Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Israel-Hamas
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • North Korea
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Alliances / Time to ditch the hub-and-spoke model on alliances
Alliances, Burden sharing, Grand strategy, NATO

November 7, 2022

Time to ditch the hub-and-spoke model on alliances

By Christopher McCallion

Japan and Australia signed an updated security pact in October, agreeing to engage in greater cooperation on a range of security and economic issues. Despite being a landmark bilateral agreement between two U.S. allies to counter China’s growing military power in the West Pacific, it received little attention in the American press.

Throughout the post-World War II era, the U.S. has preferred to build its alliances on a hub-and-spoke model, with the U.S. at the center. This is particularly true of the U.S.’ bilateral security treaties in Asia, but the U.S.’ European allies have also been content to simply lean on a U.S. security guarantee, despite NATO’s lip service toward multilateralism.

These alliance structures were all but guaranteed immediately after WWII, when the U.S. accounted for half of gross world output and industrial Europe and Asia had been decimated. But over the subsequent decades, as Japan and Germany rebuilt themselves into economic juggernauts, as Western European and East Asian economies flourished, and as the common threat from the Soviet Union vanished, America’s unbalanced alliances remained. Shorn of their central purpose after the Cold War, many experts believed that the U.S.-led alliances would either close up shop or be dramatically circumscribed. Instead, the U.S. expanded its security commitments all the way to Russia’s doorstep, a decision whose consequences are now manifesting themselves in Ukraine.

Read at Stars and Stripes

Author

Photo of Chris McCallion

Christopher
McCallion

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Europe

In the mediaUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Analysis: Putin in negotiations with U.S. presidents over the years

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

May 27, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Accepting ‘Ugly Terms’: Is This the Only Path to End the Ukraine War?

By Daniel Davis

May 5, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Is Trump’s Peace Plan for Ukraine All That Bad?

By Daniel DePetris

May 2, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Trump’s Ukraine minerals agreement is a terrible deal for the US

By Daniel DePetris

May 1, 2025

In the mediaUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Land power, Military analysis, Russia, Ukraine

Russia expulsion of Ukrainian forces from Kursk removes hurdle to peace

Featuring Christopher McCallion

April 28, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Ukraine Has Already Lost The War. That’s Not Donald Trump’s Fault

By Daniel Davis

April 27, 2025

Events on Alliances

See All Events
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

Past Virtual Event: China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualMiddle East, Alliances, Diplomacy, Israel, Military analysis

Past Virtual Event: Assessing a formal U.S.-Saudi alliance

October 17, 2024
virtualNATO, Alliances, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine, Ukraine‑Russia

Past Virtual Event: A ‘bridge’ to NATO or false hope for Ukraine?

July 12, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved