Regime Changes, Neighborhoods, and Interstate Conflict, 1816-1992

This article investigates whether a new political regime's institutional type and the political composition of its geographic neighborhood influence patterns of intraneighborhood militarized conflict. An event count model is used to analyze data on 360 new political regimes. Variables assess attributes of each new regime's geographic neighborhood, including size, political composition, stability, the presence of alliances, the presence of major powers, the distribution of capability, and the frequency of militarized disputes initiated by and against new regimes. Results show evidence of an interactive relationship between a new regime's type, the political composition of its neighborhood, and militarized disputes. However, independent of the political composition of their neighborhoods, new democratic regimes are less likely to initiate disputes against neighboring states. Furthermore, an inverted U-shaped relationship obtains between the degree of democracy in a neighborhood and the rate at which new regimes initiate disputes against neighboring states. The coherency of regimes in a neighborhood, rather than their type, may play an important role in subsequent patterns of conflict.

[1]  Z. Maoz.  Domestic sources of global change , 1996 .

[2]  Michael D. Ward,et al.  Democratizing for Peace , 1998, American Political Science Review.

[3]  N. Spykman.  Geography and Foreign Policy, II , 1938, American Political Science Review.

[4]  Xavier Coller,et al.  Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation. Southern Europe, South America and Post-Communist Europe , 1996 .

[5]  T. Clifton Morgan,et al.  Take Two Democracies and Call Me in the Morning: A Prescription for Peace , 1992 .

[6]  A. Przeworski,et al.  Modernization: Theories and Facts , 1997, World Politics.

[7]  A. Enterline.  Regime Changes and Interstate Conflict, 1816-1992 , 1998 .

[8]  S. Huntington.  The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century , 1991 .

[9]  Paul F. Diehl,et al.  Geography and war: A review and assessment of the empirical literature , 1991 .

[10]  Stuart A. Bremer,et al.  Democracy and militarized interstate conflict, 1816–1965 , 1993 .

[11]  Dan Reiter,et al.  Assessing the Dyadic Nature of the Democratic Peace, 1918–88 , 1996, American Political Science Review.

[12]  Charles S. Gochman,et al.  Interstate Metrics: Conceptualizing, Operationalizing, and Measuring the Geographic Proximity of States Since the Congress of Vienna , 1991, The New Geopolitics.

[13]  Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered , 1997 .

[14]  Harvey Starr,et al.  Inquiry, logic, and international politics , 1989 .

[15]  M. Midlarsky,et al.  Handbook of war studies , 1990 .

[16]  Bruce Bueno de Mesquita,et al.  Reason and War , 1986, American Political Science Review.

[17]  N. Spykman,et al.  The Geography of Peace. , 1944, American Journal of International Law.

[18]  Harvey Starr,et al.  Democratic Dominoes , 1991 .

[19]  Ted Robert Gurr,et al.  Transitions to Democracy: Tracking Democracy''s Third Wave with the Polity III Data , 1996 .

[20]  Jonathan M. DiCicco,et al.  Revolution and War , 1992, World Politics.

[21]  J. David Singer,et al.  Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816–1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns , 1996 .

[22]  F. Pearson.  Foreign Military Interventions and Domestic Disputes , 1974 .

[23]  N. P. Gleditsch.  Geography, democracy, and peace , 1995 .

[24]  Arthur H. Feiner,et al.  Bewitched, Bothered, and Bewildered , 1996 .

[25]  G. Blainey.  Causes of War , 1973 .

[26]  T. Clifton Morgan,et al.  Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World , 1994 .

[27]  William R. Thompson,et al.  A Tale of Two Democratic Peace Critiques , 1997 .

[28]  Harvey E. Starr.  Joining Political and Geographic Perspectives: Geopolitics and International Relations , 1991, The New Geopolitics.

[29]  Z. Maoz,et al.  Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1976 , 1984 .

[30]  M. Hermann,et al.  Putting Military Intervention into the Democratic Peace , 1997 .

[31]  Zeev Maoz,et al.  Normative and Structural Causes of Democratic Peace, 1946–1986 , 1993, American Political Science Review.

[32]  J. O'neal,et al.  The Classical Liberals Were Right: Democracy, Interdependence, and Conflict, 1950–1985 , 1997 .

[33]  N. P. Gleditsch,et al.  Peace and Democracy , 1997 .

[34]  Alfred Thayer Mahan,et al.  The Influence of Sea Power upon History , 1890 .

[35]  Matthew Krain,et al.  State-Sponsored Mass Murder , 1997 .

[36]  J. David Singer,et al.  Formal Alliances, 1816-1965: an Extension of the Basic Data , 1969 .

[37]  B. B. D. Mesquita,et al.  War and reason : domestic and international imperatives , 1992 .

[38]  Zeev Maoz,et al.  Alliance, contiguity, wealth, and political stability: Is the lack of conflict among democracies a statistical artifact? 1 , 1992 .

[39]  Harvey E. Starr.  Revolution and War: Rethinking the Linkage Between Internal and External Conflict , 1994 .

[40]  Ted Robert Gurr,et al.  Persistence and Change in Political Systems, 1800–1971 , 1974 .

[41]  Mark J. C. Crescenzi,et al.  Ripples from the Waves? A Systemic, Time-Series Analysis of Democracy, Democratization, and Interstate War , 1999 .

[42]  S. Bremer.  Dangerous Dyads , 1992 .

[43]  H. Mackinder.  Democratic Ideals and Reality , 1943 .

[44]  K. Holsti.  Peace and War: Armed Conflicts and International Order 1648–1989: Contents , 1991 .

[45]  John A. Vasquez.  Why Do Neighbors Fight? Proximity, Interaction, or Territoriality , 1995 .

[46]  Zeev Maoz,et al.  Joining the Club of Nations: Political Development and International Conflict, 1816–1976 , 1989 .

[47]  Randolph M. Siverson,et al.  Opportunity, Willingness, and the Diffusion of War , 1990, American Political Science Review.