Political Competition and the Initiation of International Conflict: A New Perspective on the Institutional Foundations of Democratic Peace

Although the empirical pattern of democratic peace is well-established, debate continues over its theoretical explanation. While theory tends to focus on specific institutional or normative characteristics within regimes, empirical studies often test this indirectly, using aggregate measures of types of political regimes as a whole. The analysis in this paper more directly assesses expectations about core characteristics of regime type for the likelihood of interstate conflict initiation. We advance a theory about political competition which leads to expectations that it, rather than political participation or constraining institutions, is the most important source of the observed democratic peace. Specifically, leaders facing a viable opposition are most concerned with forestalling potential criticism of their foreign policies. Initiating conflict with a democracy would leave them vulnerable to opposition criticism on normative and costs-of-war bases. Potential vulnerability to such opposition criticism can be seen as a necessary condition for the operation of mechanisms such as audience costs or public-goods logic proposed by existing theories. We present robust statistical and machine-learning based results for directed dyads in the post-World War II era supporting our argument that high-competition states avoid initiating fights with democracies.Benjamin Goldsmith gratefully acknowledges support from the Australian Research Council through a Future Fellowship (FT140100763)

Regional cultures of war and peace: dynamics of ethnonationalist mobilization and the spread of conflicts in post-Soviet and post-Yugoslav regions

In their last years of existence the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) experienced a similar state of affairs. Yet, in the years after the break-up of each, the occurrence and spillover of ethnopolitical conflicts was comparatively higher on the territory of former Yugoslavia. In addressing this puzzle, the thesis seeks to argue that the difference can be accounted for by looking at the distinctive dynamics of ethnonationalist mobilization in the core and peripheral republics. The central hypothesis is that the timing of mobilization with respect to political liberalization matters for the likelihood of conflict occurrence. Moreover, it is not only important to consider when mobilization takes place, but also where. In that respect, the distinction between the core and periphery is critical. Combining these two hypotheses, the dissertation expects that conflict is most likely to occur in regions where both core and peripheral republics mobilize prior to political liberalization. Furthermore, such dyads are more likely to result in conflict spillover. The explanation for the difference in regional conflict formations in the Western Balkans and the former Soviet territory hinges on these spatio-temporal assumptions. It identifies the most precarious dyads in the former Yugoslavia, as early mobilization was present within both core and some peripheral republics. On the other hand, in the former Soviet Union, the core underwent late mobilization, while the experiences of peripheral states varied. The contributions of the thesis are three-fold: 1) it explores the links between identity politics and international relations; 2) it contributes to the literature on the democratization-conflict nexus; and finally, 3) it offers a non-institutional explanation for the difference in state collapses and ensuing conflicts in the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia

Regional cultures of war and peace: dynamics of ethnonationalist mobilization and the spread of conflicts in post-Soviet and post-Yugoslav regions

In their last years of existence the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) experienced a similar state of affairs. Yet, in the years after the break-up of each, the occurrence and spillover of ethnopolitical conflicts was comparatively higher on the territory of former Yugoslavia. In addressing this puzzle, the thesis seeks to argue that the difference can be accounted for by looking at the distinctive dynamics of ethnonationalist mobilization in the core and peripheral republics. The central hypothesis is that the timing of mobilization with respect to political liberalization matters for the likelihood of conflict occurrence. Moreover, it is not only important to consider when mobilization takes place, but also where. In that respect, the distinction between the core and periphery is critical. Combining these two hypotheses, the dissertation expects that conflict is most likely to occur in regions where both core and peripheral republics mobilize prior to political liberalization. Furthermore, such dyads are more likely to result in conflict spillover. The explanation for the difference in regional conflict formations in the Western Balkans and the former Soviet territory hinges on these spatio-temporal assumptions. It identifies the most precarious dyads in the former Yugoslavia, as early mobilization was present within both core and some peripheral republics. On the other hand, in the former Soviet Union, the core underwent late mobilization, while the experiences of peripheral states varied. The contributions of the thesis are three-fold: 1) it explores the links between identity politics and international relations; 2) it contributes to the literature on the democratization-conflict nexus; and finally, 3) it offers a non-institutional explanation for the difference in state collapses and ensuing conflicts in the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia

Democracy Sausage with Mark Kenny: After Afghanistan

On this episode of Democracy Sausage, journalist Karen Middleton and foreign policy specialist Gorana Grgić join Mark Kenny to discuss the 20-year war in Afghanistan, the prospects for the country with the Taliban back in power, and the damage done to the United States’ reputation. With the departure of American and allied troops, the nearly 20-year war in Afghanistan - the longest in United States history - is over. But what does the future now hold for the country and its people, who are now back under the control of the Taliban? What are other global powers making of the manner of the Biden administration’s withdrawal? And what impact will the decision have on the credibility and reputation of the United States in the years ahead? Author of An Unwinnable War: Australia in Afghanistan Karen Middleton and Dr Gorana Grgić from the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney join Professor Mark Kenny on this episode of Democracy Sausage