Alliances and treaties can have a significant impact on the likelihood of war. For instance, they can deter aggression by creating a collective defense commitment among member states, thus making potential aggressors think twice before attacking.
Another example I'd like to add is, NATO's collective defense clause aims to prevent conflict by ensuring an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. This collective stance can enhance stability and security among member states by reducing the likelihood of attacks due to the high potential cost of triggering a collective response.
On the other hand, alliances and treaties can also escalate tensions or draw more countries into a conflict if obligations are triggered, potentially increasing the likelihood of war.
When countries are tightly bound by alliances, a small conflict between two nations can quickly escalate into a larger war as more countries are pulled in due to their treaty obligations. For example, In the recent war between India and Pakistan, we saw, how NATO and other countries were time and again giving instructions and warnings to both of the countries to de-escalate. So, we can see how war between two countries affected the whole world indirectly as all of them were putting eyes on us.
Furthermore, alliances can also lead to an increased military buildups among rival blocs, heightening tensions and the risk of miscalculation leading to war. Balancing the deterrent effect of alliances with the risk of entanglement in broader conflicts is a key challenge in international relations.
