We never need Israel to defend us, say, form Canada, so the relationship is not symmetrical. It is not in our interest to have a new Mongol Horde roll over Israel and Europe, so it becomes in our interest to have alliances with these nations that are of significant duration. Unless there is durability to the alliance, the small countries that we don't want to succumb one by one will seek separate deals with the Horde and won't provide a united front, which we do need.
It is not in our interest to have a new Mongol Horde roll over Israel and Europe, so it becomes in our interest to have alliances with these nations that are of significant duration. Unless there is durability to the alliance, the small countries that we don't want to succumb one by one will seek separate deals with the Horde and won't provide a united front, which we do need.
Aren't you basically agreeing? Why wouldn't it be possible to set up alliances with the nations WHEN we see the new Mongol Horde attempting their advance instead of IN CASE they make an attempt? Or do you think that not having a formal alliance would preclude having intelligence on the situations/conditions in a given country?
The tendency of government to remain in alliances w/o periodically re-evaluating them seems like good enough reason to follow such an approach.