Abstract This article revisits one of the most important debates in international relations theory—that between realists and liberals over security institutions. A test of the realist challenge to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) shows realist assumptions were reflected in the institutional form the alliance took channeling American power to provide collective defense of Western Europe against the Soviet Union. However, realism failed to resonate with post–Cold War leaders who guided the alliance with a liberal vision focused on spreading Western values via military interventions and membership enlargement. The liberal approach to NATO was based on faulty assumptions about institutions and security, leading to inefficient military operations and costly overextension. NATO risked, by 2020, offering a false promise of security.

中文翻译：

---

现实主义外交政策和跨大西洋安全机构

摘要 本文回顾了国际关系理论中最重要的争论之一——现实主义者和自由主义者之间关于安全制度的争论。对北大西洋公约组织 (NATO) 现实主义挑战的测试表明，现实主义假设反映在联盟采取的制度形式中，引导美国力量为西欧对抗苏联提供集体防御。然而，现实主义未能引起冷战后领导人的共鸣，他们以自由主义愿景引导联盟，专注于通过军事干预和扩大成员资格来传播西方价值观。北约的自由主义方法是基于对制度和安全的错误假设，导致军事行动效率低下和代价高昂的过度扩张。到 2020 年，北约冒着提供虚假安全承诺的风险。