This study aims to explain the pattern of contributions to NATO’s military campaign in Libya. It combines collective action theory with hypotheses on balance of threat, alliance politics, and domestic constraints in a multicausal framework, which is tested with qualitative comparative analysis. The results suggest novel inferences on the interactions between partisan politics, and the benefits states wish to secure by contributing to a multilateral operation. Contrary to conventional wisdom, parties situated at the left of the ideological spectrum were more inclined to support Operation Unified Protector than parties situated at the right. Whereas left-wing governments participated if they had the resources to contribute significantly to the fulfillment of the protection mandate and either highly valued their alliance with the United States or were not facing imminent elections, right-wing governments only contributed if their countries’ interests were threatened by the crisis in Libya or their participation was critical for the operation’s success.
AnrigChristian F.2011. “Views & Analyses-allied Air Power over Libya: A Preliminary Assessment.” Air and Space Power Journal25:89.
2.
ArenaPhilipPalmerGlenn. 2009. “Politics or the Economy? Domestic Correlates of Dispute Involvement in Developed Democracies.” International Studies Quarterly53:955–75.
3.
AuerswaldDavid P.2004. “Explaining Wars of Choice: An Integrated Decision Model of NATO Policy in Kosovo.” International Studies Quarterly48:631–62.
4.
AuerswaldDavid P.SaidemanStephen M.. 2014. NATO in Afghanistan: Fighting Together, Fighting Alone. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
BaltrusaitisDaniel F.2010. Coalition Politics and the Iraq War: Determinants of Choice. Boulder, CO: FirstForumPress.
BennettAndrewLepgoldJosephUngerDanny. 1994. “Burden-sharing in the Persian Gulf War.” International Organization48:39–75.
8.
BiehlHeikoGiegerichBastianJonasAlexandra, eds. 2013. Strategic Cultures in Europe Security and Defence Policies Across the Continent. Potsdam, Germany: Springer.
9.
BiscopSven. 2015. “The State of Defence in Europe: Dependence, Deterrence and Deployment.” Global Affairs1:169–82.
10.
BrockmeierSarah. 2013. “Germany and the Intervention in Libya.” Survival55:63–90.
11.
BrockmeierSarahKurtzGerritJunkJulian. 2014. “Emerging Norm and Rhetorical Tool: Europe and a Responsibility to Protect.” Conflict, Security & Development14:429–60.
12.
CeccorulliMichelaCoticchiaFabrizio. 2015. “Multidimensional Threats and Military Engagement: The Case of the Italian Intervention in Libya.” Mediterranean Politics20 (3): 303–21.
13.
ChivvissChristopher S.2014. Toppling Qaddafi Libya and the limits of liberal intervention. New York: Cambridge University Press.
CooperAndrew F.MomaniBessma. 2014. “The Harper Government’s Messaging in the Build-up to the Libyan Intervention: Was Canada Different than Its NATO Allies?” Canadian Foreign Policy Journal20:176–88.
16.
DavidsonJason W.2011. America’s Allies and War: Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
17.
DavidsonJason W.2013. “France, Britain and the Intervention in Libya: An Integrated Analysis.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs26:310–29.
18.
DickeRachel A.AnsonNicholasRoughtonPhillip A.HendricksonRyan C.. 2013. “NATO Burden-Sharing in Libya: Understanding the Contributions of Norway, Spain and Poland to the War Effort1.” The Polish Quarterly of International Affairs22:29–II.
19.
DöringHolgerManowPhilip. 2012. “Parliament and Government Composition Database (ParlGov): An Infrastructure for Empirical Information on Parties, Elections and Governments in Modern Democracies.” 15 October 2012: Version 12/10. University of Bremen—Centre for Social Policy Research: Bremen. Accessed February 2, 2014. http://www.parlgov.org/
20.
FordhamBenjamin O.2004. “A Very Sharp Sword: The Influence of Military Capabilities on American Decisions to Use Force.” Journal of Conflict Resolution48:632–56.
21.
ForsterPeter K.CimbalaStephen J.. 2005. The US, NATO and Military Burden-Sharing. Abingdon, UK: Frank Cass.
GaubatzKurt Taylor1991. “Election Cycles and War.” Journal of Conflict Resolution35:212–44.
24.
GelfandLauren2011. “Libya: Allied Aircraft Roll Out SEAD Operations Over Libya.” Jane’s Defence Weekly, 1–4.
25.
GleditschKristian S.WardMichael D.. 2001. “Measuring Space: A Minimum-distance Database and Applications to International Studies.” Journal of Peace Research38:739–58.
26.
GrægerNina. 2005. “Norway between NATO, the EU, and the US: A Case Study of Post-cold War Security and Defence Discourse.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs18:85–103.
27.
GrægerNinaHaugevikKristin M.. 2009. “The Revival of Atlanticism in NATO? Changing Security Identities in Britain, Norway and Denmark.” Norwegian Institute of International Affairs Report: 42–43, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, Oslo.
28.
HaesebrouckTim. 2015. “Democratic Contributions to Un Peacekeeping Operations. A Two-Step Fuzzy Set QCA of UNIFIL II.” Romanian Journal of Political Science15:4–51.
29.
HaesebrouckTim. forthcoming. “National behaviour in Multilateral Military Operations.” Political Studies Review.
30.
HallamsEllenSchreerBenjamin. 2012. “Towards a ‘Post-American’ Alliance? NATO Burden-sharing After Libya.” International Affairs88:313–27.
31.
HanselMischaOppermannKai. 2016. “Counterfactual Reasoning in Foreign Policy Analysis: The Case of German Nonparticipation in the Libya Intervention of 2011.” Foreign Policy Analysis12 (2): 109–127. doi: 10.1111/fpa.12054.
32.
HoworthJolyon Michael. 2007. Security and Defence Policy in the European Union. Basingstokes, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
JakobsenPeter ViggoMøllerKarsten Jakob. 2012. “Good News: Libya and the Danish Way of War.” Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook2012:106–30.
35.
JonesL. R.ThompsonFred. 1990. “Burden Sharing among America and Its Allies: Tests of Collective Choice and Their Significance.” The Western Political Quarterly43:459–77.
36.
JunkJulian. 2014. “The Two-level Politics of Support—US Foreign Policy and the Responsibility to Protect.” Conflict, Security & Development14:535–64.
37.
KhannaJyotiSandlerToddShimizuHirofumi. 1998. “Sharing the Financial Burden for U.N. and NATO Peacekeeping, 1976-1996.” Journal of Conflict Resolution42:176–95.
38.
KisanganiEmizet F.PickeringJeffrey. 2007. “Diverting with Benevolent Military Force: Reducing Risks and Rising Above Strategic Behavior.” International Studies Quarterly51:277–99.
39.
KochMichael T.2009. “Governments, Partisanship, and Foreign Policy: The Case of Dispute Duration.” Journal of Peace Research46:799–817.
40.
KoenigNicole. 2012. Libya A Wakeup Call for CSDP. Brussels, Belgium: TEPSA Policy Brief.
41.
LepgoldJosephUngerDannyBennettAndrew. 1997. Friends in Need: Burden Sharing in the Persian Gulf War. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
42.
Libya Crisis Rocks Oil Markets. 2011. “Libya Crisis Rocks Oil Markets.” Oil and Energy Trends36:3–6.
43.
LombardiBen. 2011. “The Berlusconi Government and Intervention in Libya.” The International Spectator46:31–44.
44.
MartonPéterEichlerJan. 2013. “Between Willing and Reluctant Entrapment: CEE Countries in NATO’s Non-European Missions.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies46:351–62.
45.
MassieJustin2016. Public Contestation and Policy Resistance: Canada’s Oversized Military Commitment to Afghanistan. Foreign Policy Analysis12 (1): 47–65, doi: 10.1111/fpa.12047.
46.
MelloPatrick A.2012. “Parliamentary Peace or Partisan Politics? Democracies’ Participation in the Iraq War.” Journal of International Relations and Development15:420–53.
47.
MelloPatrick A.2014. Democratic Participation in Armed Conflict Military Involvement in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
48.
MenonAnandLipkinJonathan. 2003. European Attitudes towards Transatlantic Relations 2000-2003: An Analytical Survey. Notre Europe: Paris.
49.
MichaelsJeffrey H.2011. “NATO After Libya: Alliance Adrift?” The RUSI Journal156:56–61.
50.
MiskimmonAlister. 2012. “German Foreign Policy and the Libya Crisis.” German Politics21:392–410.
51.
MügeKınacıoğluGürzel AylinG.. 2013. “Turkey’s Contribution to NATO’s Role in Post–Cold War Security Governance: The Use of Force and Security Identity Formation.” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations19:589–610.
52.
NoetzelTimoSchreerBenjamin. 2009. “Does a Multi-tier NATO Matter? The Atlantic Alliance and the Process of Strategic Change.” International Affairs85:211–26.
53.
OlsonMancurZeckhauserRichard. 1966. “An Economic Theory of Alliances.” Review of Economics and Statistics48:266–79.
54.
OmaIda M.2012. “Explaining States’ Burden-Sharing Behaviour within NATO.” Cooperation and Conflict47:562–73.
55.
OppermannKai. 2012. “National Role Conceptions, Domestic Constraints and the New ‘Normalcy’ in German Foreign Policy: The Eurozone Crisis, Libya and Beyond.” German Politics21:502–19.
56.
PalmerGlennLondonTamarReganPatrick. 2004. “What’s Stopping You? The Sources of Political Constraints on International Conflict Behavior in Parliamentary Democracies.” International Interactions30:1–24.
57.
R Development Core Team. 2014. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, Version 3.1.2. Vienna, Australia: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
58.
RaginCharles C.2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59.
RaginCharles C.2009. “Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using Fuzzy Sets (fsQCA).” In Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, edited by RihouxB.RaginC. C.. London, UK: Sage.
60.
RathbunBrian C.2004. Partisan Interventions: European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
61.
RihouxBenoîtMeurGisèle De. 2009. “Crisp-Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (csQCA).” In Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, edited by RihouxB.RaginC. C., 69–86. London, UK: Sage.
62.
RingsmoseJens. 2010. “NATO Burden-sharing Redux: Continuity and Change after the Cold War.” Contemporary Security Policy31:319–38.
63.
SaidemanStephen M.AuerswaldDavid P.. 2012. “Comparing Caveats: Understanding the Sources of National Restrictions upon NATO’s Mission in Afghanistan.” International Studies Quarterly56:67–84.
64.
SandlerTodd. 1993. “The Economic Theory of Alliances.” Journal of Conflict Resolution37:446–83.
SchneiderCarsten Q.WagemannClaudius. 2012. Set-theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
67.
SchusterJürgenMaierHerbert. 2006. “The Rift: Explaining Europe’s Divergent Iraq Policies in the Run-up of the American-led War on Iraq.” Foreign Policy Analysis2:223–44.
68.
ShimizuHirofumiSandlerTodd. 2002. “Peacekeeping and Burden-sharing, 1994-2000.” Journal of Peace Research39:651–68.
StinnettDouglas M.TirJaroslavDiehlPaul F.SchaferPhilipGochmanCharles. 2002. “The Correlates of War (Cow) Project Direct Contiguity Data, Version 3.0.” Conflict Management and Peace Science19:59–67.
72.
SnyderGlenn H.1984. “The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics.” World Politics36 (4): 461–495.
73.
ThiemAlrikDuşaAdrian. 2013. Qualitative Comparative Analysis with R: A User’s Guide. New York: Springer.
74.
ThiemAlrikHaesebrouckTim. 2015. “Why Contribute? Burden-Sharing in CSDP Military Operations.” Paper presented at the UACES 45th Conference, Bilbao, September 7-9, 2015.
75.
ThompsonFred. 1987. “Lumpy Goods and Cheap Riders: An Application of the Theory of Public Goods to International Alliances.” Journal of Public Policy7:431–49.
76.
VolkensAndreaLehmannPolaMerzNicolasRegelSvenWernerAnnikaLacewellOnawaSchultzeHenrike. 2013. The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Berlin, Germany: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB)
77.
WaltStephen M.1987. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
78.
WeidmannNils B.KuseDoreenGleditschKristian Skrede. 2010. “The Geography of the International System: The CShapes Dataset.” International Interactions36:86–106.
79.
WilliamsLaron K.2013. “Flexible Election Timing and International Conflict.” International Studies Quarterly57:449–61.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
