Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:58:47.770Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Identifying the Culprit: Democracy, Dictatorship, and Dispute Initiation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2003

DAN REITER  and
ALLAN C. STAM
DAN REITER
Affiliation:
Associate and Winship Research Professor, Department of Political Science, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322 (dreiter@emory.edu).
ALLAN C. STAM
Affiliation:
Associate Professor of Government and Deputy Director, Rockefeller Center, 211 Silsby Hall, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 (allan.stam@dartmouth.edu).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Peceny, Beer, and Sanchez-Terry (2002) find that interstate dyads containing a democracy and a personalist dictatorship are more likely than other types of dyads to experience militarized disputes. They argue that this is because democracies are especially likely to challenge personalist dictatorships. Unfortunately, they do not identify which state in a conflictual dyad initiated the dispute and so cannot present data to support their claim. We improve on their research design by using “directed dyads” to identify potential initiators. We confirm their finding that democracy–personalist dictatorship dyads are particularly conflict-prone, but we also disprove their argument that democracies attack dictators, as we find that personalist dictatorships are more likely to challenge democracies, but not vice versa. We also find that other kinds of autocracies, namely, military regimes and single-party regimes, are more likely to challenge democracies than vice versa. Our findings have important implications for understanding the relationships between regime type and international conflict.The authors thank Caroline Beer very much for assistance with data.

Type
FORUM
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 97 , Issue 2 , May 2003 , pp. 333 - 337
Copyright
© 2003 by the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bennett D. Scott Stam Allan C. III 1996 The Duration of Interstate Wars, 1816–1985 American Political Science Review 90 239-57Google Scholar
Bennett D. Scott Stam Allan C. 2000 Research Design and Estimator Choices in the Analysis of Interstate Dyad: When Decisions Matter Journal of Conflict Resolution 44 October 653-85Google Scholar
Bennett D. Scott Stam Allan C. 2003 The Behavioral Origins of War Ann Arbor University of Michigan Forthcoming
Bueno de Mesquita Bruce James Morrow Randolph Siverson Smith Alastair 1999 An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace American Political Science Review 93 December 791 807Google Scholar
Filson Darren Werner Suzanne 2002 Bargaining and Fighting: The Impact of Regime Type on War Onset, Duration, and Outcomes Emory University Typescript
Geddes Barbara 1999 Authoritarian Breakdown: Empirical Test of a Game Theoretical Argument Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association Atlanta
Gelpi Christopher Grieco Joseph M. 2001 Attracting Trouble: Democracy, Leadership Tenure, and the Targeting of Militarized Challenges, 1918–1992 Journal of Conflict Resolution 45 December 794 817Google Scholar
Gelpi Christopher F. Griesdorf Michael 2001 Winners or Losers? Democracies in International Crisis, 1918–94 American Political Science Review 95 September 633-47Google Scholar
Goemans H. E. 1999 War and Punishment: The Causes of War Termination and the First World War Princeton, NJ Princeton University
Jaggers Keith Gurr Ted Robert 1995 Tracking Democracy's Third Wave with the Polity III Data Journal of Peace Research 32 November 469-82Google Scholar
Jones Daniel M. Bremer Stuart A. Singer J. David 1996 Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816–1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns Conflict Management and Peace Science 15 Fall 163 213Google Scholar
King Gary Zeng Langche 2001 Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data, Political Analysis 9 Spring 137-63Google Scholar
Leeds Brett Ashley Davis David R. 1999 Beneath the Surface: Regime Type and International Interaction, 1953–1978 Journal of Peace Research 36 1 5 21Google Scholar
Peceny Mark Beer Caroline C. Sanchez-Terry Shannon 2002 Dictatorial Peace? American Political Science Review 96 March 15 26Google Scholar
Reiter Dan Meek Curtis 1999 Determinants of Military Strategy, 1903–1994: A Quantitative Empirical Test International Studies Quarterly 43 June 363-87Google Scholar
Reiter Dan Stam Allan C. 2002 Democracies at War Princeton, NJ Princeton University
Reiter Dan Tillman Erik R. 2002 Public, Legislative, and Executive Constraints on the Democratic Initiation of Conflict Journal of Politics 64 August 810-26Google Scholar
Rousseau David L. Christopher Gelpi Dan Reiter Huth Paul K. 1996 Assessing the Dyadic Nature of the Democratic Peace, 1918–1988 American Political Science Review 90 September 512-33Google Scholar
Siverson Randolph M. 1995 Democratic and War Participation: In Defense of the Institutional Constraints Argument European Journal of International Relations 1 December 481-89Google Scholar
Stam Allan C. III 1996 Win, Lose, or Draw: Domestic Politics in the Crucible of War Ann Arbor University of Michigan
Tomz Michael Gary King Zeng Langche 1999 RELOGIT: Rare Events Logistic Regression, Version 1.1 Cambridge, MA Harvard University October 1, http://gking.harvard.edu/
Werner Suzanne 2000 The Effects of Political Similarity on the Onset of Militarized Disputes, 1816–1985 Political Research Quarterly 53 343-74Google Scholar