It Takes Two: An Explanation of the Democratic Peace
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper, we provide an explanation of the democratic peace hypothesis, i.e., the observation that democracies rarely fight one another. We show that in the presence of information asymmetries and strategic complements, the strategic interaction between two democracies differs from any other dyad. In our model, two democracies induce the highest probability of peaceful resolution of conflicts. But it takes two for peace; one democracy involved in a conflict does not necessarily increases the probability of a peaceful resolution compared to a conflict between two non-democratic regimes. “It takes two to get peace out of an armistice” Bartholomew, Charles L., Minneapolis Journal (April 12, 1898)
منابع مشابه
Might Makes Right or Right Makes Might? Two Systemic Democratic Peace Tales
In a path-breaking article, Wade Huntley (1996) reinterpreted Immanuel Kant’s pacific union as a systemic phenomenon. Huntley’s argument spawned a new wave of inquiry into the evolutionary expansion of the democratic peace, with several empirical studies finding a positive relationship between global democracy and systemic peace (e.g. Crescenzi and Enterline 1999; Gleditsch and Hegre 1997; Kade...
متن کاملThe Democratic Peace Unraveled: It’s the Economy
Recent studies show that the democratic peace correlation is not significant once the potentially confounding variable that can cause both democracy and peace, contract-intensive economy, is considered; this pattern holds in analyses of wars, fatal militarized interstate conflicts (Mousseau 2009), and interstate crises (Mousseau et al. 2013). These studies rescind the primary evidence for democ...
متن کاملMight Makes Right or Right Makes Might
In a path-breaking article, Wade Huntley (1996) reinterpreted Immanuel Kant’s pacific union as a systemic phenomenon. Huntley’s argument spawned a new wave of inquiry into the evolutionary expansion of the democratic peace, with several empirical studies finding a positive relationship between global democracy and systemic peace (e.g. Crescenzi and Enterline 1999; Gleditsch and Hegre 1997; Kade...
متن کاملJabri , the theory of state: the social power and ideal of democratic changes
Mohammed Abed al-jabri has advanced tow main projects in his intelectual endeavours: first, an anattempt to study and reveal, as he say, Arab-islamic reason, second to propuse ideas to restrucutring it with an aim for political changes in The line of democratic order. In this propuse, he confronts, both directly and idirectly, with a theory of state. This research deals with consisteney of...
متن کاملPermanent Friends? Dynamic Difference and the Democratic Peace
Perhaps the simplest explanation for where fault lines lie in a political process involves the presence of an "other." Difference divides and similarity unites. These similarities and differences can in turn orient and propagate conflict. Yet, similarity and difference are also dynamic, evolving in response to changing population characteristics or a new reference point. We offer a simple expla...
متن کامل