Gallop, Max 2017. More dangerous than dyads: how a third party enables rationalist explanations for war. Journal of Theoretical Politics, p. 095162981668288.
Lee, Yusin 2017. Interdependence, issue importance, and the 2009 Russia-Ukraine gas conflict. Energy Policy, Vol. 102, p. 199.
Miller, Charles and Taylor, Helen 2017. Can economic interests trump ethnic hostility? Trading ties versus outgroup hostility in Australian perceptions of China as a security threat. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, Vol. 17, Issue. 1, p. 67.
Muratbekova, Albina 2017. The Sino-Indian border issue as a factor for the development of bilateral relations. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, p. 205789111769045.
Pant, Meha 2017. Intercultural Relations and Ethnic Conflict in Asia.
Ásgeirsdóttir, Áslaug and Steinwand, Martin C. 2016. Distributive Outcomes in Contested Maritime Areas. Journal of Conflict Resolution, p. 002200271667756.
Feldman, Nizan and Sadeh, Tal 2016. War and Third-party Trade. Journal of Conflict Resolution, p. 002200271664432.
Gartzke, Erik and Westerwinter, Oliver 2016. The complex structure of commercial peace contrasting trade interdependence, asymmetry, and multipolarity. Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 53, Issue. 3, p. 325.
Gawarkiewicz, Thomas and Tang, Yao 2016. The Relationship between Political Tensions, Trade and Capital Flows in ASEAN Plus Three. The World Economy,
Heilmann, Kilian 2016. Does political conflict hurt trade? Evidence from consumer boycotts. Journal of International Economics, Vol. 99, p. 179.
Jager, Nicolas W. 2016. Transboundary Cooperation in European Water Governance - A set-theoretic analysis of International River Basins. Environmental Policy and Governance, Vol. 26, Issue. 4, p. 278.
Karam, Fida and Zaki, Chahir 2016. How did wars dampen trade in the MENA region?. Applied Economics, Vol. 48, Issue. 60, p. 5909.
Kim, Dongkyu 2016. The effects of inter-state conflicts on foreign investment flows to the developing world: Enduring vs ephemeral risk of conflicts. International Political Science Review, Vol. 37, Issue. 4, p. 422.
Kim, Kwang-Ho 2016. Impacts of Foreign Direct Investment on the Most Centralized Country: Evidence from Gaeseong Industrial Complex in North Korea. Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 58, Issue. 4, p. 305.
Lee, Hoon and Rider, Toby J. 2016. Evaluating the Effects of Trade on Militarized Behavior in the Context of Territorial Threat. Foreign Policy Analysis,
Melin, Molly M. 2016. Business, peace, and world politics: The role of third parties in conflict resolution. Business Horizons, Vol. 59, Issue. 5, p. 493.
Poznansky, Michael and Scroggs, Matt K. 2016. Ballots and Blackmail: Coercive Diplomacy and the Democratic Peace. International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 60, Issue. 4, p. 731.
Pratto, Felicia 2016. On power and empowerment. British Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 55, Issue. 1, p. 1.
Tanaka, Seiki Tago, Atsushi and Skrede Gleditsch, Kristian 2016. Seeing the Lexus for the Olive Trees? Public Opinion, Economic Interdependence, and Interstate Conflict. International Interactions, p. 1.
Chapman, Terrence L. McDonald, Patrick J. and Moser, Scott 2015. The Domestic Politics of Strategic Retrenchment, Power Shifts, and Preventive War. International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 59, Issue. 1, p. 133.
Research appears to substantiate the liberal conviction that trade fosters global peace. Still, existing understanding of linkages between conflict and international economics is limited in at least two ways. First, cross-border economic relationships are far broader than just trade. Global capital markets dwarf the exchange of goods and services, and states engage in varying degrees of monetary policy coordination. Second, the manner in which economics is said to inhibit conflict behavior is implausible in light of new analytical insights about the causes of war. We discuss, and then demonstrate formally, how interdependence can influence states' recourse to military violence. The risk of disrupting economic linkages—particularly access to capital—may occasionally deter minor contests between interdependent states, but such opportunity costs will typically fail to preclude militarized disputes. Instead, interdependence offers nonmilitarized avenues for communicating resolve through costly signaling. Our quantitative results show that capital interdependence contributes to peace independent of the effects of trade, democracy, interest, and other variables.
This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
Full text views reflects the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.
Abstract views reflect the number of visits to the article landing page.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd July 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.