This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Maoz, Z. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Peace by Empire? Conflict Outcomes and International Stability, 1816-1976

Department of Political Science University of Haifa

This study attempts to explore the relationship between dispute outcomes and international stability. Stability is defined as a period characterized by the absence of violent-ridden or violent-prone interactions among states. Two models of international stability are discussed. The 'peace by empire' model posits that stability tends to increase following decisive victories and imposed settlements in which the victors subdue the losers. The 'prudence in victory' model contends that stability is enhanced following symmetrical outcomes in which the grievance of the parties toward the post-dispute status quo are minimized. A test of these models on a random sample of serious interstate disputes between 1816-1976 suggests that: a) Both nation level outcomes (i.e., the identity of the winners and losers) and dyadic level outcomes (i.e., the mode of resolution or non-resolution of the dispute) are significantly related to the degree of subsequent stability, b) This relationship is consistent with the expectations of the 'peace by empire' model but inconsistent with the expectations of the 'prudence in victo ry' model. However, c) winners of past disputes — even those that ended in imposed settlements — are fre quently forced to initiate subsequent disputes in order to preserve past achievements.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 21, No. 3, 227-241 (1984)
DOI: 10.1177/002234338402100303


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. A. Hartzell Settling Civil Wars: Armed Opponents' Fates and the Duration of the Peace Conflict Management and Peace Science, September 1, 2009; 26(4): 347 - 365. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. L. Quackenbush and J. F. Venteicher Settlements, Outcomes, and the Recurrence of Conflict Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 2008; 45(6): 723 - 742. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Tir Never-Ending Conflicts? Territorial Changes as Potential Solutions for Territorial Disputes Conflict Management and Peace Science, January 1, 2003; 20(2): 59 - 83. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Suzuki, V. Krause, and J. D. Singer The Correlates of War Project: a Bibliographic History of the Scientific Study of War and Peace, 1964-2000 Conflict Management and Peace Science, January 1, 2002; 19(2): 69 - 107. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. R. Hensel An Evolutionary Approach To the Study of Interstate Rivalry Conflict Management and Peace Science, January 1, 1999; 17(2): 175 - 206. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. R. Hensel Charting A Course To Conflict: Territorial Issues and Interstate Conflict, 1816-1992 Conflict Management and Peace Science, January 1, 1996; 15(1): 43 - 73. [Abstract] [PDF]