|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Beneath the Surface: Regime Type and International Interaction, 1953-78
Brett Ashley Leeds
Department of Political Science, Florida State University
David R. Davis
Department of Political Science, Emory University
The empirical finding that democracies do not fight each other has long suggested that regime type influences international behavior. In the research reported here, we demonstrate that the democratic peace is only the most visible manifestation of the impact of domestic political structure on international relations. We consider the complete range of cooperative and conflictual interaction of each state in the international system with every dyadic partner in its politically relevant international environment between 1953 and 1978. We demonstrate a strong and consistent relationship between regime type and foreign policy behavior, both at the monadic and the dyadic level. States with more democratic characteristics tend to behave more cooperatively and less conflictually in the international system; these tendencies intensify when democratic states interact with other democracies. Meanwhile, non-democracies tend to treat democracies with more conflictual and less cooperative behavior. The influence of the internal institutional structures of states on their external behavior extends well beyond decisions to go to war. The empirical findings reported herein suggest that future research will benefit from increased attention to the relationships among state structure, leaders' incentives, foreign policy behavior, and international outcomes.
Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 36, No. 1,
5-21 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343399036001001

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. L. Quackenbush and M. Rudy
Evaluating the Monadic Democratic Peace
Conflict Management and Peace Science,
July 1, 2009;
26(3):
268 - 285.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Fuhrmann
Taking a Walk on the Supply Side: The Determinants of Civilian Nuclear Cooperation
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
April 1, 2009;
53(2):
181 - 208.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. J.C. Crescenzi, A. J. Enterline, and S. B. Long
Bringing Cooperation Back In: A Dynamic Model of Interstate Interaction
Conflict Management and Peace Science,
July 1, 2008;
25(3):
264 - 280.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. E. Hansen, S. McLaughlin Mitchell, and S. C. Nemeth
IO Mediation of Interstate Conflicts: Moving Beyond the Global versus Regional Dichotomy
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
April 1, 2008;
52(2):
295 - 325.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. R. Boehmer
A Reassessment of Democratic Pacifism at the Monadic Level of Analysis
Conflict Management and Peace Science,
February 1, 2008;
25(1):
81 - 94.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Filson and S. Werner
Sensitivity to Costs of Fighting versus Sensitivity to Losing the Conflict: Implications for War Onset, Duration, and Outcomes
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
October 1, 2007;
51(5):
691 - 714.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Makim
Resources for Security and Stability? The Politics of Regional Cooperation on the Mekong, 1957-2001
The Journal of Environment Development,
March 1, 2002;
11(1):
5 - 52.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Rasler and W. R. Thompson
Rivalries and the Democratic Peace in the Major Power Subsystem
Journal of Peace Research,
November 1, 2001;
38(6):
659 - 683.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Lemke and W. Reed
The Relevance of Politically Relevant Dyads
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
February 1, 2001;
45(1):
126 - 144.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Reiter
Military Strategy and the Outbreak of International Conflict: Quantitative Empirical Tests, 1903-1992
Journal of Conflict Resolution,
June 1, 1999;
43(3):
366 - 387.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|