Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Political Research Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Werner, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Effects of Political Similarity on the Onset of Militarized Disputes, 1816-1985

Suzanne Werner

Emory University

Historical evidence suggests that international conflicts often concern the management of domestic affairs. States frequently take issue with other states' human rights records and with the composition of their goernments. If domestic politics are frequently the issue in dispute between states, then we should not expect such disagreements to be equally likely to arise between all pairs of states. Since politically similar states manage their domestic affairs in similar fashion, they are less likely to disagree over domestic politics and thus less likely to be involved in conflict. To test the hypothesis that politically similar states are less likely to engage in conflict than are politically disparate states, I use a hazard model that evaluates the risk that peace ends with the onset of a militarized dispute for all dyads in the international system from 1816 to 1985. I find strong support for the hypothesis, even when I control for the pacifying effects of similar democratic states and exclude data from the ideologically charged 20th century. I also find consistent evidence that conflict becomes more likely as the power of each state in the dyad increases, as the geographic distance between states declines, and as the number of past disputes increases. I find weaker support for the pacifying effects of alliances and the dangers of power parity.

Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 53, No. 2, 343-374 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/106591290005300207


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


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
D. Lektzian and M. Souva
A Comparative Theory Test of Democratic Peace Arguments, 1946--2000
Journal of Peace Research, January 1, 2009; 46(1): 17 - 37.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
B. E. Goldsmith, S. K. Chalup, and M. J. Quinlan
Regime Type and International Conflict: Towards a General Model
Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 2008; 45(6): 743 - 763.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
M. Bussmann and J. R. Oneal
Do Hegemons Distribute Private Goods?: A Test of Power-Transition Theory
Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2007; 51(1): 88 - 111.
[Abstract] [PDF]