Explaining Relative Peace: Major Power Order,1816-1976

Abstract

Defining peace as the absence of war has been of limited usefulness in understanding the systemic and dyadic conditions that lead to changes in the explicit use of interstate force in the international system. Building on the recent work of Wallensteen (1984) and Midlarsky (1988), this study offers an empirical analysis which explores whether the collective policies of state decision-makers matter in the maintenance of relative international peace over the period 1816 to 1976. The results of the analysis suggest that past efforts of major powers to establish limited international orders have mattered in the promotion of international peace. Further research into the dynamics of international dispute processes is needed if we are to advance our understanding of the conditions of peace and the causes of war.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blainey, Geoffrey , 1973. The Causes of War. New York: Free Press.

Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce , 1981. The War Trap. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce , 1985. `The War Trap Revisited', American Political Science Review, vol. 79, no. 1, March, pp. 157-176.

Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce & David Lalman , 1986. `Reason and War', American Political Science Review, vol. 80, no. 4, December, pp. 1113-1131.

Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce & David Lalman , 1989. `Empirical Support for Systemic and Dyadic Explanations of International Conflict', World Politics, vol. 41, no. 1, October, pp. 1-20.

Domke, William , 1988. War and the Changing Global System. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Gilpin, Robert , 1981. War and Change in World Politics. London: Cambridge University Press.

Gochman, Charles and Zeev Maoz , 1984. `Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1976', Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 585-615.

Goldstein, Joshua , 1988. Long Cycles: Prosperity and War in the Modern Age. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

10.

Maoz, Zeev , 1982. Paths to Conflict: International Dispute Initiation, 1816-1976. Boulder, CO: Westview.

11.

Maoz, Zeev and Nasrin Abdolali , 1989. `Regime Types and International Conflict, 1816-1976', Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 3-35.

12.

Midlarsky, Manus , 1984. `Preventing Systemic War: Crisis Decision-Making Admist a Structure of Conflict Relationships', Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 563-584.

13.

Midlarsky, Manus , 1986. `A Hierarchical Equilibrium Theory of Systemic War', International Studies Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 77-105.

14.

Midlarsky, Manus , 1988. The Onset of World War. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman.

15.

Morgenthau, Hans , 1966. Politics Among Nations: the Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: Knopf.

16.

Organski, A. F. K. & Jacek Kugler , 1980. The War Ledger. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

17.

Sabrosky, Alan , ed., 1985. Polarity and War: the Changing Structure of International Conflict. Boulder, CO: Westview.

18.

Small, Melvin and J. David Singer , 1982. Resort to Arms. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

19.

Singer, J. David ; Stuart Bremer & John Stuckey , 1972. `Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820-1965', pp. 163-195 in J. David Singer , ed., Explaining War. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

20.

Vasquez, John , 1983. The Power of Power Politics. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

21.

Vasquez, John , 1987. `The Steps to War: Toward a Scientific Explanation of Correlates of War Findings', World Politics, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 108-145.

22.

Wallensteen, Peter , 1981. `Incompatibility, Confrontation, and War: Four Models and Three Historical Systems, 1816-1976', Journal of Peace Research, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 57-90.

23.

Wallensteen, Peter , 1984. `Universalism vs. Particularism: On the Limits of Major Power Order', Journal of Peace Research, vol. 21, no. 3, September, pp. 243-257.