IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v49y2005i5p742-769.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maintenance Processes in International Rivalries

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Goertz
  • Bradford Jones

    (Department of Political Science, University of Arizona)

  • Paul F. Diehl

    (Department of Political Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

Abstract

This article asks a new question: what are the processes that maintain rivalries? The authors argue that rivalries are maintained through the failure of realist strategies and conflict management ones. They focus on stalemate outcomes as both a signal that militarized strategies for dealing with conflict have not succeeded and as reasons for the countries to continue the rivalry. They explore the process of rivalry maintenance, largely from the perspective of the punctuated equilibrium model of rivalries, and examine 1,166 rivalries across the period from 1816 to 1992. They contrast their approach with that of the “repeated conflicts†literature, which only examines the impact of the previous dispute on recurring conflict. The authors find that the most recent conflict does matter, and the longer term history of the rivalry is more important. They also find that the impacts of various factors (e.g., democracy) change over the course of the rivalry.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Goertz & Bradford Jones & Paul F. Diehl, 2005. "Maintenance Processes in International Rivalries," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 742-769, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:49:y:2005:i:5:p:742-769
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002705279375
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002705279375
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002705279375?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. D. Scott Bennett & Allan C. Stam, 2000. "Eugene : A conceptual manual," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 179-204, March.
    2. Dixon, William J., 1994. "Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 14-32, March.
    3. Derekh Cornwell & Michael Colaresi, 2002. "Holy Trinities, Rivalry Termination, and Conflict," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(4), pages 325-353, October.
    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. Michael Mousseau, 2005. "Comparing New Theory with Prior Beliefs: Market Civilization and the Democratic Peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(1), pages 63-77, February.
    2. Jason Enia & Patrick James, 2015. "Regime Type, Peace, and Reciprocal Effects," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(2), pages 523-539, June.
    3. Michael J. Ireland & Scott Sigmund Gartner, 2001. "Time to Fight," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(5), pages 547-568, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Matthew Fuhrmann & Sarah E. Kreps, 2010. "Targeting Nuclear Programs in War and Peace: A Quantitative Empirical Analysis, 1941-2000," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(6), pages 831-859, December.
    6. Ely Ratner, 2009. "Reaping What You Sow," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 53(3), pages 390-418, June.
    7. Michelle A. Benson, 2005. "The Relevance of Politically Relevant Dyads in the Study of Interdependence and Dyadic Disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(2), pages 113-133, April.
    8. David J. Brulé & Bryan W. Marshall & Brandon C. Prins, 2010. "Opportunities and Presidential Uses of Force," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(5), pages 486-510, November.
    9. Bruce Bueno De Mesquita & Michael T. Koch & Randolph M. Siverson, 2004. "Testing Competing Institutional Explanations of the Democratic Peace: The Case of Dispute Duration," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(4), pages 255-267, September.
    10. 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.
    11. David Brulé, 2006. "Congressional Opposition, the Economy, and U.S. Dispute Initiation, 1946-2000," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(4), pages 463-483, August.
    12. Renato Corbetta & William J. Dixon, 2005. "Danger Beyond Dyads: Third-Party Participants in Militarized Interstate Disputes," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(1), pages 39-61, February.
    13. 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.
    14. Florian Justwan & Sarah K. Fisher, 2017. "Generalized Social Trust and International Dispute Settlement," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(5), pages 717-743, September.
    15. 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.
    16. Cali Mortenson Ellis & Michael C. Horowitz & Allan C. Stam, 2015. "Introducing the LEAD Data Set," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(4), pages 718-741, August.
    17. Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2011. "Disaggregated Trade Flows and International Conflict," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 25, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2006. "Power Positions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(1), pages 3-27, February.
    19. Conconi, Paola & Sahuguet, Nicolas & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2018. "Electoral incentives, term limits, and the sustainability of peace," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 15-26.
    20. Lingyu Lu & Cameron G. Thies, 2010. "Trade Interdependence and the Issues at Stake in the Onset of Militarized Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(4), pages 347-368, 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:jocore:v:49:y:2005:i:5:p:742-769. 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.