We explore US covert forcible actions against democratic governments and their citizens and show that interdemocratic use of covert force is common and can be accommodated within the theory of democratic peace. Grounded in the Perceptual Theory of Legitimacy, we argue that democracies are constrained by public perceptions of their legitimacy from overtly aggressing against other democratic states. When democracies desire to aggress against their democratic counterparts, they will do so covertly. We test the assumptions of the theory and its implication with (1) laboratory studies of the conflation of democracy with ally status and (2) historical analyses of covert militarized actions and prisoner detention, which show that US forcible actions, when carried out against democracies and their citizens, are carried out clandestinely.
AbrahamianE.2013. The Coup: 1953, the CIA, and the Roots of Modern US–Iranian Relations. New York: New Press.
2.
BaumM. A.PotterP. B.. 2008. “The Relationships between Mass Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis.” Annual Review of Political Science11: 39–65.
3.
BeasleyR.CrandallC.. 2004. “Allawi’s “Violent Past:” A Signal of Future Peace?” Dialogue19 (2): 11.
4.
BennettS.2006. “Toward a Continuous Specification of the Democracy-autocracy Connection.” International Studies Quarterly50:313–38.
CrandallC. S.BeasleyR. K.. 2001. “A Perceptual Theory of Legitimacy: Politics, Prejudice, Social Institutions, and Moral Value.” In The Psychology of Legitimacy, edited by JostJ.MajorB., 121–45. New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
CrandallC. S.SilviaP. J.N’GbalaA. N.TsangJ.DawsonK.. 2007. “Balance Theory, Unit Relations, and Attribution: The Underlying Integrity of Heiderian Theory.” Review of General Psychology11:12–30.
11.
DeMesquitaB. B.MorrowJ. D.SiversonR. M.SmithA.. 1999. “An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace.” American Political Science Review93 (4): 791–807.
12.
DownesA. B.LilleyM. L.. 2010. “Overt Peace, Covert War?: Covert Intervention and the Democratic Peace.” Security Studies19:266–306.
13.
DoyleM. W.1995. “On the Democratic Peace.” International Security19 (4): 180–84.
14.
DoyleM. W.2005. “Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace.” American Political Science Review99 (3): 463–66.
15.
European Parliament. 2007. “European Parliament Resolution on the Alleged Use of European Countries by the CIA for the Transportation and Illegal Detention of Prisoners.” 2006/2200(INI).
16.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.PereiraA.StaerkléC.ButeraF.. 2011. “Do All Lives Have the Same Value? Support for International Military Interventions as a Function of Political System and Public Opinion of Target States.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations15 (3): 347–62.
17.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.StaerkléC.PereiraA.ButeraF.. 2012. “Democracy as Justification for Waging War.” Social Psychological and Personality Science3:324–32.
18.
FestingerL.1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19.
ForsytheD. P.1992. “Democracy, War, and Covert Action.” Journal of Peace Research29 (4): 385–95.
20.
ForsytheD. P.2011. “Human Rights and Mass Atrocities: Revisiting Transitional Justice.” International Studies Review, 13 (1): 85–95.
21.
GanserD.2005. NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe. New York: Frank Cass.
22.
GhosnF.PalmerP.. 2003. “Codebook for the Militarized Interstate Dispute Data.” Version 3.0. Accessed August 27, 2008.http://www.correlatesofwar.org/.
23.
GleijesesP.1992. Shattered Hope: The Guatemalan Revolution and the United States, 1944–1954. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
GreyS.2006. Ghost Plane: The True Story of the CIA Torture Program. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
26.
GurrT. R.JaggersK.MooreW. H.. 1989. “Polity II Codebook.” Boulder: Center for Comparative Politics, University of Colorado.
27.
HartJ.1974. “Symmetry and Polarization in the European International System, 1870–1879: A Methodological Study.” Journal of Peace Research11:229–44.
28.
HayesJ.2012. “Securitization, Social Identity, and Democratic Security: Nixon, India, and the Ties that Bind.” International Organization66:63–93.
29.
HeiderF.1958. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
30.
HeiderF.1990. Fritz Heider: Notebooks: Vol. 6. Units and Coinciding. München-Weinheim, Germany: Psychologie-Verlags Union.
31.
HendersonE.2002. Democracy and War: The End of an Illusion?Boulder, CO: Lynner Riener.
32.
HermannM. G.KegleyC. W.. 1995. “Rethinking Democracy and International Peace: Perspectives from Political Psychology.” International Studies Quarterly39 (4): 511–33.
33.
Ish-ShalomP.2008. “Theorization, Harm, and the Democratic Imperative: Lessons from the Politicization of the Democratic-peace Thesis.” International Studies Review10:680–92.
34.
JamesP.MitchellG. E.. 1995. “Targets of Covert Pressure: The Hidden Victims of the Democratic Peace.” International Interactions21:85–107.
35.
JervisR.1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: University Press.
36.
JuergensmeyerM.2008. Global Rebellion: Religious Challenges to the Secular State, from Christian Militias to al Qaeda, Vol. 16. Berkeley: University of California Press.
37.
KegleyC. W.HermannM. G.. 1995. “The Political Psychology of “Peace through Democratization.” Cooperation and Conflict30:5–30.
38.
KimJ.2005. “Democratic Peace and Covert War: A Case Study of the U.S. Covert War in Chile.” Journal of International and Area Studies12 (1): 25–47.
39.
KimJ.HundtD.. 2012. “Popular Consent and Foreign Policy Choices: War against the Philippines and Covert Action in Chile.” Australian Journal of International Affairs66:52–69.
40.
KinsellaD.2005. “No Rest for the Democratic Peace.” American Political Science Review19:453–57.
41.
LarsonD. W.1985. Origins of Containment: A Psychological Explanation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
42.
LayneC.1994. “Kant or Cant: The Myth of the Democratic Peace.” International Security19 (2): 5–49.
43.
LevyG.RazinR.. 2004. “It Takes Two: An Explanation for the Democratic Peace.” Journal of the European economic Association2:1–29.
44.
LipsetS. M.1959. “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy.” American Political Science Review53:69–105.
45.
MaozZ.RussettB.. 1993. “Normative and Structural Causes of Democratic Peace, 1946-1986.” American Political Science Review87:624–38.
46.
MarshallM. G.JaggersK.. 2005. Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800e2003. College Park: CIDCM, University of Maryland. Accessed August 27, 2008.http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/polity/index.htm.
MoravcsikA.1997. “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics.” International Organization51:513–53.
49.
MorganT. C.PalmerG.. 2000. “A Model of Foreign Policy Substitutability Selecting the Right Tools for the Job(s).” Journal of Conflict Resolution44:11–32.
50.
MorganT. C.SchwebachV. L.. 1992. “Take Two Democracies and Call Me in the Morning: A Prescription for Peace?” International Interactions17:305–20.
51.
MostB. A.StarrH.. 1984. “International Relations Theory, Foreign Policy Substitutability, and ‘Nice’Laws.” World Politics36:383–40.
52.
MousseauM.2009. “The Social Market Roots of Democratic Peace.” International Security33 (4): 52–86.
53.
OnealJ.RussettB.. 1999a. “The Kantian Peace.” World Politics52 (1): 1–37.
54.
OnealJ.RussettB.. 1999b. “Assessing the Liberal Peace with Alternative Specifications: Trade Still Reduces Conflict.” Journal of Peace Research36:423–42.
55.
OrenI.2013. Our Enemies and US: America’s Rivalries and the Making of Political Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
OwenJ. M.1997. Liberal Peace, Liberal War: American Politics and International Security. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press
58.
PalmerG.WohlanderS. B.MorganT. C.. 2002. “Give or Take: Foreign Aid and Foreign Policy Substitutability.” Journal of Peace Research39:5–26.
59.
PatrikarakosD.2013. “Iran, from Enemy to Ally.” New York Times, December 9, A33.
60.
PfiffnerJ. P.2009. Power Play: The Bush Presidency and the Constitution. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
61.
RamsayM.2010. “Liberal Democratic Politics as a Form of Violence.” Democratization17 (2): 235–50.
62.
ReiterD.StamA. C.. 2002. Democracies at War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
63.
ReiterD.TillmanE. R.. 2002. “Public, Legislative, and Executive Constraints on the Democratic Initiation of Conflict.” Journal of Politics64 (3): 810–26.
64.
RosatoS.2003. “The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory.” American Political Science Review97:585–602.
65.
RousseauD. L.GelpiC.ReiterD.HuthP. K.. 1996. “Assessing the Dyadic Nature of the Democratic Peace, 1918-88.” American Political Science Review90 (3): 512–33.
66.
SenA. K.1999. “Democracy as a Universal Value.” Journal of Democracy10:3–17.
Van EveraS.1990a. “The Case against Intervention.” The Atlantic Monthly266 (1): 72–80.
74.
Van EveraS.1990b. “Primed for Peace: Europe after the Cold War.” International Security15 (3): 7–57.
75.
WeartS. R.1998. Never at War: Why Democracies Will Not Fight One Another. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
76.
WorthingtonA.2007. The Guantanamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America’s Illegal Prison. London, UK: Pluto Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
