Skip to main content

Defense Cooperation Agreements and the Emergence of a Global Security Network

  • Brandon J Kinne

Bilateral defense cooperation agreements, or DCAs, are now the most common form of institutionalized defense cooperation. These formal agreements establish broad defense-oriented legal frameworks between signatories, facilitating cooperation in such fundamental areas as defense policy coordination, research and development, joint military exercises, education and training, arms procurement, and exchange of classified information. Although nearly a thousand DCAs are currently in force, with potentially wide-ranging impacts on national and international security outcomes, DCAs have been largely ignored by scholars. Why have DCAs proliferated? I develop a theory that integrates cooperation theory with insights from social network analysis. Shifts in the global security environment since the 1980s have fueled demand for DCAs. States use DCAs to modernize their militaries, respond to shared security threats, and establish security umbrellas with like-minded states. Yet, demand alone cannot explain DCA proliferation; to cooperate, governments must also overcome dilemmas of mistrust and distributional conflicts. I show that network influences increase the supply of DCAs by providing governments with information about the trustworthiness of partners and the risk of asymmetric distributions of gains. DCAs become easier to sign as more states sign them. I identify two specific network influences—preferential attachment and triadic closure—and show that these influences are largely responsible for the post-Cold War diffusion of DCAs. Novel empirical strategies further indicate that these influences derive from the proposed informational mechanism. States use the DCA ties of others to glean information about prospective defense partners, thus endogenously fueling further growth of the global DCA network.

Hide All

For comments, I thank David Bearce, Wilfred Chow, Skyler Cranmer, Han Dorussen, John Duffield, Erik Gartzke, Paul Huth, Joe Jupille, Miles Kahler, Yuch Kono, Ashley Leeds, Zeev Maoz, Heather McKibben, Alex Montgomery, Amanda Murdie, Clint Peinhardt, Paul Poast, Todd Sandler, Gerald Schneider, Curt Signorino, Jaroslav Tir, Mike Ward, Camber Warren, Oliver Westerwinter, and audiences at University of Colorado; University of California, Davis; and Georgia State University. Early versions of this project were presented at the 2012 meeting of the Peace Science Society; the Interdependence, Networks, and International Governance Workshop of the 2013 International Studies Association Annual Meeting; and at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. For exceptional research assistance, I thank Mayu Takeda, Calin Scoggins, Engin Kapti, Kuo-Chu Yang, Fiona Ogunkoya, Jasper Kaplan, and Evan Sandlin. I owe particular thanks to Jon Pevehouse and three anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful feedback. This research was supported in part by Minerva Research Initiative grant 67804-LS-MRI. The opinions herein are my own and not those of the Department of Defense or Army Research Office.

Hide All
Adler, Emanuel, and Barnett, Michael N.. 1998. Security Communities in Theoretical Perspective. In Security Communities, edited by Adler, Emanuel and Barnett, Michael N., 328. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Barabási, Albert-László, and Albert, Réka. 1999. Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks. Science 286 (5439):509–12.
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce. 1975. Measuring Systemic Polarity. Journal of Conflict Resolution 19 (2):187216.
Buzan, Barry. 1997. Rethinking Security after the Cold War. Cooperation and Conflict 32 (1):528.
Carter, Ashton. 2016. The Rebalance and Asia-Pacific Security: Building a Principled Security Network. Foreign Affairs 95 (6):65.
Carter, Ashton. 2017. Department of Defense Accomplishments (2009–2016): Taking the Long View, Investing for the Future. US Department of Defense. Cabinet Exit Memo. Available at <>.
Cha, Victor D. 1999. Alignment Despite Antagonism: The United States-Korea-Japan Security Triangle. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Chayes, Abram, and Chayes, Antonia Handler. 1993. On Compliance. International Organization 47 (2):175205.
Cranmer, Skyler J., Desmarais, Bruce A., and Kirkland, Justin H.. 2012. Toward a Network Theory of Alliance Formation. International Interactions 38 (3):295324.
Dai, Xinyuan, and Snidal, Duncan. 2010. International Cooperation Theory. In The International Studies Encyclopedia, edited by Denemark, Robert A.. Blackwell Reference Online: Blackwell. Available at <>.
Fafchamps, Marcel, Leij, Marco J., and Goyal, Sanjeev. 2010. Matching and Network Effects. Journal of the European Economic Association 8 (1):203–31.
Fearon, James D. 1998. Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation. International Organization 52 (2):269305.
Feinberg, Richard E. 2003. The Political Economy of United States Free Trade Arrangements. The World Economy 26 (7):1019–40.
Gartzke, Erik A. 2000. Preferences and the Democratic Peace. International Studies Quarterly 44 (2):191212.
Gibler, Douglas M. 2009. International Military Alliances, 1648–2008. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Gowa, Joanne, and Mansfield, Edward D.. 1993. Power Politics and International Trade. American Political Science Review 87 (2):408–20.
Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology 78 (6):1360–80.
Grieco, Joseph, Powell, Robert, and Snidal, Duncan. 1993. The Relative-Gains Problem for International Cooperation. American Political Science Review 87 (3):729–43.
Jung, Danielle F., and Lake, David A.. 2011. Markets, Hierarchies, and Networks: An Agent-Based Organizational Ecology. American Journal of Political Science 55 (4):972–90.
Kinne, Brandon J. 2013. Network Dynamics and the Evolution of International Cooperation. American Political Science Review 107 (4):766–85.
Kinne, Brandon J. 2014. Does Third-Party Trade Reduce Conflict? Credible Signaling versus Opportunity Costs. Conflict Management and Peace Science 31 (1):2848.
Kinne, Brandon J. 2016. Agreeing to Arm: Bilateral Weapons Agreements and the Global Arms Trade. Journal of Peace Research 53 (3):359–77.
Kinne, Brandon J. 2017. Networked Defense: Assessing the Impact of Bilateral Defense Cooperation. Working paper.
Kinne, Brandon J., and Bunte, Jonas. Forthcoming. Guns or Money? Defense Cooperation and Bilateral Lending as Coevolving Networks. British Journal of Political Science.
Koremenos, Barbara, Lipson, Charles, and Snidal, Duncan. 2001. The Rational Design of International Institutions. International Organization 55 (4):761800.
Kydd, Andrew H. 2005. Trust and Mistrust in International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kydd, Andrew H. 2006. When Can Mediators Build Trust? American Political Science Review 100 (3):449–62.
Lai, Brian, and Reiter, Dan. 2000. Democracy, Political Similarity, and International Alliances, 1816–1992. Journal of Conflict Resolution 44 (2):203–27.
Lake, David A. 1999. Entangling Relations: American Foreign Policy in Its Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Larson, Deborah Welch. 2000. Anatomy of Mistrust: US-Soviet Relations During the Cold War. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Lipson, Charles. 1984. International Cooperation in Economic and Security Affairs. World Politics 37 (1):123.
Long, Andrew G. 2003. Defense Pacts and International Trade. Journal of Peace Research 40 (5):537–52.
Manger, Mark S., Pickup, Mark A., and Snijders, Tom A.B.. 2012. A Hierarchy of Preferences: A Longitudinal Network Analysis Approach to PTA Formation. Journal of Conflict Resolution 56 (5):853–78.
Maoz, Zeev. 2012. Preferential Attachment, Homophily, and the Structure of International Networks, 1816–2003. Conflict Management and Peace Science 29 (3):341–69.
Matz-Lück, Nele. 2012. Framework Agreements. Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, vol. 4, 220–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Morrow, James D. 1994. Modeling the Forms of International Cooperation: Distribution versus Information. International Organization 48 (3):387–87.
Morrow, James D. 2014. Order within Anarchy: The Laws of War as an International Institution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Newman, Mark E.J. 2003. The Structure and Function of Complex Networks. SIAM Review 45 (2):167256.
Olson, Mancur, and Zeckhauser, Richard. 1966. An Economic Theory of Alliances. Review of Economics and Statistics 48 (3):266–79.
Rathbun, Brian C. 2011. Before Hegemony: Generalized Trust and the Creation and Design of International Security Organizations. International Organization 65 (2):243–73.
Robins, Garry, Pattison, Pip, Kalish, Yuval, and Lusher, Dean. 2007. An Introduction to Exponential Random Graph (p*) Models for Social Networks. Social Networks 29 (2):173–91.
Sandler, Todd. 1993. The Economic Theory of Alliances: A Survey. Journal of Conflict Resolution 37 (3):446–83.
Schultz, Kenneth A. 1998. Domestic Opposition and Signaling in International Crises. American Political Science Review 92 (4):829–44.
Signorino, Curtis S., and Ritter, Jeffrey M.. 1999. Tau-b or Not Tau-b: Measuring the Similarity of Foreign Policy Positions. International Studies Quarterly 43 (1):115–44.
Snidal, Duncan. 1985. Coordination Versus Prisoners’ Dilemma: Implications for International Cooperation and Regimes. The American Political Science Review 79 (4):923–42.
Stein, Arthur A. 1982. Coordination and Collaboration: Regimes in an Anarchic World. International Organization 36 (2):299324.
Tomz, Michael. 2007. Reputation and International Cooperation: Sovereign Debt Across Three Centuries. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Walt, Stephen M. 1987. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Ward, Michael D., Ahlquist, John S., and Rozenas, Arturas. 2013. Gravity's Rainbow: A Dynamic Latent Space Model for the World Trade Network. Network Science 1 (1):95118.
Warren, Camber. 2010. The Geometry of Security: Modeling Interstate Alliances as Evolving Networks. Journal of Peace Research 47 (6):697709.
Wicker, McDaniel. 2016. Completing the Triangle: Security in Unity between the United States, South Korea, and Japan. Wilson Center: Asia Program. 14 April. Available at <>.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Organization
  • ISSN: 0020-8183
  • EISSN: 1531-5088
  • URL: /core/journals/international-organization
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Kinne Dataset

Supplementary materials

Kinne supplementary material
Kinne supplementary material 1

 Unknown (34.5 MB)
34.5 MB


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed