IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v32y2015i1p28-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Escalation in international conflict management: A foreign policy perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Molly M. Melin

Abstract

Efforts to resolve interstate disputes are often characterized by repeated engagement and evolving strategies. What explains a state’s decision to continue conflict resolution efforts but escalate their management strategy? Drawing from foreign policy literature, I argue that third parties escalate policies in response to past failures, shifting conflict dynamics and their relationship with the disputants. Analysis of management efforts from 1946 to 2001 reveals that the changing nature of the conflict, policy failures and relationships between the third party and disputants are integral to understanding the management decision process, but the effects of these factors depend on the management history.

Suggested Citation

  • Molly M. Melin, 2015. "Escalation in international conflict management: A foreign policy perspective," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(1), pages 28-49, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:32:y:2015:i:1:p:28-49
    DOI: 10.1177/0738894214545033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0738894214545033
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0738894214545033?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. Derrick V. Frazier & William J. Dixon, 2006. "Third-Party Intermediaries and Negotiated Settlements, 1946--2000," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 385-408, December.
    2. J. Michael Greig, 2005. "Stepping Into the Fray: When Do Mediators Mediate?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 249-266, April.
    3. Jacob Bercovitch & Scott Sigmund Gartner, 2006. "Is There Method in the Madness of Mediation? Some Lessons for Mediators from Quantitative Studies of Mediation," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 329-354, December.
    4. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott & Kimberly Ann Elliott, 2009. "Economic Sanctions Reconsidered, 3rd Edition (paper)," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 4129, April.
    5. Dixon, William J., 1996. "Third-party techniques for preventing conflict escalation and promoting peaceful settlement," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(4), pages 653-681, October.
    6. David H. Clark & William Reed, 2005. "The Strategic Sources of Foreign Policy Substitution," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(3), pages 609-624, July.
    7. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott & Kimberly Ann Elliott, 2009. "Economic Sanctions Reconsidered, 3rd Edition softcover with CD," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 4310, January.
    8. David H. Clark & Timothy Nordstrom & William Reed, 2008. "Substitution Is in the Variance: Resources and Foreign Policy Choice," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 763-773, October.
    9. James Fearon, 2002. "Selection Effects and Deterrence," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 5-29, January.
    10. Powell, Robert, 1993. "Guns, Butter, and Anarchy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(1), pages 115-132, March.
    11. Molly M. Melin & Isak Svensson, 2009. "Incentives for Talking: Accepting Mediation in International and Civil Wars," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 249-271, August.
    12. Favretto, Katja, 2009. "Should Peacemakers Take Sides? Major Power Mediation, Coercion, and Bias," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(2), pages 248-263, May.
    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. Dominic Rohner, 2018. "Success Factors for Peace Treaties: A Review of Theory and Evidence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 18.08, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    2. Andrew P. Owsiak, 2015. "Forecasting conflict management in militarized interstate disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(1), pages 50-75, February.
    3. Molly M. Melin & Scott Sigmund Gartner & Jacob Bercovitch, 2013. "Fear of rejection: The puzzle of unaccepted mediation offers in international conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(4), pages 354-368, September.
    4. Renato Corbetta & Molly M. Melin, 2018. "Exploring the Threshold between Conflict Management and Joining in Biased Interventions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(10), pages 2205-2231, November.
    5. Renato Corbetta & Keith A. Grant, 2012. "Intervention in Conflicts from a Network Perspective," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 314-340, July.
    6. Govinda Clayton & Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, 2014. "Will we see helping hands? Predicting civil war mediation and likely success," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(3), pages 265-284, July.
    7. Bernd Beber, 2012. "International Mediation, Selection Effects, and the Question of Bias," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(4), pages 397-424, September.
    8. Shawn L. Ramirez, 2018. "Mediation in the shadow of an audience: How third parties use secrecy and agenda-setting to broker settlements," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 30(1), pages 119-146, January.
    9. Kyle Beardsley, 2008. "Agreement without Peace? International Mediation and Time Inconsistency Problems," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 723-740, October.
    10. Melin, Molly M., 2016. "Business, peace, and world politics: The role of third parties in conflict resolution," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 59(5), pages 493-501.
    11. Emir Yazici, 2020. "Transborder identities, bias, and third-party conflict management," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(4), pages 490-511, July.
    12. David Quinn & Jonathan Wilkenfeld & Pelin Eralp & Victor Asal & Theodore Mclauchlin, 2013. "Crisis managers but not conflict resolvers: Mediating ethnic intrastate conflict in Africa," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(4), pages 387-406, September.
    13. Vanessa A. Lefler, 2015. "Strategic forum selection and compliance in interstate dispute resolution," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(1), pages 76-98, February.
    14. Frederick R. Chen, 2019. "Disentangling bias: national capabilities, regime type, and international conflict mediation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(2), pages 149-168, March.
    15. Renato Corbetta, 2015. "Between indifference and coercion: Third-party intervention techniques in ongoing disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(1), pages 3-27, February.
    16. Tobias Böhmelt, 2015. "The spatial contagion of international mediation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(1), pages 108-127, February.
    17. Tobias Böhmelt, 2013. "Failing to succeed? The cumulative impact of international mediation revisited1," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(3), pages 199-219, July.
    18. Matthieu Crozet & Julian Hinz, 2020. "Friendly fire: the trade impact of the Russia sanctions and counter-sanctions," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 35(101), pages 97-146.
    19. Amegashie J. Atsu, 2011. "On Third-Party Intervention in Conflicts: An Economist's View," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(2), pages 1-10, April.
    20. Joan Esteban & Massimo Morelli & Dominic Rohner, 2015. "Strategic Mass Killings," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(5), pages 1087-1132.

    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:32:y:2015:i:1:p:28-49. 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.