Suchergebnisse

[R]econstruction projects have already gotten underway in some parts of the country, such as those occupied by Turkey, while others have been without basic services for years.

Attempts to rebuild and resettle refugees are already underway in parts of the country as the war winds down, but outside help will be needed to secure a sustainable peace.

AbstractThe main argument of this article is that we need to incorporate domestic-pressure arguments into conflict management studies and, at the same time, we need to include conflict-management opportunities in the study of domestic-international theory. This study looks at the impact of domestic incentives on a state's decision to negotiate. The primary hypothesis is that domestic turmoil will increase the likelihood that rival states with a history of aggressive interaction shift their foreign policy to a more accommodative one. Testing my argument on strategic rivals between 1945 and 1995, I find that after controlling for the factors of history and level of hostility between the rivals, anti-government unrest actually increases the likelihood of negotiations taking place, while acts threatening the downfall of the regime tend to decrease the chance of witnessing negotiations.

This paper analyzes the conditions that encourage (or hinder) conflicting states in coming to the negotiating table. It also explores the factors that influence the successfulness of such negotiation attempts. A main argument of the paper is that it is important to look at what brings states to the table, because this may have a direct or indirect impact on the outcome of such negotiations. While confirming some of the findings within the conflict management literature, this paper demonstrates that contextual factors seem to have different effects or a different impact on each stage, implying that while certain factors may bring states to the table, they may not be the same factors that make agreements possible. Adapted from the source document.

This article seeks to explain the role and salience of culture in interstate conflict management efforts. Past studies of cultural similarity in conflict management involving third parties often focused on two-way cultural relationships: either examining cultural similarity between disputants or similarity between third parties and each of the disputants as individuals. However, we argue that this first wave of research should be augmented by a focus on triads. Our study asks the question: to what extent does cultural similarity among disputants and potential mediators predict the likelihood of a mediation offer? We test our hypotheses using data from the International Conflict Management Dataset between 1945 and 1995 and find that mediation offers are most likely to emerge when the triad is ethnically or religiously similar, while shared political culture is not a reliable predictor of mediation offers to disputing dyads.

This article seeks to explain the role and salience of culture in interstate conflict management efforts. Past studies of cultural similarity in conflict management involving third parties often focused on two-way cultural relationships: either examining cultural similarity between disputants or similarity between third parties and each of the disputants as individuals. However, we argue that this first wave of research should be augmented by a focus on triads. Our study asks the question: to what extent does cultural similarity among disputants and potential mediators predict the likelihood of a mediation offer? We test our hypotheses using data from the International Conflict Management Dataset between 1945 and 1995 and find that mediation offers are most likely to emerge when the triad is ethnically or religiously similar, while shared political culture is not a reliable predictor of mediation offers to disputing dyads. Adapted from the source document.