Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

State Development, Parity, and International Conflict

  • DOUGLAS M. GIBLER (a1)
Abstract

This article explains the empirical connection between dyadic capability differences and international conflict as a consequence of how, when, and where states enter the international system. State capabilities are largely static, and, since states enter the system in geographic clusters, the processes of state maturation affect contiguous and regionally proximate states similarly. This makes dyadic capability differences static as well. The lack of change in capability differences over time suggests that the parity-conflict relationship is largely a product of the factors associated with state system entry. Indeed, as I demonstrate, several different proxies for the conditions of state system entry separately eliminate any statistical relationship between parity and militarized dispute onset, 1816–2001. I also find no relationship between parity and the wars that have occurred during that same time period. These results have a number of implications for the role of power and capabilities in explaining international conflict.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Doug Gibler is Professor of Political Science in the Institute for Social Science Research at the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL (dmgibler@ua.edu).
Footnotes
Hide All
Thanks to Mark Nieman and John Vasquez for comments on an earlier draft, and thanks to Andrew Enterline for answering several questions related to the CINC score measure. Special appreciation goes to Marc Hutchison who first pointed out to me that most wars are actually fought between unequal states and coalitions. Finally, the National Science Foundation (Awards No. 0923406 and No. 1260492) generously supported research that contributed greatly to this project.
Footnotes
References
Hide All
BeckNathaniel, Katz Jonathan N., and Tucker Richard. 1998. “Taking Time Seriously: Time-Series-Cross-Section Analysis with a Binary Dependent Variable.” American Journal of Political Science 42 (4): 1260–88.
BlaineyGeoffrey. 1988. Causes of War. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
BouldingKenneth E. 1962. Conflict and Defense: A General Theory. New York: Harper.
BremerStuart A. 1992. “Dangerous Dyads: Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Interstate War, 1816-1965.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 36 (2): 309–41.
Bueno de MesquitaBruce. 1983. The War Trap. New Haven: Yale University Press.
CentenoMiguel Angel. 2003. Blood and Debt: War and the Nation-State in Latin America. University Park, PA: Penn State Press.
EfirdBrian, Kugler Jacek, and Genna Gaspare. 2003. “From War to Integration: Generalizing Power Transition Theory.” International Interactions 29 (4): 293313.
FearonJames D. 1995. “Rationalist Explanations for War.” International Organization 49 (3): 379414.
GellerDaniel S. 2000. “Power and International Conflict.” In What Do We Know About War?, eds Vasquez John A.. Plymouth, UK: Rowan and Littlefield, 259–77.
GiblerDouglas M. 2009. International Military Alliances, 1648–2008. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
GiblerDouglas M. and Little Erin K.. 2016. “Heterogeneity in the Militarized Interstate Disputes (MIDs), 1816–2001: What Fatal MIDs Cannot Fix”, Political Science Research and Methods, 111. doi: 10.1017/psrm.2016.11.
HerbstJeffrey. 2000. States and Power in Africa: Comparative Lessons in Authority and Control. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
KaderaKelly M. 2001. The Power-Conflict Story: A Dynamic Model of Interstate Rivalry. Ann Arbour, MI: University of Michigan Press.
KaderaKelly M., and Sorokin Gerald. 2004. “Measuring National Power.” International Interactions 30 (3): 211–30.
KrugmanPaul R. and Obstfeld Maurice. 2009. International Economics: Theory and Policy. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
KuglerJacek, and Lemke Douglas. 2000. The Power Transition Research Program: Assessing Theoretical and Empirical Advances. In Handbook of War Studies II, ed. Midlarsky Manus. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 129163.
LeeRonald. 2011. “The Outlook for Population Growth.” Science 333 (6042): 569–73.
LemkeDouglas. 1995. “The Tyranny of Distance: Redefining Relevant Dyads.” International Interactions 21 (1): 2338.
LemkeDouglas. 2002. Regions of War and Peace, Vol. 80. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
MarshallMonty G., Gurr Ted R., Davenport Christian, and Jaggers Keith. 2002. “Polity IV Project: 1800–1999.” Comparative Political Studies 35 (1): 4045.
MorgenthauHans. 1960. Politics Among Nations: the struggle for power and peace, 3rd ed. New York: Knopf. Originally published in 1948.
OrganskiAbramo FK. 1958. World Politics. New York, NY: Knopf.
OrganskiAbramo, and Kugler J.. 1980. The War Ledger. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
PowellRobert. 2006. “War as a Commitment Problem.” International Organization 60 (01): 169203.
ReedWilliam. 2003. “Information, Power, and War.” American Political Science Review 97 (4): 633–41.
SarkeesMeredith Reid, and Wayman Frank. 2010. Resort to War: 1816–2007. Washington DC: CQ Press.
SignorinoCurtis S., and Ritter Jeffrey M.. 1999. “Tau-b or Not Tau-b: Measuring the Similarity of Foreign Policy Positions.” International Studies Quarterly 43 (1): 115–44.
SingerJ. David, Bremer Stuart A., and Stuckey John. 1972. Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820–1965. In Peace, War and Numbers, ed. Russett Bruce. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. pp. 1948.
StarrHarvey. 1978. “Opportunity and Willingness as Ordering Concepts in the Study of War.” International Interactions 4 (4): 363–87.
StinnettDouglas M., Tir Jaroslav, Schafer Philip, Diehl Paul F., and Gochman Charles. 2002. “The Correlates of War Project Direct Contiguity Data, Version 3.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 19 (2): 5967.
ThiesCameron G. 2005. “War, Rivalry and State Building in Latin America.” American Journal of Political Science 49 (3): 451–65.
ThiesCameron, Chyzh Olga, and Nieman Mark. 2016. “The Spatial Dimensions of State Fiscal Capacity: The Mechanisms of International Influence on Domestic Extractive Efforts.” Political Science Research and Methods 4 (1): 526.
ThompsonWilliam R. 2001. “Identifying Rivals and Rivalries in World Politics.” International Studies Quarterly 45 (4): 557–86.
TillyCharles. 1975. The Formation of National States in Western Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
TillyCharles. 1985. “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime.” In Bringing the State Back In, eds. Evans Peter B., Rueschemeyer Dietrich, and Skocpol Theda. New York: Cambridge University Press, 169–87.
TillyCharles. 1990. Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990–1990. New York: Blackwell Publishing Inc.
VasquezJohn A. 2009. The War Puzzle Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press.
WaymanFrank Whelon. 1996. “Power shifts and the onset of War.” In Parity and War, eds. Kugler Jacek and Lemke Douglas. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 145–62.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary Materials

Gibler supplementary material
Appendix

 PDF (1.4 MB)
1.4 MB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 28
Total number of PDF views: 381 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 779 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 24th February 2017 - 19th October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.