IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v96y2002i01p15-26_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dictatorial Peace?

Author

Listed:
  • PECENY, MARK
  • BEER, CAROLINE C.
  • SANCHEZ-TERRY, SHANNON

Abstract

Is there a dictatorial peace that resembles the democratic peace? This paper uses a new data set compiled by Barbara Geddes to examine the conflict behavior of three types of autocratic regimes—personalist, military, and single-party dictatorships—in the post-World War II era. We find some evidence that specific types of authoritarian regimes are peaceful toward one another. No two personalist dictators or two military regimes have gone to war with each other since 1945. These dyads were not less likely to engage in militarized interstate disputes than were mixed dyads, however. Although single-party regimes were the only homogeneous dyad in this study to have experienced war, multivariate analyses of participation in militarized interstate disputes suggest that single-party states are more peaceful toward one another than are mixed dyads. Thus, while we have found no unambiguous evidence of a dictatorial peace to match the robustness of the democratic peace, there is substantial interesting variation in the conflict behavior of specific types of authoritarian regimes. The analysis presented here demonstrates that studies of the impact of regime type on conflict behavior must work from a more sophisticated conception of authoritarianism.

Suggested Citation

  • Peceny, Mark & Beer, Caroline C. & Sanchez-Terry, Shannon, 2002. "Dictatorial Peace?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 96(1), pages 15-26, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:96:y:2002:i:01:p:15-26_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055402004203/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jason Brownlee, 2009. "Portents of Pluralism: How Hybrid Regimes Affect Democratic Transitions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 515-532, July.
    2. Thomas Tangerås, 2009. "Democracy, autocracy and the likelihood of international conflict," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 99-117, April.
    3. Petersen Karen K., 2008. "There is More to the Story than 'Us-Versus-Them': Expanding the Study of Interstate Conflict and Regime Type Beyond a Dichotomy," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 62-96, April.
    4. Lin Scott Y. & Seiglie Carlos, 2014. "Same Evidences, Different Interpretations – A Comparison of the Conflict Index between the Interstate Dyadic Events Data and Militarized Interstate Disputes Data in Peace-Conflict Models," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 347-372, April.
    5. Jeffrey Pickering & Emizet F. Kisangani, 2010. "Diversionary Despots? Comparing Autocracies' Propensities to Use and to Benefit from Military Force," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 477-493, April.
    6. Vincenzo Bove & Jennifer Brauner, 2016. "The demand for military expenditure in authoritarian regimes," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 609-625, September.
    7. José Cheibub & Jennifer Gandhi & James Vreeland, 2010. "Democracy and dictatorship revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 67-101, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:96:y:2002:i:01:p:15-26_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.