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 JUNGBLUT, B. M. E. Articles by STOLL, R. J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Liberal Peace and Conflictive Interactions: The Onset of Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1950-78

Department of Political Science, University of Central Florida

RICHARD J. STOLL

Department of Political Science, Rice University stoll{at}rice.edu

Over the past few years, there has been an increasing focus on the connection at the dyadic level between democracy, interdependence, and international conflict. This has led to some contention, with scholars taking different positions on both substantive and methodological matters. This article seeks to advance this literature by building explicitly on the work of Oneal & Russett. It adds an additional facet to this literature: exploring the impact of conflictive interactions on the chances of a dyad experiencing conflict. A conflictive interaction is the presence of a conflict below the level at which military force is used. The question is whether the issue at stake in a conflictive interaction influences the chances of the dyad experiencing a militarized interstate dispute (MID). The scope of the research is all dyads from 1950 to 1978, with observations at the quarter-year. Results are generally consistent with Oneal & Russett. However, there are several differences. First, the effect of joint democracy, while negative, is not statistically significant (this may be an artifact of our research design). Second, the coefficient for the higher trade-to-GDP ratio, while positive as in their work, is statistically significant here. But trade does reduce conflict (as embodied in the lower trade-to-GDP ratio) even when including the `peaceyears' correction for temporal dependence. As for the impact of issue area, conflictive interactions involving issues of `high politics' increase the chances of a dispute. Thus, elements of both `high politics' and the liberal peace have independent impacts on the chances of an MID outbreak.

Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 39, No. 5, 527-546 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0022343302039005002


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. E. Goldsmith A Liberal Peace in Asia? Journal of Peace Research, January 1, 2007; 44(1): 5 - 27. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. E. Goldsmith A Universal Proposition? Region, Conflict, War and the Robustness of the Kantian Peace European Journal of International Relations, December 1, 2006; 12(4): 533 - 563. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Dacey The Status of Likelihood Claims in International Relations and Peace Science Conflict Management and Peace Science, July 1, 2005; 22(3): 189 - 200. [Abstract] [PDF]