IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/compsc/v34y2017i2p141-159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External threat and the limits of democratic pacifism

Author

Listed:
  • Sambuddha Ghatak

    (Department of Political Science, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA)

  • Aaron Gold

    (Department of Political Science, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA)

  • Brandon C Prins

    (Howard Baker, Jr. Center for Public Policy, Department of Political Science, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA)

Abstract

Scholars widely recognize that democratic dyads are associated with lower hazards of armed conflict and more efficient conflict resolution. Many attempts have been made to challenge the notion of democratic pacifism, but perhaps the most significant is the argument that the Democratic Peace is epiphenomenal to territorial issues, specifically the external threats that they pose. The presence of an external threat might be the mechanism by which democratic dyads, owing to audience costs and resolve, fail to decide contentious issues non-violently. This study seeks to answer the question: “Under what conditions do democratic dyads lower the likelihood of armed conflict?†To do this we propose a hard test of the Democratic Peace. Using an updated global sample of cases, we model joint democracy’s ability to lower the likelihood of armed conflict in the presence of direct external threats in the form of strategic rivalry and territorial contention. The empirical evidence we uncover systematically shows the Democratic Peace to be more limited than previously observed. When we control for each external threat with a simple right-hand-side variable, joint democracy continues to reduce conflict propensities. But when democracies face external threats (i.e. the interaction of democracy and threat), the pacifying effect of democracy is less visible.

Suggested Citation

  • Sambuddha Ghatak & Aaron Gold & Brandon C Prins, 2017. "External threat and the limits of democratic pacifism," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(2), pages 141-159, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:compsc:v:34:y:2017:i:2:p:141-159
    DOI: 10.1177/0738894216650429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0738894216650429
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0738894216650429?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. Paul D. Senese, 2005. "Territory, Contiguity, and International Conflict: Assessing a New Joint Explanation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(4), pages 769-779, October.
    2. Weeks, Jessica L., 2008. "Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 35-64, January.
    3. Reiter, Dan & Stam, Allan C., 1998. "Democracy, War Initiation, and Victory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(2), pages 377-389, June.
    4. Michael D. Ward & Randolph M. Siverson & Xun Cao, 2007. "Disputes, Democracies, and Dependencies: A Reexamination of the Kantian Peace," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 583-601, July.
    5. William Reed & Daina Chiba, 2010. "Decomposing the Relationship Between Contiguity and Militarized Conflict," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 61-73, January.
    6. Gowa, Joanne, 1995. "Democratic states and international disputes," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 511-522, July.
    7. Cullen F. Goenner, 2004. "Uncertainty of the Liberal Peace," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 41(5), pages 589-605, September.
    8. Sam R. Bell, 2017. "Power, territory, and interstate conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(2), pages 160-175, March.
    9. Michael Colaresi, 2004. "When Doves Cry: International Rivalry, Unreciprocated Cooperation, and Leadership Turnover," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 555-570, July.
    10. Rosato, Sebastian, 2003. "The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(4), pages 585-602, November.
    11. 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.
    12. Paul R Hensel & Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, 2017. "From territorial claims to identity claims: The Issue Correlates of War (ICOW) Project," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(2), pages 126-140, March.
    13. repec:cup:apsrev:v:87:y:1993:i:03:p:624-638_27 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. de Mesquita, Bruce Bueno & Morrow, James D. & Siverson, Randolph M. & Smith, Alastair, 1999. "An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(4), pages 791-807, December.
    15. Carter, David B. & Signorino, Curtis S., 2010. "Back to the Future: Modeling Time Dependence in Binary Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(3), pages 271-292, July.
    16. Maoz, Zeev & Russett, Bruce, 1993. "Normative and Structural Causes of Democratic Peace, 1946–1986," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 624-638, September.
    17. Erik Gartzke, 2007. "The Capitalist Peace," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 166-191, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Priscilla Paola Severo & Leonardo B. Furstenau & Michele Kremer Sott & Danielli Cossul & Mariluza Sott Bender & Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, 2021. "Thirty Years of Human Rights Study in the Web of Science Database (1990–2020)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-23, February.
    2. Brandon C. Prins & Krista Wiegand & Sambuddha Ghatak & Aaron Gold, 2017. "Managing territorial conflict: An introduction to this special issue," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(2), pages 121-125, March.
    3. Douglas M. Gibler, 2017. "What they fight for: Specific territorial issues in militarized interstate disputes, 1816–2001," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(2), pages 194-211, March.

    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. David Altman & Federico Rojas-de-Galarreta & Francisco Urdinez, 2021. "An interactive model of democratic peace," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 384-398, May.
    2. Christos Kollias & Suzanna-Maria Paleologou, 2017. "The Globalization and Peace Nexus: Findings Using Two Composite Indices," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 131(3), pages 871-885, April.
    3. Johann Park, 2013. "Forward to the future? The democratic peace after the Cold War," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(2), pages 178-194, April.
    4. William J. Dixon & Paul D. Senese, 2002. "Democracy, Disputes, and Negotiated Settlements," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(4), pages 547-571, August.
    5. Choong-Nam Kang, 2017. "Capability revisited: Ally’s capability and dispute initiation1," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(5), pages 546-571, September.
    6. David B Carter, 2017. "History as a double-edged sword," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 16(4), pages 400-421, November.
    7. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How Does Democratic Accountability Shape International Cooperation?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 28-55, February.
    8. Sally Anderson & Mark Souva, 2010. "The Accountability Effects of Political Institutions and Capitalism on Interstate Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(4), pages 543-565, August.
    9. Jo Jakobsen & Thomas Halvorsen, 2019. "Geographical and temporal patterns of interstate security competition: Global and regional evidence," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(3), pages 226-246, September.
    10. Alexandra Guisinger & Alastair Smith, 2002. "Honest Threats," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(2), pages 175-200, April.
    11. Thomas Tangerås, 2009. "Democracy, autocracy and the likelihood of international conflict," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 99-117, April.
    12. Thorin M. Wright & Toby J. Rider, 2014. "Disputed territory, defensive alliances and conflict initiation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(2), pages 119-144, April.
    13. Elizabeth A. Stanley & John P. Sawyer, 2009. "The Equifinality of War Termination," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(5), pages 651-676, October.
    14. Sam R. Bell, 2017. "Power, territory, and interstate conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(2), pages 160-175, March.
    15. Sebastian Rosato, 2011. "On the Democratic Peace," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Kelly Daniels & Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, 2017. "Bones of democratic contention: Maritime disputes," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 20(4), pages 293-310, December.
    17. H. E. Goemans, 2000. "Fighting for Survival," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 44(5), pages 555-579, October.
    18. Mark Harrison & Nikolaus Wolf, 2014. "The Frequency of Wars," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: THE ECONOMICS OF COERCION AND CONFLICT, chapter 5, pages 121-149, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Adamson, Jordan, 2020. "Political institutions, resources, and war: Theory and evidence from ancient Rome," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    20. Jacob Ausderan, 2018. "Reassessing the democratic advantage in interstate wars using k-adic datasets," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(5), pages 451-473, September.

    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:34:y:2017:i:2:p:141-159. 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.