IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v31y2014i4p357-382.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Victory without peace: Conquest, insurgency, and war termination

Author

Listed:
  • Alex Weisiger

Abstract

The decisive defeat of an enemy in conventional war—conquest—frequently brings about peace on the victor’s terms; in some cases, however, conquest does not end the violence, but instead marks a transition to guerrilla war. What determines whether conquest results in war termination? While traditional theories of insurgency would predict that peace depends on appealing to the hearts and minds of the defeated population, I argue that conquerors in conventional wars cannot expect to win over the defeated population, and hence that avoiding post-conquest resistance requires quick and often brutal responses to initial opposition to deter potential challengers. I test this argument both statistically and through two sets of short paired case studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Alex Weisiger, 2014. "Victory without peace: Conquest, insurgency, and war termination," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(4), pages 357-382, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:31:y:2014:i:4:p:357-382
    DOI: 10.1177/0738894213508691
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0738894213508691
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0738894213508691?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Slantchev, Branislav L., 2003. "The Power to Hurt: Costly Conflict with Completely Informed States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(1), pages 123-133, February.
    2. Fearon, James D. & Laitin, David D., 2003. "Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(1), pages 75-90, February.
    3. Lyall, Jason & Wilson, Isaiah, 2009. "Rage Against the Machines: Explaining Outcomes in Counterinsurgency Wars," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(1), pages 67-106, January.
    4. Robert Powell, 2004. "Bargaining and Learning While Fighting," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(2), pages 344-361, April.
    5. Peic, Goran & Reiter, Dan, 2011. "Foreign-Imposed Regime Change, State Power and Civil War Onset, 1920–2004," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 453-475, July.
    6. Macartan Humphreys & Jeremy M. Weinstein, 2008. "Who Fights? The Determinants of Participation in Civil War," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(2), pages 436-455, April.
    7. Downes, Alexander B. & Sechser, Todd S., 2012. "The Illusion of Democratic Credibility," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(3), pages 457-489, July.
    8. Cunningham, David E. & Lemke, Douglas, 2013. "Combining Civil and Interstate Wars," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(3), pages 609-627, July.
    9. Croco, Sarah E., 2011. "The Decider's Dilemma: Leader Culpability, War Outcomes, and Domestic Punishment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(3), pages 457-477, August.
    10. Zorn, Christopher, 2005. "A Solution to Separation in Binary Response Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 157-170, April.
    11. Kristian Gleditsch, 2004. "A Revised List of Wars Between and Within Independent States, 1816-2002," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 231-262, July.
    12. Snyder, Jack & Borghard, Erica D., 2011. "The Cost of Empty Threats: A Penny, Not a Pound," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(3), pages 437-456, August.
    13. Fearon, James D., 1994. "Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 577-592, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew Hauenstein, 2020. "The conditional effect of audiences on credibility," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(3), pages 422-436, May.
    2. Agustín Goenaga & Oriol Sabaté & Jan Teorell, 2023. "The state does not live by warfare alone: War and revenue in the long nineteenth century," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 393-418, April.
    3. John Tyson Chatagnier, 2015. "Conflict bargaining as a signal to third parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(2), pages 237-268, April.
    4. Helge Holtermann, 2012. "Explaining the Development–Civil War Relationship," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 56-78, February.
    5. Nakao, Keisuke, 2022. "Democratic Victory and War Duration: Why Are Democracies Less Likely to Win Long Wars?," MPRA Paper 112849, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Yuri M. Zhukov, 2014. "Theory of Indiscriminate Violence," Working Paper 365551, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    7. Clara Ponsati & Santiago Sanchez-Pages, 2012. "Optimism and commitment: an elementary theory of bargaining and war," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 157-179, March.
    8. Patricia L. Sullivan & Johannes Karreth, 2015. "The conditional impact of military intervention on internal armed conflict outcomes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(3), pages 269-288, July.
    9. Yuleng Zeng, 2021. "Biding time versus timely retreat: Asymmetric dependence, issue salience, and conflict duration," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 719-733, July.
    10. Christopher Gelpi, 2017. "Democracies in Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(9), pages 1925-1949, October.
    11. Giacomo Chiozza, 2017. "Presidents on the cycle: Elections, audience costs, and coercive diplomacy," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(1), pages 3-26, January.
    12. Coyne,Christopher J., 2020. "Defense, Peace, and War Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108724036, January.
    13. Eryan Ramadhani, 2019. "Is Assertiveness Paying the Bill? China’s Domestic Audience Costs in the South China Sea Disputes," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 6(1), pages 30-54, April.
    14. Helge Holtermann, 2011. "Explaining the Development-Civil War Relationship," LIS Working papers 566, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    15. Colton Heffington & Brandon Beomseob Park & Laron K Williams, 2019. "The “Most Important Problem†Dataset (MIPD): a new dataset on American issue importance," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(3), pages 312-335, May.
    16. Tilman Br�ck & Patricia Justino & Philip Verwimp & Andrew Tedesco & Alexandra Avdeenko, 2013. "Measuring Conflict Exposure in Micro-Level Surveys," HiCN Working Papers 153, Households in Conflict Network.
    17. Bandyopadhyay, Sanghamitra & Green, Elliott, 2013. "Nation-Building and Conflict in Modern Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 108-118.
    18. Blouin, Max & Pallage, Stéphane, 2016. "Warlords, famine and food aid: Who fights, who starves?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 18-38.
    19. Xiaojun Li & Dingding Chen, 2021. "Public opinion, international reputation, and audience costs in an authoritarian regime," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(5), pages 543-560, September.
    20. Adam, Antonis & Tsavou, Evi, 2020. "One strike and you’re out! Dictators’ fate in the aftermath of terrorism," MPRA Paper 103772, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2020.

    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:sae:compsc:v:31:y:2014:i:4:p:357-382. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.