Territory, war and peace
In: Contemporary security studies
144 results
Sort by:
In: Contemporary security studies
World Affairs Online
In: Cambridge Studies in International Relations v.110
In: Cambridge studies in international relations 63
In: Prentice Hall studies in international relations
World Affairs Online
In: Cambridge studies in international relations 27
This book constructs a new scientific explanation of the onset and expansion of war and the conditions of peace. The author describes systematically those factors common to wars between equal states to see if there is a pattern that suggests why war occurs, and how it might be avoided or mitigated, delineating the typical path by which relatively equal states have become embroiled in wars with one another in the modern global system. Emphasis is placed on the issues that give rise to war and how the practices of power politics lead to a series of steps that produce war rather than peace. The book differs from others in that it employs the large number of empirical findings generated in the last twenty-five years as the basis of its theorizing, and integrates these research findings so as to advance dramatically the scientific knowledge of war and peace
The Wilsonian Monadic Peace argues that not only do joint democracies not fight each other, but they are inherently peaceful. They get involved in war primarily by being attacked and rarely initiate wars. The institutional explanation of this monadic democratic peace maintains that democracies have this pacific tendency because the people use the legislature to restrain the executive. This paper argues that the best way to assess the causal logic underlying the institutional explanation is by comparing specific cases where war is avoided and where it occurs to see if legislatures and the public restrain leaders. Three historical cases from the Nineteenth Century, which were uncovered as part of a larger project, are reviewed in detail: one that did not go to war and two that did. Cases are drawn from the most democratic states at the time—France, England, and the U.S. In each instance the casual process did not work the way it was expected. Instead, the legislature and the "public" were more prone to war hysteria than the executive. Each of these cases is regarded as anomalous for the democratic peace. The implications of these three anomalies are explored in detail.
BASE
In: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Research Paper No. RSCAS 2020/31
SSRN
Working paper
In: International studies review, Volume 16, Issue 4, p. 623-644
ISSN: 1468-2486
In: Perspectives on politics, Volume 4, Issue 4
ISSN: 1541-0986
In: Perspectives on politics: a political science public sphere, Volume 4, Issue 4, p. 810-811
ISSN: 1537-5927
In: Perspectives on politics: a political science public sphere, Volume 4, Issue 4, p. 810
ISSN: 1537-5927
In: International studies perspectives: ISP, Volume 6, Issue 3, p. 307-315
ISSN: 1528-3585