State-building process in Africa appears in different conditions to those experienced on other continents. It is primarily characterized by the presence of fixed borders. The article repurposes evolutionary and identitarian theories on the development of political communities for the African realities. It highlights the necessity to develop policies creating territorial division between the population of the state and the external environment and utilizing armed forces for the protection of the state against such an environment for the state-building process to succeed. In cases of Eritrea, Senegal, and Burkina Faso, three hypotheses are being tested with an outcome that state-building process connected to the creation of Nomos does not have to be violent but requires a connection of the armed forces to the society. Once the division between the Nomos and the hostis develops inside of the state, such entities are not able to develop power projection capabilities inside their borders.

Building on an original dataset, this article focuses on the interactions between NATO and its declared worldwide partners. It argues that the analysis of these interactions can reveal NATO’s strategic approach to partnerships, but it can also provide a tool for its classification as an organisation that is either exclusive – defined by the focus on defence of its members, or inclusive – emphasising the global protection of democracies and human rights. The relationship between types of interactions and NATO categorisation is estimated using an unconditional negative binomial regression with fixed effects as well as a within-between (hybrid) model. Furthermore, they are illustrated on two brief case studies of Sweden and Japan. The results of the study suggest that NATO engages primarily with countries that are powerful relative to their neighbourhood, even though they are not the most powerful among the partners. The given country’s level of democracy, integration into the international institutions, and stability, do not seem to play any overarching role here.

Building on an original dataset, this article focuses on the interactionsbetween NATO and its declared worldwide partners. It argues that theanalysis of these interactions can reveal NATO’s strategic approach topartnerships, but it can also provide a tool for its classification as anorganisation that is either exclusive – defined by the focus on defence of itsmembers, or inclusive – emphasising the global protection of democraciesand human rights. The relationship between types of interactions and NATOcategorisation is estimated using an unconditional negative binomialregression with fixed effects as well as a within-between (hybrid) model.Furthermore, they are illustrated on two brief case studies of Sweden andJapan. The results of the study suggest that NATO engages primarily withcountries that are powerful relative to their neighbourhood, even thoughthey are not the most powerful among the partners. The given country’slevel of democracy, integration into the international institutions, andstability, do not seem to play any overarching role here.