Suchergebnisse

Addressing decision-making over interstate disputes and the democratic peace thesis, Choi and James build an interactive foreign policy decision-making model with a special emphasis on civil-military relations, conscription, diplomatic channels and media openness. Each is significant in explaining decisions over dispute involvement. The temporal scope is broad while the geographic scope is global. The result is sophisticated analysis of the causes of conflict and factors that can ameliorate it, and a generalizable approach to the study of foreign relations. The findings that media openness con

Abstract
Although civil society has significant implications for international peace, it has been overlooked and not given enough attention. Instead, existing studies focus on other factors that contribute to peace. In this study, we compare five prominent peace factors, namely, democratic peace, Cold War peace, contractualist peace, capitalist peace, and territorial peace, to a robust civil society. Our research presents a unique theoretical argument that a robust civil society can have a pacifying effect on international conflict. This is because it can organize a united front against belligerent leaders, solve collective action problems, and take immediate action against leaders' war decisions in pursuit of a common peace agenda. We begin by building a canonical democratic peace model and then compare the results related to civil society and each of the five peace factors. Our findings provide supporting evidence that a robust civil society has a stronger pacifying effect compared to democratic, Cold War, contractualist, capitalist, and territorial peace, respectively. Our empirical results are significant for academics and policymakers, highlighting the importance of building a robust civil society in the pursuit of perpetual peace.

AbstractWhether Islam is responsible for increased suicide terrorist attacks is a salient but highly controversial issue. Using independently produced demographics data, we investigate whether there is a correlation between Islam and suicide attacks. We find that (1) countries with greater Muslim populations are likely to experience more suicide attacks, (2) countries with greater Sunni Muslim populations are likely to encounter more suicide attacks, and (3) countries with greater Hanafi Muslim populations, in contrast to other Sunni legal schools, face the greatest risk of experiencing suicide attacks. The overall analysis suggests that Islam is positively associated with suicide attacks, although the degree of its association is not uniform among all branches.

AbstractDoes the rise of nationalism lead to immigration policy change? By focusing on elite‐led nationalism, this study offers a novel perspective: When top political leaders rely on nationalism as their legitimation strategy, they are more disposed to adopt policies aimed at strict immigration control, such as the imposition of sanctions on illegal immigrants, due to their hands being tied. We perform a battery of empirical tests using a cross‐national, time‐series data for 33 countries for the years 1980–2010. We find evidence that nationalist countries are positively associated with heightened immigration control. This finding is robust even after possible reverse causality is taken into account. The overall analysis illustrates that nationalism is a significant factor in explaining why countries are pushing for more restrictive immigration control in the contemporary world.

In this study, we argue that ethnic inclusiveness is an important democratic norm that fosters interstate peace. When two states are socialized into the notion of ethnic tolerance, they acquire the ability to reach cooperative arrangements in time of crisis. Based on cross-national time-series data analysis covering the period 1950–2001, we illustrate how two states that are inclusive of their politically relevant ethnic groups are less likely to experience interstate disputes than states that remain exclusive. This finding was robust, regardless of sample size, intensity of the dispute, model specification, or estimation method. Therefore, we believe in the existence of ethnic peace: ethnic inclusiveness represents an unambiguous force for democratic peace.

Are states that engage in foreign military interventions vulnerable to subsequent transnational terrorist attacks? If so, do all types of foreign interventions stimulate terrorism? Using data on international military interventions for 125 to 182 countries during the period from 1970 to 2005, we demonstrate that states experience more terrorism after they engage in military interventions. In particular, politico-strategic use of military force abroad—for example, interference in another country's domestic disputes, territorial interventions, or interventions to affect local politics and policy—leads to increased subsequent transnational terrorist attacks for the intervener. In contrast, socioeconomic foreign military interventions, such as those geared toward providing humanitarian relief, protecting social groups, or securing economic interests, do not lead to an increase in transnational terrorist attacks against intervening states.

This study asserts that countries with large internally displaced populations (IDPs) are more likely to experience a higher rate of suicide terrorism. After demonstrating this, the study tests four intervening factors hypothesized to drive the relationship between IDPs and suicide attacks: IDPs are expected (1) to increase the pool of potential suicide recruits, thereby lowering the labor costs for suicide terrorist groups; (2) to increase local ethnic conflicts that foster a favorable environment for suicide terrorism; (3) to worsen the human rights conditions in countries, prompting aggrieved people to support suicide terrorist tactics; and (4) to raise the counterterrorism and policing costs of the state, enabling terrorists to plan and execute suicide attacks. Results from negative binomial regression and Tobit models show evidence for the IDPs-suicide terrorism connection. When recursive models are employed to evaluate the effects of four intervening variables, the results most consistently support human rights violations as a significant and substantive mediator between IDPs and suicide attacks.

This study examines the effect of foreign military interventions on the incidence of suicide attacks. It presents three theoretical explanations. Foreign military interventions may boost insurgent use of suicide attacks by (a) fomenting a nationalist backlash that sanctions the use of more extreme and unconventional tactics like suicide attacks, (b) providing more and better targets against which suicide attacks can be launched, or (c) prompting insurgents to use suicide tactics in order to overcome their power asymmetries and to confront better defended targets that are enhanced by interventions. We test these competing explanations using a battery of statistical tests on cross-national, time-series data for 138 countries during the period from 1981 to 2005. We find that only foreign interventions with specific features—pro-government interventions involving larger numbers of ground troops—boost suicide attacks in countries experiencing interventions. This finding suggests that by tipping the balance of power against insurgents and hardening targets in the context of assisting a local government, foreign military interventions are likely to increase the use of suicide attacks by regime challengers.

Democracy, human rights, and terrorism are major foreign policy issues. However, among these issues, what do the US leaders care about the most? This study assesses the degree to which Washington responds militarily to threats to democratic institutions, human rights abuses, and terrorist activity in other countries. Based on a cross-national, time-series data analysis of 164 countries for the years 1981 to 2005, this study presents empirical models that evaluate the relative importance of these issues for contemporary American foreign and security policy. It turns out that, all other things being equal, the United States is likely to engage in military campaigns for humanitarian reasons that focus on human rights protection rather than for its own security interests such as democracy promotion or terrorism reduction. This finding is extremely robust and reinforced by case illustrations that support a causal explanation for US intervention with a basic and sustained place for human rights protection.