For enterprises, the establishment of strategic alliances is an important means of developing emerging markets. The performance of strategic alliances depends on the length of cooperation between enterprises. As a means of scoring the security and interests of a country, quasi-alliance is more volatile than alliance, collective security and cooperative security. This is mainly based on two aspects: one is the principle of cost-effectiveness, that is, whether quasi-alliance gains the most benefits with the minimum cost; the other is the internal relationship between the solution and the result, that is, whether quasi-alliance has achieved the strategic goal of the actor. The questions to be discussed in this chapter are: 1. Why are the performances of quasi-alliance diplomacy so different? 2. What are the main factors that determine the performance of quasi-alliance diplomacy?

Divergence of Quasi-Alliance Efficacy

In terms of alliance diplomacy, statistics shows that from 1816 to 1965, 73% of allies had chosen treachery when conflicts broke out, which seems to indicate that alliance has poor performance. Alliance is often regarded as selfish “treachery diplomacy”; the performance of the alliance is directly related to the vitality of security cooperation mechanism and the construction of regional power relationship. For example, from 1816 to 1984, a total of 598 military conflicts broke out in Europe. If a country fought alone with an enemy, the probability of winning was 74%; but if a country and its allies fought together, the probability of victory was only 40%. It is not hard to see that the performance of alliance is less effective and the performance of security cooperation directly affects the result of war and security cooperation.

Comparison of Efficacy Between Alliance and Quasi-Alliance

Efficacy (also known as effectiveness) is an important concept in management, which reflects the expected results. It refers to the effective output when an entity manages to achieve its strategic objectives. Joshua S. Goldstein points out in his book International Relations that some countries, regardless of formal covenants, may become mortal enemies such as between the Soviet Union and China in the 1960s, between Greece and Turkey in the NATO military alliance, whereas some countries have not signed a formal military covenant but are able to perform similarly compared with the military alliance. Although Goldstein does not specify which countries fall into the special category of quasi-alliance, he makes it clear that an informal alliance (quasi-alliance) do not necessarily perform worse than a formal alliance. Sometimes quasi-alliance is even more effective than alliance from a pragmatic perspective.