Suchergebnisse

Drawing on recent liberal peace and Asian security research, this article assesses the relevance of prominent "Kantian" hypotheses for understanding the international politics of Asia. While many regional analysts' expectations about the general efficacy of international organizations for reducing conflict in Asia are confirmed, specific assertions about ASEAN and other well-known organizations do not find strong support. Although the role of regime type is often ignored in discussions of international security in Asia, there is qualified evidence for a democratic peace effect in Asia. The third leg of the Kantian triangle, international economic interdependence, does not seem consistently important for reducing conflict in Asia, even though there is a high level of trade interdependence among Asian states. In fact, higher levels of trade with China tend to increase conflict among Asian dyads including China. Asian states' relations with states outside the region conform well to liberal expectations. While the findings support the idea that Asia is to some extent "different," they also show that general Kantian and realist theories are relevant, and that common assumptions of specialists on the region are not always in accord with the regularities of conflict and peace in Asia.

Drawing on recent liberal peace and Asian security research, this article assesses the relevance of prominent "Kantian" hypotheses for understanding the international politics of Asia. While many regional analysts' expectations about the general efficacy of international organizations for reducing conflict in Asia are confirmed, specific assertions about ASEAN and other well-known organizations do not find strong support. Although the role of regime type is often ignored in discussions of international security in Asia, there is qualified evidence for a democratic peace effect in Asia. The third leg of the Kantian triangle, international economic interdependence, does not seem consistently important for reducing conflict in Asia, even though there is a high level of trade interdependence among Asian states. In fact, higher levels of trade with China tend to increase conflict among Asian dyads including China. Asian states' relations with states outside the region conform well to liberal expectations. While the findings support the idea that Asia is to some extent "different," they also show that general Kantian and realist theories are relevant, and that common assumptions of specialists on the region are not always in accord with the regularities of conflict and peace in Asia.

Competing hypotheses are tested on an extensive set of defense-burden data to determine the general factors that influence states' levels of military spending. Results provide some clear answers to longstanding questions and supply new findings that beg further investigation. When controls are introduced for domestic political and economic factors, several international factors, including alliances and rivalries, lose statistical significance. Consistent with liberal theory, regime type has a robust effect: democracies spend proportionately less on defense than other states. As implied by realism, under conditions of economic growth or high levels of wealth, "extra" resources are diverted disproportionately to the military.

Economics of War and Peace: Economic, Legal, and Political Perspectives brings together recent, cutting-edge research on economic factors affecting peace and war. It is the only book to explicitly unite economic, legal, and political scholarship to focus

Economies of War and Peace: Economic, Legal, and Political Perspectives brings together recent, cutting-edge research on economic factors affecting peace and war. This important area of continuing research was the focus of an international conference held at the University of Sydney in June 2009 and these chapters are partly drawn from among the best contributions to that meeting. The book weaves together threads from a number of themes in current research including new theoretical perspectives on the economic foundations of peace, violence and war within countries, connections between international trade and inter-state conflict, and the role of legal/institutional factors in international and internal conflict. Through a focused exploration of these related topics emerge areas of scholarly consensus as well as areas of continued debate. International in scope, it is the only book to explicitly bring together economic, legal and political scholarship to focus on the problem of conflict. It employs a range of modern social science analytical methods, including qualitative cases, econometrics, and game-theoretic models, to rigorously advance understanding of conflict within and between countries.