Suchergebnisse

Trade interdependence does not always reduce hostility between states. It depends on whether the trade represents vulnerability or sensitivity interdependence. Portfolio investment also does not represent a tie that binds politically. Even more important, foreign direct investment (FDI) represents a link that is costly (& time-consuming) to break. Thus, FDI links between countries are more likely to reduce conflict than trading links. Evidence shows that symmetrical FDI is the most stable guarantor of low conflict between countries. One factor generating conflict may be that scarce factors of production are in political command. Abundant factors, now more generally in power among developed states, may be partly responsible for the diminishment of conflict among these states in recent years. 4 Tables, 2 Figures, 46 References. Adapted from the source document.

A security regime is an uneasy compromise where the relationship among the parties is generally undefined, limited in scope, & transitional. The relationship is undefined, because the parties are usually former adversaries who, for the moment, do not think of war as a feasible or practical, or, under some conditions, even a possible instrument. Yet they are far from being allies. A security regime differs in important ways from an alliance or a security community. A security regime is also limited. What happens inside the regime is only a part of what happens in the larger relationship. Participation in a regime does not imply clear behavioral expectations outside the security arena. Finally, the parties to a security regime are usually in a transitional relationship; although the parties have moved away from a full-scale adversarial relationship, where they are going is less clear. Security regimes do not develop in a linear sequence to become 'security communities'. Adapted from the source document.