abstract

International Relations scholars provide the contradictory empirical findings as to democratic alliance reliability. They place very different assumptions about the similarity of preference of domestic political group vis-a-vis alliance commitments. The studies in supporting the thesis that the democracies are more reliable partners make the assumption that there is a national consensus about keeping the promises it made in a form of the formal treaty. The scholars in the opposite side of the debate assume that the preferences for an alliance commitment significantly vary among different political actors. This paper illustrates how differently/ similarly competing political parties consider alliance commitments. As a trial, I select three US alliances in northeast Asia and explain the differences between the Democrat.s and Republican.s preferences to maintain US commitments.