Underlying the emerging interest in the role of rivalry processes as antecedents to interstate conflict is the simple idea that conflict within the constraints of rivalry works differently than conflict outside of rivalry. In this article, we inspect the concepts of protracted conflict, as developed within the International Crisis Behavior (ICB) project, and rivalry, and discuss some of their applications to crisis escalation. The protracted conflict and rivalry concepts are not identical, but they do overlap in terms of their emphases on historical context, serious goal incompatibilities, and stakes that might be resolved coercively. Developing an argument for the concept of rivalry possessing fewer limitations than protracted conflict, we proceed to analyze and test the interaction between rivalry and other variables, again making use of an ICB escalation model, when predicting crisis escalation to war. Throughout, our basic question concerns what role interstate rivalry plays in crisis behavior. Are the crises of rivals more lethal than those of non-rivals? If so, can we pinpoint why that is the case? We find that rivalry not only makes escalation more likely, but also significantly interacts with more traditional predictors of conflict, such as capability ratios, the number of actors in a crisis, democracy, and the issues under contention.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Azar, Edward; Paul Jureidini & Ronald McLaurin, 1978. `Protracted Social Conflict: Theory and Practice in the Middle East', Journal of Palestine Studies29(1): 41-60.
2.
Beck, Nathaniel ; Jonathan N. Katz & Richard Tucker, 1998. `Taking Time Seriously: Time Series-Cross Section Analysis with a Binary Dependent Variable', American Journal of Political Science42(4): 1260-1289.
3.
Bennett, D. Scott , 1996. `Security, Bargaining, and the End of Interstate Rivalry', International Studies Quarterly40(2): 157-183.
4.
Bennett, D. Scott , 1997. `Measuring Rivalry Termination: 1816-1992', Journal of Conflict Resolution41(2): 227-258.
5.
Bennett, D. Scott , 1998. `Integrating and Testing Models of Rivalry', American Journal of Political Science42(4): 1200-1232.
6.
Bennett, D. Scott & Timothy Nordstrom, 2000. `Foreign Policy Substitutability and Internal Economic Problems in Enduring Rivalries', Journal of Conflict Resolution44(1): 33-52.
7.
Blainey, Geoffrey , 1973. Why Nations Go to War. New York: Free Press.
8.
Brecher, Michael , 1993. Crises in World Politics: Theory & Reality. Oxford: Pergamon.
9.
Brecher, Michael ; Patrick James & Jonathan Wilkenfeld, 2000. `Escalation and War in the Twentieth Century: Findings from the International Crisis Behavior Project', in John A. Vasquez, ed., What Do We Know About War?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield (37-53).
10.
Brecher, Michael & Jonathan Wilkenfeld, 1997. A Study of Crisis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
11.
Bremer, Stuart A. , 2000. `Who Fights Whom, When, Where, and Why?', in John A. Vasquez, ed., What Do We Know About War?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield (23-36).
12.
Carment, David , 1993. `The International Dimensions of Ethnic Conflict: Concepts, Indicators, and Theory', Journal of Peace Research30(2): 137-150.
13.
Claude, Inis , 1962. Power and International Relations. New York: Random House.
14.
Colaresi, Michael , 2001. `Shocks to the System: Great Power Rivalries and the Leadership Long Cycle', Journal of Conflict Resolution45(5): 569-593.
15.
Colley, Linda , 1992. Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707-1837. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16.
Cusack, Thomas & Wolf-Dieter Eberwein, 1982. `Prelude to War: Incidence, Escalation and Intervention in International Disputes, 1900-1976', International Interactions9(1): 9-28.
17.
Desch, Michael C. , 1996. `War and Strong States, Peace and Weak States?', International Organization50(2): 236-268.
18.
Diehl, Paul F. & Gary Goertz, 2000. War and Peace in International Rivalry. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
19.
Dixon, William J. , 1994. `Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict', American Political Science Review88(1): 14-33.
20.
Gartzke, Erik & Michael W. Simon, 1999. `Hot Hand: A Critical Analysis of Enduring Rivalries', Journal of Politics63(3): 777-798.
21.
Geller, Daniel S. , 1993. `Power Differentials and War in Rival Dyads', International Studies Quarterly37(2): 173-193.
22.
Geller, Daniel S. , 2000. `Material Capabilities: Power and International Conflict', in John A. Vasquez, ed., What Do We Know About War?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield (259-277).
23.
Goertz, Gary & Paul F. Diehl, 1993. `Enduring Rivalries: Theoretical Constructs and Empirical Patterns', International Studies Quarterly37(2): 147-172.
24.
Goertz, Gary & Paul F. Diehl, 1995. `The Initiation and Termination of Enduring Rivalries: The Impact of Political Shocks', American Journal of Political Science39(1): 30-53.
25.
Goertz, Gary & Paul F. Diehl, 2000a. `(Enduring) Rivalries', in Manus Midlarsky, ed., Handbook of War Studies II. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press (222-270).
26.
Goertz, Gary & Paul F. Diehl, 2000b. `Rivalries: The Conflict Process', in John A. Vasquez, ed., What Do We Know About War?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield (197-217).
27.
Hensel, Paul R. , 1994. `One Thing Leads to Another: Recurrent Militarized Disputes in Latin America 1816-1986', Journal of Peace Research31(3): 281-298.
28.
James, Patrick , 1988. Crisis and War. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
29.
Jervis, Robert , 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
30.
Jervis, Robert , 1988. `Perceiving and Coping with Threat', in Robert Jervis, Richard Ned Lebow & Janice Gross Stein, eds, Psychology and Deterrence. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press (1-31).
31.
Lebow, Richard Ned , 1981. Between Peace and War: The Nature of International Crisis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
32.
Leng, Russell J. , 1983. `When Will They Ever Learn? Coercive Bargaining in Recurrent Crises', Journal of Conflict Resolution21(5): 379-419.
33.
Leng, Russell J. , 2000. Bargaining and Learning in Recurring Crises: The Soviet-American, Egyptian-Israeli, and Indo-Pakistani Rivalries. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
34.
Long, J. Scott , 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. London: Sage.
35.
McClelland, Charles A. , 1972. `The Beginning, Duration, and Abatement of International Crises: Comparisons in Two Conflict Arenas', in Charles C. Hermann, ed., International Crises: Insights from Behavioral Research. New York: Free Press (83-105).
36.
McGinnis, Michael D. & John T. Williams, 1989. `Change and Stability in Super Power Rivalry', American Political Science Review83(4): 1101-1123.
37.
Maoz, Zeev , 1996. Domestic Sources of Global Change. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
38.
Maoz, Zeev & Ben D. Mor, 1996. `Enduring Rivalries: The Early Years', International Political Science Review17(2): 141-160.
39.
Maoz, Zeev & Ben D. Mor, 1998. `Learning, Preference Change, and the Evolution of Enduring Rivalries', in Paul F. Diehl, ed., Dynamics of Enduring Rivalries. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press (129-164).
40.
Nomikos, Eugenia V. & Robert C. North, 1976. International Crisis: The Outbreak of World War I. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
41.
Pevehouse, Jon C. & Joshua S. Goldstein, 1997. `Reciprocity, Bullying and International Cooperation: Time Series Analysis of the Bosnian Conflict', American Political Science Review91(3): 515-532.
42.
Rasler, Karen & William R. Thompson, 2000. `Explaining Rivalry Escalation to War: Contiguity, Space and Position in the Major Power Subsystem', International Studies Quarterly44(3): 503-531.
43.
Rasler, Karen & William R. Thompson, 2001. `Rivalries and the Democratic Peace in the Major Power Subsystem', Journal of Peace Research38(6): 659-683.
44.
Rioux, Jean S. , 1997. `U.S. Crises and Domestic Politics: Crisis Outcomes, Reputation, and Domestic Consequences', Southeastern Political Review25(2): 219-229.
45.
Ross, Marc Howard , 1998. The Culture of Conflict: Interpretations and Interests in Comparative Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
46.
Russett, Bruce , 1993. Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principals for a Post-Cold War World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
47.
Sorokin, Gerald L. , 1994. `Arms, Alliances, and Security Trade-Offs in Enduring Rivalries', International Studies Quarterly38(3): 421-447.
48.
Stoessinger, John , 1985. Why Nations Go to War, 4th edn.New York: St. Martin's.
49.
Thompson, William R. , 1995. `Principal Rivalries', Journal of Conflict Resolution39(2): 195-223.
50.
Thompson, William R. , 2001. `Identifying Rivals and Rivalries in World Politics', International Studies Quarterly45(4): 557-587.
51.
Vasquez, John A. , 1993. The War Puzzle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
52.
Vasquez, John A. , 1996. `Distinguishing Rivals That Go To War from Those That Do Not: A Quantitative Comparative Case Study of the Two Paths to War', International Studies Quarterly40(4): 531-558.
53.
Vasquez, John A. , 2000. `What Do We Know About War?', in John A. Vasquez, ed., What Do We Know About War?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield (335-370).
54.
Vertzberger, Yaacov , 1990. The World in Their Minds: Information Processing, Cognition, and Perception in Foreign Policy Decision-Making. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
55.
Waltz, Kenneth N. , 1979. Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: McGraw Hill.
56.
Wayman, Frank W. , 2000. `Rivalries: Recurrent Disputes and Explaining War', in John A. Vasquez, ed., What Do We Know About War?Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield (219-234).
57.
Wilkenfeld, Jonathan & Michael Brecher, 2000. `Interstate Crises and Violence: Twentieth Century Findings', in Manus Midlarsky, ed., Handbook of War Studies II. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press (271-300).
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.
