This article addresses the effect of political instability and domestic conflict on the probability of militarized interstate disputes. Existing research on the subject has produced inconsistent findings. I hypothesize that the effect of political instability on international disputes is conditional on states’ involvement in civil conflict. More specifically, I argue that while political instability provides leaders with the willingness to use force, civil war creates the necessary opportunities for initiating conflict abroad. A directed-dyad analysis of international rivals for the 1816–2000 time period shows that instability coupled with civil war increases the probability of militarized interstate dispute initiation among rival states. Results are consistent for alternative indicators of political instability and civil war.
AkcinarogluSedenRadziszweskiElizabeth. 2005. Expectations, rivalry, and civil war duration. International Interactions31: 349–374.
2.
Balch-LindsayDylanEnterlineAndrew. 2000. Killing time: The world politics of civil war duration, 1820–1992. International Studies Quarterly44(4): 615–642.
3.
BanksArthur. 1996. Cross-National Time Series Data. Binghamton, NY: State University of New York Press.
4.
BeckNathanielKatzJonathan N.TuckerRichard. 1998. Taking time seriously: Time-series–cross-section analysis with a binary dependent variable. American Journal of Political Science42(4): 1260–1288.
5.
BerryWilliam D.DeMerittJacqueline H. R.EsareyJustin. 2010. Testing for interaction in binary logit and probit models: Is a product term essential?American Journal of Political Science54(1): 248–266.
6.
CarmentDavidJamesPatrick. 1996. Two-level games and third-party intervention: Evidence from ethnic conflict in the Balkans and Southeast Asia. Canadian Journal of Political Science29(3): 521–554.
7.
CarmentDavidRowlandsDane. 1998. Three’s company: Evaluating third party intervention in intrastate conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution42(5): 572–599.
8.
ClarkDavid H.2003. Can strategic interaction divert diversionary behavior? A model of U.S. conflict propensity. Journal of Politics65(4): 1013–1039.
9.
ColaresiMichael. 2004. When doves cry: International rivalry, unreciprocated cooperation, and leadership turnover. American Journal of Political Science48(3): 555–570.
10.
DasselKurtReinhardtEric. 1999. Domestic strife and the initiation of violence at home and abroad. American Journal of Political Science41(1): 56–85.
11.
DaviesGraeme A.2002. Domestic strife and the initiation of international conflicts. Journal of Conflict Resolution46(5): 672–692.
12.
DavisDavid R.MooreWill H.1997. Ethnicity matters: Transnational ethnic alliances and foreign policy behavior. International Studies Quarterly71(1): 171–184.
13.
DiehlPaul F.GoertzGary. 2000. War and Peace in International Rivalry. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
14.
EnterlineAndrew J.1998. Regime changes and interstate conflict, 1816–1992. Political Research Quarterly51(2): 385–409.
15.
EstyDaniel C.GoldstoneJackGurrTed RobertHarffBarbaraSurkoPamela T.UngerAlan N.ChenRobert. 1998. The State Failure Project: Early warning research for US foreign policy planning. In Preventive Measures: Building Risk Assessment and Crisis Early Warning Systems, eds DaviesJohn L.GurrTed Robert, pp. 27–39. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
16.
FearonJames D.2004. Why do some civil wars last so much longer than others?Journal of Peace Research41(3): 275–302.
17.
FearonJames D.LaitinDavid D.2003. Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. American Political Science Review97(1): 75–90.
18.
FindleyMichael G.TeoTze Kwang. 2006. Rethinking third-party interventions into civil wars: An actor-centric approach. Journal of Politics68(4): 828–837.
19.
GiblerDouglas M.SarkeesMeredith. 2004. Measuring alliances: The Correlates of War Formal Interstate Alliance Dataset, 1816–2000. Journal of Peace Research41(2): 211–222.
20.
GleditschKristian S.WardMichael D.1997. Double take: A reexamination of democracy and autocracy in modern politics. Journal of Conflict Resolution41(3): 361–368.
21.
GleditschKristian S.WardMichael D.1998. Democratizing for peace. American Political Science Review92(1): 51–61.
22.
GleditschKristian S.WardMichael D.2000. War and peace in space and time: The role of democratization. International Studies Quarterly44(1): 1–29.
23.
GleditschKristian S.SalehyanIdeanSchultzKenneth. 2008. Fighting at home, fighting abroad: How civil wars lead to international disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution52(4): 479–506.
24.
GleditschNils PetterWallensteenPeterEriksonMikaelStollenbergMargaretaStrandHavard. 2002. Armed Conflict 1946–2001: A new dataset. Journal of Peace Research39(5): 615–637.
25.
GhosnFatenPalmerGlennBremerStuart A.2004. The MID3 Data Set, 1993–2001: Procedures, coding rules, and description. Conflict Management and Peace Science21(2): 133–154.
26.
GoemansH. E.2008. Which way out? The manners and consequences of losing office. Journal of Conflict Resolution52(6): 771–794.
27.
HarffBarbara. 2003. No lessons learned from the Holocaust? Assessing risks of genocide and political mass murder since 1955. American Political Science Review97(1): 57–73.
28.
HegreHavardSambanisNicholas. 2006. Sensitivity analysis of empirical results on civil war onset. Journal of Conflict Resolution50(4): 508–535.
29.
HegreHavardEllingsenTanjaGatesScottGleditschNils Petter. 2001. Toward a democratic civil peace? Democracy, political change, and civil war, 1816–1992. American Political Science Review95(1): 33–48.
30.
KingGaryKeohaneRobert O.VerbaSydney. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
31.
LaPorteRobertJr.1972. Pakistan in 1971: The disintegration of a nation. Asian Survey12(2): 97–108.
32.
MansfieldEdward D.SnyderJack. 2002. Democratic transitions, institutional strength, and war. International Organization56(2): 297–337.
33.
MansfieldEdward D.SnyderJack. 2005. Electing to Fight: Why Emerging Democracies Go to War. Cambridge, MA: BCSIA Studies in International Security.
34.
MarshallMonty G.JaggersKeith. 2005. Polity IV Dataset User’s Manual. Arlington, VA: Center for Global Policy, School of Public Policy, George Mason University.
35.
MarwahOnkar. 1979. India’s military intervention in East Pakistan, 1971–1972. Modern Asian Studies13(4): 549–580.
36.
MillerRoss A.1999. Regime type, strategic interaction and the diversionary use of force. Journal of Conflict Resolution43(3): 388–402.
37.
Mishali-RamMeirav. 2006. Ethnic diversity, issues, and international crisis dynamics, 1918–2002. Journal of Peace Research43(5): 583–600.
38.
MitchellSara MacLaughlinPrinsBrandon C.2004. Rivalry and diversionary uses of force. Journal of Conflict Resolution48(6): 1–25.
39.
MostBenjamin A.StarrHarvey. 1989. Conceptualizing “War”: Consequences for theory and research. Journal of Conflict Resolution27(1): 137–159.
40.
RaleighClionadhHegreHavard. 2010. Introducing ACLED: An Armed Conflict Location and Event Dataset. Journal of Peace Research47(5): 651–660.
41.
ReganPatrick. 2002. Third-party interventions and the duration of intrastate conflicts. Journal of Conflict Resolution46(1): 55–73.
42.
RummelR. J.1983. Libertarianism and international violence. Journal of Conflict Resolution27(1): 27–71.
43.
SalehyanIdean. 2008. No shelter here: Rebel sanctuaries and international conflict. Journal of Politics70(1): 54–66.
44.
SalehyanIdeanGleditschKristian S.2006. Refugees and the spread of civil war. International Organization60: 335–366.
45.
SingerJ. DavidBremerStuartStuckeyJohn. 1972. Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820–1965. In Peace, War, and Numbers, ed. RussettBruce, p. 19–48. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
46.
SissonRichardRoseLeo E.1991. War and Secession: Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
47.
SmithAlastair. 1996. Diversionary foreign policy in democratic states. International Studies Quarterly40(1): 133–153.
48.
ThompsonWilliam R.2001. Identifying rivals and rivalries in world politics. International Studies Quarterly45: 557–586.
49.
ThompsonWilliam R.TuckerRichard. 1997. A tale of two democratic peace critiques. Journal of Conflict Resolution41(3): 428–454.
50.
TomzMichaelWittenbergJasonKingGary. 2001. CLARIFY: Software for interpreting and presenting statistical results. Version 2.0. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, June1. http://gking.harvard.edu.
51.
VasquezJohn A.1993. The War Puzzle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
52.
VreelandJames R.2008. The effect of political regime on civil war: Unpacking anocracy. Journal of Conflict Resolution52(3): 401–425.
53.
WardMichael D.WidmaierUlrich. 1982. The domestic–international conflict nexus: New evidence and old hypotheses. International Interactions9(1): 75–101.
