?
Allies, Partners, and Rivals: A Three-Dimensional Classification of Military-Political Alignments
Contemporary IR theory lacks a unified and complete taxonomy of interstate military-political relationships. The conceptual diversity of overlapping, often interchangeable terms (alliance, alignment, coalition, entente, strategic partnership) generates false dichotomies and a gap between fundamental alliance theories and applied studies of defense cooperation practices. This article proposes a three-dimensional classification of military alignments. Each state dyad is characterized along three independent axes: (1) strategic orientation (from overlapping interests to clashing interests), (2) intensity of actual military cooperation (from minimal to deep integration), and (3) level of institutionalization (from unofficial interaction to legally binding obligations). An analysis of over 30 state dyads (2006–2016/2024) — based on ATOP, SIPRI, joint military exercises, and military deployments — finds that the proposed dimensions are statistically independent (correlation of .13) and empirically tractable. The proposed classification may serve as a conceptual foundation for more precise diagnosis of interstate relations, comparative research on defense cooperation, and operationalization of dependent variables in alliance studies.