State alliances are made to improve the countries' international stature. These pacts often revolve around economics, a shared cultural identity, or a strategic advantage. In the Neach Literature Review, we see how alliances work between hegemonic powers and smaller states. It is said that the alliance help smaller states achieve their foreign policies; consequently, hegemonic states would want access to elements that would spread their sphere of influence. In this era, smaller states seem to be the primary benefactors of this asymmetric alliance, leaving the hegemonic state with no significant economic or military advantages. The literature review seek to emphasize the identity basis to these alliances and find patterns of actions to grasp the decisions made by the states who practice paternalistic alliances. .
The hegemonic state subjects itself to the costs of the alliances to try and control the smaller state. The smaller state wants to gain sovereignty; however, it is pressured to stay by its dependency. First, the smaller state are sustained by its protective state through economic, security, military, and diplomatic functions. Next, the relationship will surface when the juvenile state will be hit by an international crisis. Lastly, a level of distrust will be evident. Survival and expansion will be the keys to move forward. For the next part of the review, we will look at two examples of paternal alliances: China and Korea, and Russia and Syria. .
North Korea has been able to establish itself internationally because of the continued support of China. China has also kept North Korea's economy from collapsing. We can also see this with Syria and Russia. Russia has prevented the United States from invading the country and even established themselves as Syria's primary ally. In the review we've read, the author writes about the realist view of alliances. He says that the prevailing idea is that alliances are not always built along friendly lines, but some are built on necessity.