Institutionalized Defense Cooperation and Regime Security

How does the institutionalization of external security cooperation affect government-military relations? This question has become increasingly salient amid a dramatic increase in bilateral defense cooperation agreements over the past few decades. I argue that DCAs help stabilize government-military relations and bolster regime security by mitigating a persistent credibility problem between signatory governments and their armed forces. By securing military-specific resources, DCAs limit the government’s ability to divert benefits elsewhere. The involvement of partner states further enhances credibility, as reneging on these bilateral agreements carries diplomatic and reputational costs. Because the military depends on the government to sustain these arrangements, the costs of plotting a coup increase: any extra-constitutional removal of the government threatens the institutional channels through which critical resources flow. A cross-sectional time-series analysis of 160 countries from 1980 to 2010 suggests that one or more DCAs exhibit significantly lower odds of coup attempts. The study highlights the role of international agreements in shaping domestic political stability. It also expands our understanding of states’ unique role in managing domestic civil-military relations through international brokerage and cooperation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Conflict Resolution
Published
2026-03-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027261432196
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Institutionalized Defense Cooperation and Regime Security

Md Muhibbur Rahman
Journal of Conflict Resolution
International Relations and Foreign Policy
article

Institutionalized Defense Cooperation and Regime Security

Md Muhibbur Rahman
article en

Abstract

How does the institutionalization of external security cooperation affect government-military relations? This question has become increasingly salient amid a dramatic increase in bilateral defense cooperation agreements over the past few decades. I argue that DCAs help stabilize government-military relations and bolster regime security by mitigating a persistent credibility problem between signatory governments and their armed forces. By securing military-specific resources, DCAs limit the government’s ability to divert benefits elsewhere. The involvement of partner states further enhances credibility, as reneging on these bilateral agreements carries diplomatic and reputational costs. Because the military depends on the government to sustain these arrangements, the costs of plotting a coup increase: any extra-constitutional removal of the government threatens the institutional channels through which critical resources flow. A cross-sectional time-series analysis of 160 countries from 1980 to 2010 suggests that one or more DCAs exhibit significantly lower odds of coup attempts. The study highlights the role of international agreements in shaping domestic political stability. It also expands our understanding of states’ unique role in managing domestic civil-military relations through international brokerage and cooperation.

Journal of Conflict Resolution
California University of Pennsylvania (US)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.