee. Some have argued that the UN or the Security Council can exercise agency on behalf of IS, but in view of the “underinstitutionalization” of IS in the UN, a more interesting possibility is that groups of states may authorize themselves to act on the behalf of IS as “coalitions of the willing.” However, the contrasting experience of the Gulf War of 1990/91 and the Kosovo campaign of 1999 suggest that the degree of ideological coherence of the coalition in question is an important variable here - in 1999, NATO was able with some plausibility to represent the wider international society because of its commitment to certain core democratic values, while in 1991 the Gulf War coalition could only act conservatively in restoring the status quo because of its diverse nature.
30
Fiszer, Józef M. "Kto wygrał II wojnę światową, a kto przegrał pokój? Refleksje na kanwie 70. rocznicy zakończenia II wojny światowej." Rocznik Polsko-Niemiecki, no. 24/1 (April 29, 2016): 11–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.35757/rpn.2016.24.02.
Анотація:
This article is an attempt to answer the questions that have long been bothering historians, political scientists, sociologists and lawyers, as well as ordinary people, nationals of the former anti-Hitler coalition and members of the fascist Berlin-Rome-Tokyo coalition: namely, who really won World War II and who lost the peace that put an end to the war in Europe and the world? Who had reasons to celebrate victory, and who suffered a bitter defeat and enslavement?The main thesis of this article is the observation that, in military terms, World War II was won by the states belonging to the anti-fascist coalition, and lost by Germany, Italy, Japan and their allies. However, in political and economic terms, World War II was won by Western countries led by the United States, and lost by Central and Eastern European countries, with the Soviet Union at the forefront. In international terms, the war and peace were won primarily by the United States and the Soviet Union. These countries have become global superpowers that created a new international order, called the Yalta-Potsdam governance.
31
Phillips, Richard. "Standing together: the Muslim Association of Britain and the anti-war movement." Race & Class 50, no. 2 (October 2008): 101–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306396808096396.
Анотація:
One of the main groups involved in organising the mobilisation of millions of people in opposition to the Iraq war of 2003 was the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB). Much recent commentary has focused on the involvement of MAB (an offshoot of the Arab Muslim Brotherhood) in the coalition of organisations that led the anti-war movement. Less attention has been paid to how MAB activists themselves understood their working relationship with the other organised groups in the Stop the War coalition. Based mainly on interviews with MAB activists, this article examines their perspectives and experiences of working within a broad Left movement.
32
Beeber, Matthew. "Nancy Cunard and the 1930s Coalitional Anthology." Comparative Literature 74, no. 4 (December 1, 2022): 448–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00104124-9989243.
Анотація:
Abstract This essay addresses Pablo Neruda and Nancy Cunard’s Spanish Civil War poetry anthology Los poetas del mundo defienden al pueblo espanol alongside Cunard’s earlier anthology, her massive and eclectic Negro: Anthology (1934). I argue that when read alongside Cunard’s later, lesser-known collaboration with Neruda, Negro can be seen as one part of Cunard’s larger trajectory as an editor of coalitional anthologies. Los poetas, an understudied collection of modernist poetry deserving of recovery in its own right, also allows greater perspective of Cunard’s earlier anthology. Reading Negro alongside Los poetas makes clear that the stakes of the project, along with the current academic discourse surrounding Cunard, are rooted in questions of the possibility of coalition. Ultimately, I argue that these anthologies uniquely model within their aesthetic form the organization of the political coalitions they seek to produce. They are coalitional, with the goal of bringing disparate elements into productive harmony, in both aesthetics and praxis. I locate what I call coalitional aesthetics within each volume, simultaneously attesting to the disparity of its constituent parts and to their unity. Coalitional aesthetics do not smooth over incongruities between individual parts but rather emphasize them, insisting on their singularity even within the whole they comprise.
33
Chung, Kuyoun. "Competitive Coexistence and Institutional Balancing of the US: Analyzing the formation of the US-led bespoke and ad hoc coalition and regional architecture." Korean Association of Area Studies 40, no. 3 (September 30, 2022): 1–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.29159/kjas.40.3.1.
Анотація:
This study analyzes the nature of US-China competition which is conceptualized as competitive coexistence in its attempt to examine the condition under which the US-led bespoke and ad hoc coalitions are established. The current US-China competition, which is characterized by changing balance of power and deepening interdependence, is allowing hedging behavior among regional countries. The US, which seek to form a favorable balance of power vis-a-vis China, attempts institutional balancing, building a multi-layered regional architecture with its through engaging regional countries. However, the distribution of varying interests and threat perceptions among regional countries makes the US difficult blocize the coherent supporting coalition as in the Cold War. Instead, it leads to the emergence of a bespoke and ad hoc coalition with its informality and institutional flexibility. Meanwhile, given these coalitions are being formed to meet specific goals such as interests, values, and threats, it remains unclear whether they can be properly utilized for the purpose of balancing China at a critical moment. As in the case of the Quad, it might be difficult to expand the mission beyond the originally agreed upon goal. Hence, the expanded role of balancing among these coalitions need to be observed in the future.
34
Barnard-Wills, David. ""This is not a cyber war, it's a...?"." International Journal of Cyber Warfare and Terrorism 1, no. 1 (January 2011): 13–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijcwt.2011010102.
Анотація:
This paper is a political theory analysis using the conflict, attacks, and ‘hactivism’ surrounding the WikiLeaks organisations following diplomatic cable releases as a case study to demonstrate the complexity of contemporary cyber conflict. This complexity is reflected in the motivations, identities, and values of a multiplicity of (often non-state) actors. Termed ‘the first visible cyber war’ this conflict (having already drawn in states, media organisations, banks and payments companies, and loose coalitions of individuals) is one where traditional metaphors of war occlude as much as they reveal. International relations and critical security studies have developed a range of approaches to international conflict that focus on identities, values, and normative frameworks. Securitization, hegemony, and democratic demands offer a productive way of understanding cyber conflict. Distributed denial of service attacks are interpreted as an attempt to establish a dominant discursive position and to construct a coalition around political issues
35
Newnham, Randall. ""Coalition of the Bribed and Bullied?" U.S. Economic Linkage and the Iraq War Coalition." International Studies Perspectives 9, no. 2 (May 2008): 183–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2008.00326.x.
36
Mello, Patrick A. "Paths towards coalition defection: Democracies and withdrawal from the Iraq War." European Journal of International Security 5, no. 1 (June 14, 2019): 45–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/eis.2019.10.
Анотація:
AbstractDespite widespread public opposition to the Iraq War, numerous democracies joined the US-led multinational force. However, while some stayed until the end of coalition operations, and several increased their deployments over time, others left unilaterally. How to explain this variation? While some studies suggest that democratic defection from security commitments is primarily motivated by electoral incentives or leadership change, scholars have not reached a consensus on this issue. To account for the complex interplay between causal factors, this article develops an integrative theoretical framework, using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) on original data on the Iraq War involvement of 51 leaders from 29 democracies. The findings document the existence of multiple paths towards coalition defection. Among others, the results show that: (1) leadership change led to early withdrawal only when combined with leftist partisanship and the absence of upcoming elections; (2) casualties and coalition commitment played a larger role than previously assumed; and (3) coalition defection often occurred under the same leaders who had made the initial decision to deploy to Iraq, and who did not face elections when they made their withdrawal announcements.
37
GARST, W. DANIEL. "From Factor Endowments to Class Struggle." Comparative Political Studies 31, no. 1 (February 1998): 22–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010414098031001002.
Анотація:
Ronald Rogowski's recent and important work, Commerce and Coalitions, sets forth a farranging and parsimonious theory of trade and political cleavages. This article closely investigates its validity in the case of pre-World War I Germany, where trade has long been seen as a critical factor determining coalition formation and Rogowski's argument appears at first glance to be especially compelling. Close investigation, however, reveals that the key variable in Rogowski's theory, relative factor endowments, fails to account for the political alignment of capital and labor in Germany following 1890. This article puts forward an alternative theory in which business-labor coalition formation is determined not only by the alliance possibilities associated with trade but also by their intersection with the strength of worker organization and capital-labor mobility. This argument both addresses the anomalies that prewar Germany poses for Rogowski's account of trade and cleavages and provides a potential explanation for the absence of business-labor collaboration elsewhere in Western Europe before 1914.
38
de Oliveira, Andre Rossi, and Emilson Caputo Delfino Silva. "Self-Enforcing Collective Counterterror Retaliation." Games 13, no. 1 (December 21, 2021): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/g13010001.
Анотація:
Motivated by recent examples of collective effort on the war on terror, we examine the incentives that retaliation may produce for the endogenous formation of an international counterterror coalition. We show that there are quite reasonable circumstances under which any nation that is a target of a terrorist attack finds it desirable to be a member of the international counterterror coalition, holding the choices of all other nations as given. The incentives to join the coalition are the group-specific benefits from retaliation enjoyed by each coalition member, the relatively lower spillover benefit from retaliation enjoyed by each stand-alone nation, and the inability of pre-emptive measures to avert terrorist attacks. The disincentive to join is the anticipated backlash from retaliation, which targets coalition members only.
39
Jefferys, Kevin. "British Politics and Social Policy during the Second World War." Historical Journal 30, no. 1 (March 1987): 123–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x00021944.
Анотація:
This article sets out to examine the relationship between party politics and social reform in the Second World War. The issue of government policy towards reform was raised initially by Richard Titmuss, who argued in his official history of social policy that the experience of total war and the arrival of Churchill's coalition in 1940 led to a fundamentally new attitude on welfare issues. The exposure of widespread social deprivation, Titmuss claimed, made central government fully conscious for the first time of the need for reconstruction; the reforms subsequently proposed or enacted by the coalition were therefore an important prelude to the introduction of a ‘welfare state’ by the post-war Labour administration. These claims have not been borne out by more recent studies of individual wartime policies, but as a general guide to social reform in the period the ideas of Richard Titmuss have never been entirely displaced. In fact the significance of wartime policy, and its close relationship with post-war reform, has been reaffirmed in the most comprehensive study of British politics during the war – Paul Addison's The road to 1945. For Addison, the influence of Labour ministers in the coalition made the government the most radical since Asquith's Liberal administration in the Edwardian period. The war, he notes, clearly placed on the agenda the major items of the post-war welfare state: social security for all, a national health service, full employment policies, improved education and housing, and a new system, of family allowances.
40
Pechatnov, V. O. "Exploring Lessons from Soviet Diplomacy and Western Allied Cooperation in World War II." MGIMO Review of International Relations 16, no. 6 (January 16, 2024): 13–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2023-6-93-13-36.
Анотація:
Based on an analysis of documentary sources from Russian, American, and British archives, this article delves into the intricacies of coalition diplomacy among the Allies during World War II. It places special emphasis on the adherence to obligations and coalition behavior norms, encompassing respect for partners' interests, maintaining unity amidst divergences, coordinating actions towards shared objectives, and avoiding actions that risk coalition breakdown. The comparative analysis of Soviet and Anglo-American diplomacy reveals that the principal members of the anti-Hitler coalition generally adhered to these norms, contributing to the ultimate defeat of their common adversary. However, the study indicates that the Soviet Union exhibited greater fidelity in fulfilling its obligations and was more proactive in institutionalizing the coalition for enhanced stability and equal participation in strategic decision-making for war conduct and postwar arrangements. This quest for parity was often impeded by the Western powers' reluctance to accept the Soviet Union as an enduring, equal partner and legitimate member of the great powers' club, both during and after the war. This hesitance, the article argues, was rooted not just in geopolitical considerations but also in deep-seated cultural factors, particularly the traditional Western sense of superiority and perception of Russia as a 'lesser' civilization not fit for inclusion in the Euro-Atlantic community. The article brings to light lesser-known documents from US and UK archives to illustrate this mindset. It also acknowledges dissenting voices in Anglo-American political spheres who advocated for a more equitable relationship with the USSR. However, these perspectives did not significantly alter the overarching direction of Western policy.
41
Iber, Patrick. "Cold War Liberalism Returns." Dissent 70, no. 3 (September 2023): 131–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/dss.2023.a906665.
Анотація:
Abstract: Because of the echoes in our times of the conditions that produced Cold War liberalism, it should not surprise us that recent years have brought a renewed interest in the tradition. Today, its inheritors warn ominously of the growing threats from the authoritarian right. But they are also concerned about the left’s drift toward a rejection of liberalism. The war in Ukraine has further enlivened their coalition. What should be made of this revival?
42
Hakim, Amri. "Neostructural Realism’s Explanation on Russia-Ukraine War." JOELS: Journal of Election and Leadership 4, no. 2 (August 22, 2023): 96–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.31849/joels.v4i2.15523.
Анотація:
This article aims to explain why NATO keeps expanse on Ukraine, and why Russia responses it through invasion now. By using qualitative methode, library research, and the neostructural realism theory founded that since the dissolution of Soviet Union, NATO has been no longer appropriate abstracted as an alliance but an unipole security coalition, then the NATO expansion on Ukraine can be seen as the continuity of U.S.’ containment policy to Russia, and adding its coalition partners for unilateral action legitimacy in order to maintain its hegemon position which undermine Russia’s Eurasia great power vision and its crucial national security. Meanwhile the uneven distribution of power elements between U.S. and Russia as the macro international structure constraint Russia invasion but the bipolar world through Russia-China unlimited strategic partnership, and the shifting of U.S. offset strategy to Russia on hypersonic missile as the micro structure encourage Russia to take invasion now.
43
Opeyeoluwa, Rotimi Olajide. "THE GULF WAR REVISITED: ISSUES AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ART OF WAR." Journal of Contemporary International Relations and Diplomacy 2, no. 1 (June 30, 2021): 263–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.53982/jcird.2021.0201.07-j.
Анотація:
This paper examines the 1991 Gulf War and how it contributed to the development of the art of war since the dawn of the post-Cold War realities. The 1991 Gulf War was a war waged by a coalition force of 40 nations led by the United States of America (USA) against Iraq in response to Iraq’s invasion and subsequent annexation of Kuwait, arising from oil pricing and production disputes. This article seeks an explanation for how the Gulf War has contributed to the art of war by explaining how the Napoleonic strategy of quick and decisive victory was used in the operation. This strategy contrast sharply with the intention of Iraq for a sustained all-drawn-out war, which is meant to wear out their opponents. The article analyses the further consequences of this conceptual clash in military doctrine. It explains that the contrast between both concepts and especially the western military culture for fighting wars was the decisive element in the Gulf War. In carrying out this research, secondary sources were consulted and used accordingly. The research findings show the contribution of the 1991 Gulf War to the increasing complexities of war. The war further demonstrated the validity of the collective security system as the coalition forces were able to restore Kuwait’s sovereignty. In addition, the study is relevant as it exposed the challenges posed by warfare and the vulnerabilities it poses in inter-state relations and on the international system.
44
Lewandowsky, Stephan, Werner G. K. Stritzke, Klaus Oberauer, and Michael Morales. "Memory for Fact, Fiction, and Misinformation." Psychological Science 16, no. 3 (March 2005): 190–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00802.x.
Анотація:
Media coverage of the 2003 Iraq War frequently contained corrections and retractions of earlier information. For example, claims that Iraqi forces executed coalition prisoners of war after they surrendered were retracted the day after the claims were made. Similarly, tentative initial reports about the discovery of weapons of mass destruction were all later disconfirmed. We investigated the effects of these retractions and disconfirmations on people's memory for and beliefs about war-related events in two coalition countries (Australia and the United States) and one country that opposed the war (Germany). Participants were queried about (a) true events, (b) events initially presented as fact but subsequently retracted, and (c) fictional events. Participants in the United States did not show sensitivity to the correction of misinformation, whereas participants in Australia and Germany discounted corrected misinformation. Our results are consistent with previous findings in that the differences between samples reflect greater suspicion about the motives underlying the war among people in Australia and Germany than among people in the United States.
45
Shi, Huafei. "Issue Coalition: A Burgeoning Strategy in U.S. Foreign Policy." Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media 5, no. 1 (May 17, 2023): 33–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/5/20220392.
Анотація:
As one of the most important phenomena in international relations, alliance has long been widely valued and widely studied. In fact, there are great differences in the form and degree of alliance. There are not only offensive or defensive alliances for military security, but also possible alliances for a specific issue to achieve their own strategic goals, which are defined as Issue Coalition. Throughout the development process of the international community, the phenomenon of Issue Coalition has both internal and external generation logic and existence reasons, especially after the end of the Cold War. This article tries to extract the definition and features of Issue Coalition and especially focuses on the US foreign behavior surrounding Issue Coalition. It can be fou
46
Woodward, David R., and Jehuda L. Wallach. "Uneasy Coalition: The Entente Experience in World War I." Journal of Military History 58, no. 2 (April 1994): 335. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2944041.
47
Etcheson, Craig. "Civil war and the coalition government of democratic Kampuchea." Third World Quarterly 9, no. 1 (January 1987): 187–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01436598708419968.
48
Sussman, Gerald. "Reheating the Cold War: us, Russia, and the Revival of Rollback." Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 16, no. 6 (December 6, 2017): 736–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15691497-12341459.
Анотація:
Abstract A neoconservative coalition of oppositional forces, comprised of the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party and their allies in the Republican Party, the liberal mainstream media, and the deep state have promoted a new Cold War against Russia. This is intended as a mobilizing strategy to overturn the Trump presidency, weaken the Russian state, and reconstruct state legitimacy following years of decline in the quality of life and democracy in America. The coalition reconstructed the Cold War as an ideological tool in the interest of continuing to pursue domestic and global neoliberal policies and dealing with a fractious public disenchanted with government, its elected officials, the mainstream media, and a failing democracy.
49
Kelly, Michael J. "Iraq and the law of occupation: new tests for an old law." Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 6 (December 2003): 127–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1389135900001318.
Анотація:
When deciding to go to war against Iraq in 2003 it had been intended by the Coalition states from the outset that the regime of Saddam Hussein would be deposed. It was believed, however, that there would be close engagement with a surviving Iraqi administrative capacity and perhaps a successor government. Consequently, it was expected that there would not be a need for much ‘post conflict’ administrative effort beyond the provision of support to a largely intact infrastructure, remaining functionaries and perhaps some humanitarian relief. Instead, Coalition forces faced the greatest post-conflict administrative challenge since World War II and the greatest public security challenge any force has ever had to manage.
50
А.В., Постников,. "Crimean War in the Baltic Sea." Историческая география, no. 6 (December 30, 2022): 192–224. http://dx.doi.org/10.21267/aquilo.2022.91.54.001.
Анотація:
В статье описывается и анализируется военно-морское противостояние России и коалиции союзников в акватории Балтийского моря во время Крымской войны. Показаны мотивации принятия решений и действий двух англо-французских эскадр и ответные действий российского командования по обороне своих северных рубежей. События на северном театре военных действий Крымской войны хорошо показывают, что эта война по своим целям и масштабу была настоящей мировой войной. Флот антироссийской коалиции смог обеспечить морскую блокаду России, однако эта глава Крымской войны окончилась ничем, поскольку союзники не смогли привлечь на свою сторону страны Северной Европы. The article describes and analyses the naval confrontation between Russia and the coalition of allies in the Baltic Sea during the Crimean War. The motives of decisions and actions of the two Anglo-French squadrons are shown, as well as the Russian command’s response to defend its northern borders. Events in the northern theatre of operations of the Crimean War show well that this war was a real world war in its goals and scale. The anti-Russian coalition fleet was able to secure a naval blockade of Russia, but this chapter of the Crimean War ended in nothing, as the allies were unable to bring the countries of Northern Europe to their side.