Issue rivalries

Sara Mclaughlin Mitchell, Cameron Thies

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article expands upon the traditional interstate rivalry concept by focusing on two conceptual dimensions of interstate rivalry: issues and militarization. The first dimension captures the number of distinct issues that characterize a dyadic interstate relationship, such as repeated clashes between states over border disputes, maritime zones, or cross-border rivers. The second dimension is very similar to the dispute density approach to rivalry, and captures the number of militarized incidents over specific contentious issues. The first dimension of issue rivalry is coded by identifying pairs of states with two or more (simultaneous) contentious issues. The second dimension of militarized rivalry is coded for single issues (such as a border dispute), capturing the presence of two or more militarized incidents over that issue in the past. Empirical analyses of these two new rivalry measures in the Western Hemisphere and Western Europe show some important variation in these rivalry dimensions. Issue rivals and militarized rivals are significantly more likely to employ militarized force and peaceful negotiation techniques to resolve geopolitical issues in comparison with dyads that experience contentious issues in non-rivalry settings. On the other hand, dyads characterized by issue rivalry do not experience disputes that escalate to high levels of violence, such as fatalities or wars. It is only prior militarization of a specific contentious issue that leads states down the path to war.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)230-260
Number of pages31
JournalConflict Management and Peace Science
Volume28
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

militarization
dyad
incident
Western Europe
experience
river
violence
Rivalry
Dispute

Keywords

  • conflict
  • issues
  • maritime
  • rivalry
  • rivers
  • territory

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Political Science and International Relations
  • Economics and Econometrics

Cite this

Issue rivalries. / Mitchell, Sara Mclaughlin; Thies, Cameron.

In: Conflict Management and Peace Science, Vol. 28, No. 3, 07.2011, p. 230-260.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mitchell, Sara Mclaughlin ; Thies, Cameron. / Issue rivalries. In: Conflict Management and Peace Science. 2011 ; Vol. 28, No. 3. pp. 230-260.
@article{4210e2621c3b4a96a50279ade998db7f,
title = "Issue rivalries",
abstract = "This article expands upon the traditional interstate rivalry concept by focusing on two conceptual dimensions of interstate rivalry: issues and militarization. The first dimension captures the number of distinct issues that characterize a dyadic interstate relationship, such as repeated clashes between states over border disputes, maritime zones, or cross-border rivers. The second dimension is very similar to the dispute density approach to rivalry, and captures the number of militarized incidents over specific contentious issues. The first dimension of issue rivalry is coded by identifying pairs of states with two or more (simultaneous) contentious issues. The second dimension of militarized rivalry is coded for single issues (such as a border dispute), capturing the presence of two or more militarized incidents over that issue in the past. Empirical analyses of these two new rivalry measures in the Western Hemisphere and Western Europe show some important variation in these rivalry dimensions. Issue rivals and militarized rivals are significantly more likely to employ militarized force and peaceful negotiation techniques to resolve geopolitical issues in comparison with dyads that experience contentious issues in non-rivalry settings. On the other hand, dyads characterized by issue rivalry do not experience disputes that escalate to high levels of violence, such as fatalities or wars. It is only prior militarization of a specific contentious issue that leads states down the path to war.",
keywords = "conflict, issues, maritime, rivalry, rivers, territory",
author = "Mitchell, {Sara Mclaughlin} and Cameron Thies",
year = "2011",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1177/0738894211404794",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "230--260",
journal = "Conflict Management and Peace Science",
issn = "0738-8942",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Issue rivalries

AU - Mitchell, Sara Mclaughlin

AU - Thies, Cameron

PY - 2011/7

Y1 - 2011/7

N2 - This article expands upon the traditional interstate rivalry concept by focusing on two conceptual dimensions of interstate rivalry: issues and militarization. The first dimension captures the number of distinct issues that characterize a dyadic interstate relationship, such as repeated clashes between states over border disputes, maritime zones, or cross-border rivers. The second dimension is very similar to the dispute density approach to rivalry, and captures the number of militarized incidents over specific contentious issues. The first dimension of issue rivalry is coded by identifying pairs of states with two or more (simultaneous) contentious issues. The second dimension of militarized rivalry is coded for single issues (such as a border dispute), capturing the presence of two or more militarized incidents over that issue in the past. Empirical analyses of these two new rivalry measures in the Western Hemisphere and Western Europe show some important variation in these rivalry dimensions. Issue rivals and militarized rivals are significantly more likely to employ militarized force and peaceful negotiation techniques to resolve geopolitical issues in comparison with dyads that experience contentious issues in non-rivalry settings. On the other hand, dyads characterized by issue rivalry do not experience disputes that escalate to high levels of violence, such as fatalities or wars. It is only prior militarization of a specific contentious issue that leads states down the path to war.

AB - This article expands upon the traditional interstate rivalry concept by focusing on two conceptual dimensions of interstate rivalry: issues and militarization. The first dimension captures the number of distinct issues that characterize a dyadic interstate relationship, such as repeated clashes between states over border disputes, maritime zones, or cross-border rivers. The second dimension is very similar to the dispute density approach to rivalry, and captures the number of militarized incidents over specific contentious issues. The first dimension of issue rivalry is coded by identifying pairs of states with two or more (simultaneous) contentious issues. The second dimension of militarized rivalry is coded for single issues (such as a border dispute), capturing the presence of two or more militarized incidents over that issue in the past. Empirical analyses of these two new rivalry measures in the Western Hemisphere and Western Europe show some important variation in these rivalry dimensions. Issue rivals and militarized rivals are significantly more likely to employ militarized force and peaceful negotiation techniques to resolve geopolitical issues in comparison with dyads that experience contentious issues in non-rivalry settings. On the other hand, dyads characterized by issue rivalry do not experience disputes that escalate to high levels of violence, such as fatalities or wars. It is only prior militarization of a specific contentious issue that leads states down the path to war.

KW - conflict

KW - issues

KW - maritime

KW - rivalry

KW - rivers

KW - territory

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960067607&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960067607&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0738894211404794

DO - 10.1177/0738894211404794

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:79960067607

VL - 28

SP - 230

EP - 260

JO - Conflict Management and Peace Science

JF - Conflict Management and Peace Science

SN - 0738-8942

IS - 3

ER -