(Babylonian) lions, (Asian) tigers, and (Russian) bears: A statistical test of three rivalrous paths to conflict

Paul A. Kowert, Cameron G. Thies

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

Structural theories of international relations anticipate no meaningful differences of kind, as opposed to capabilities, among states. Empirical investigations of enduring and strategic rivalries hint at a distinction, however, between states that see themselves as potential rivals and those that do not. Constructivists go further, suggesting that the roles adopted by states during their interactions are the result of varying underlying images of threat. This paper develops the theoretical claim that three different images of threat may produce distinct kinds of rivalry and thereby three paths to militarised interstate conflict. Each image of threat is rooted in a different normative context: strategic threats are associated with violations of the enforcement of Hobbesian cooperative security arrangements; competitive threats are associated with violations of fairness or reasonableness standards in Lockean exchange relationships; and institutional threats are associated with violations of the basis for commitment to Kantian communities of peace. A logistic regression analysis of Correlates of War data, combined with other data relevant to the three threat images, provide empirical support for each of these rivalrous paths to conflict.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages406-433
Number of pages28
JournalJournal of International Relations and Development
Volume16
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

statistical test
threat
test
conflict
international relations
logistics
regression analysis
reasonableness
enforcement
fairness
peace
commitment
interaction
community

Keywords

  • conflict
  • constructivism
  • Correlates of War
  • foreign policy images
  • rivalry
  • threat

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Development
  • Political Science and International Relations

Cite this

@article{c27a214397fb4ca88f170a89ce32bd81,
title = "(Babylonian) lions, (Asian) tigers, and (Russian) bears: A statistical test of three rivalrous paths to conflict",
abstract = "Structural theories of international relations anticipate no meaningful differences of kind, as opposed to capabilities, among states. Empirical investigations of enduring and strategic rivalries hint at a distinction, however, between states that see themselves as potential rivals and those that do not. Constructivists go further, suggesting that the roles adopted by states during their interactions are the result of varying underlying images of threat. This paper develops the theoretical claim that three different images of threat may produce distinct kinds of rivalry and thereby three paths to militarised interstate conflict. Each image of threat is rooted in a different normative context: strategic threats are associated with violations of the enforcement of Hobbesian cooperative security arrangements; competitive threats are associated with violations of fairness or reasonableness standards in Lockean exchange relationships; and institutional threats are associated with violations of the basis for commitment to Kantian communities of peace. A logistic regression analysis of Correlates of War data, combined with other data relevant to the three threat images, provide empirical support for each of these rivalrous paths to conflict.",
keywords = "conflict, constructivism, Correlates of War, foreign policy images, rivalry, threat",
author = "Kowert, {Paul A.} and Thies, {Cameron G.}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1057/jird.2012.26",
volume = "16",
pages = "406--433",
journal = "Journal of International Relations and Development",
issn = "1408-6980",
publisher = "Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - (Babylonian) lions, (Asian) tigers, and (Russian) bears

T2 - Journal of International Relations and Development

AU - Kowert,Paul A.

AU - Thies,Cameron G.

PY - 2013/7

Y1 - 2013/7

N2 - Structural theories of international relations anticipate no meaningful differences of kind, as opposed to capabilities, among states. Empirical investigations of enduring and strategic rivalries hint at a distinction, however, between states that see themselves as potential rivals and those that do not. Constructivists go further, suggesting that the roles adopted by states during their interactions are the result of varying underlying images of threat. This paper develops the theoretical claim that three different images of threat may produce distinct kinds of rivalry and thereby three paths to militarised interstate conflict. Each image of threat is rooted in a different normative context: strategic threats are associated with violations of the enforcement of Hobbesian cooperative security arrangements; competitive threats are associated with violations of fairness or reasonableness standards in Lockean exchange relationships; and institutional threats are associated with violations of the basis for commitment to Kantian communities of peace. A logistic regression analysis of Correlates of War data, combined with other data relevant to the three threat images, provide empirical support for each of these rivalrous paths to conflict.

AB - Structural theories of international relations anticipate no meaningful differences of kind, as opposed to capabilities, among states. Empirical investigations of enduring and strategic rivalries hint at a distinction, however, between states that see themselves as potential rivals and those that do not. Constructivists go further, suggesting that the roles adopted by states during their interactions are the result of varying underlying images of threat. This paper develops the theoretical claim that three different images of threat may produce distinct kinds of rivalry and thereby three paths to militarised interstate conflict. Each image of threat is rooted in a different normative context: strategic threats are associated with violations of the enforcement of Hobbesian cooperative security arrangements; competitive threats are associated with violations of fairness or reasonableness standards in Lockean exchange relationships; and institutional threats are associated with violations of the basis for commitment to Kantian communities of peace. A logistic regression analysis of Correlates of War data, combined with other data relevant to the three threat images, provide empirical support for each of these rivalrous paths to conflict.

KW - conflict

KW - constructivism

KW - Correlates of War

KW - foreign policy images

KW - rivalry

KW - threat

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879915758&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879915758&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1057/jird.2012.26

DO - 10.1057/jird.2012.26

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 406

EP - 433

JO - Journal of International Relations and Development

JF - Journal of International Relations and Development

SN - 1408-6980

IS - 3

ER -