The purpose of this study is to scrutinize the relationship between general material capabilities (i.e. power) and influence in a specific military alliance: the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. I shed light on the following puzzle: how do small powers wield influence in an organization traditionally led by great powers?

For the purposes of this project, I define influence as a state's demonstrated ability to achieve desired alliance policies. A theoretical model is proposed that takes into account four critical inputs (i.e. independent variable categories) into influence outcomes: 1) Systemic Factors, 2) Institutional Factors, 3) Domestic Factors and 4) Influence Tactics. The framework is proposed as one useful for future studies of influence outcomes in international organizations.

The study's three primary case studies are from the post-Cold War era and include two successful influence attempts (Denmark and Greece) and one failed case (Belgium). The findings of the study indicate that national level factors (especially a state's intensity of interest and political cohesion) must be considered along with international level factors (i.e. security dependency and institutional factors) in order to fully understand small power influence in NATO. Additionally, a small power's ability to secure sponsorship from one of NATO's four great powers was demonstrated as critical for influence success. These results fill a gap in International Relations literature. It challenges previously held assumptions about small power influence and helps explain the antecedents of key security policy decisions in the North Atlantic region.