This paper examines how territorial claims between states condition the effect of power on interstate conflict. I argue that when the weaker state in a dyad controls a piece of contested territory, increases in power for the state that does not hold the territory lead to increases in the probability of conflict initiation. This has important implications for our understanding of the role that territorial claims play in conflict processes and attempts at conflict management, and provides support for the theoretical claim that the relationship between power and conflict is conditioned by the distribution of benefits.
CarterDB (2010) The strategy of territorial conflict. American Journal of Political Science54(4): 969–987.
5.
CarterDBSignorinoCS (2010) Back to the future: Modeling time dependence in binary data. Political Analysis18(3): 271–292.
6.
ColaresiMPThompsonWR (2005) Alliances, arms buildups and recurrent conflict: Testing a steps-to-war model. The Journal of Politics67(2): 345–364.
7.
DreyerD (2010) Issue conflict accumulation and the dynamics of strategic rivalry. International Studies Quarterly54(3): 779–795.
8.
Economist (2015) Bolivia‘s access to the sea: Beaches of the future?, 9May, p. 30.
9.
FearonJD (1995) Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization49(3): 379–414.
10.
FravelMT (2007) Power shifts and escalation: Explaining China’s use of force in territorial disputes. International Security32(3): 44–83.
11.
GentSEShannonM (2014) Bargaining power and the arbitration and adjudication of territorial claims. Conflict Management and Peace Science31(3): 303–322.
12.
GhatakSGoldAPrinsB (2017) External threat and the limits of democratic pacifisim. Conflict Management and Peace Science, this issue.
13.
GhosnFBennettS (2003) Codebook for the dyadic militarized interstate incident data, version 3.0. Available from: http://cow2.la.psu.edu
14.
GiblerD (2012) The Territorial Peace: Borders, State Development, and International Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
GiblerD (2017) What they fight for: Specific issues in militarized interstate disputes, 1816–2001. Conflict Management and Peace Science, this issue.
16.
GilpinR (1988) The theory of hegemonic war. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History18(4): 591–613.
HenselPR (2001) Contentious issues and world politics: The management of territorial claims in the Americas, 1816–1992. International Studies Quarterly45(1): 81–109.
HenselPRMitchellSM (2005) Issue indivisibility and territorial claims. GeoJournal64: 275–285.
21.
HenselPRMitchellSM (2017) From territorial claims to identity claims: The Issue Correlates of War Project. Conflict Management and Peace Science, this issue.
22.
HenselPRMitchellSMSowersTEIIThyneCL (2008) Bones of contention: Comparing territorial, maritime, and river issues. Journal of Conflict Resolution52(1): 117–143.
23.
HuthPK (1996) Standing Your Ground: Territorial Disputes and International Conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
24.
HwangW (2010) Power, preferences, and multiple levels of interstate Conflict. International Interactions36: 215–239.
25.
LektzianDPrinsBCSouvaM (2010) Territory, river, and maritime claims in the Western Hemisphere: Regime type, rivalry, and MIDS from 1901 to 2000. International Studies Quarterly54: 1073–1098.
26.
MellinMMGrigorescuA (2014) Connecting the dots: Dispute resolution and escalation in a world of entangled territorial claims. Journal of Conflict Resolution58(6): 1085–1109.
27.
MoonCSouvaM (2016) Audience costs, information, and credible commitment problems. Journal of Conflict Resolution, in press.
28.
MorrowJD (1989) Capabilities, uncertainty, and resolve: A limited information model of crisis bargaining. American Journal of Political Science33(4): 941–972.
29.
NortonECWangHAiC (2004) Computing interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models. The Stata Journal4(2): 154–167.
30.
OrganskiAFKKuglerJ (1980) The War Ledger. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
OwsiakA (2012) Signing up for peace: International boundary agreements, democracy, and militarized interstate conflict. International Studies Quarterly56: 51–66.
PowellR (1996) Stability and the distribution of power. World Politics48(2): 239–267.
34.
PowellR (1999) In the Shadow of Power. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
QuackenbushSL (2010) Territorial issues and recurrent conflict. Conflict Management and Peace Science27(3): 239–252.
36.
ReedWClarkDHNordstromTHwangW (2008) War, power, and bargaining. The Journal of Politics70(4): 1203–1216.
37.
RiderTJOwsiakAP (2016) Border settlement, commitment problems, and the causes of contiguous rivalry. Journal of Peace Research, in press.
38.
SchultzKA (2014) What’s in a claim: De jure vs de facto borders in interstate territorial disputes. Journal of Conflict Management58(6): 1059–1084
39.
SenesePD (2005) Territory, contiguity, and international conflict: Assessing a new joint explanation. American Journal of Political Science49(4): 769–779.
40.
SenesePDVasquezJA (2003) A unified explanation of territorial conflict: Testing the impact of sampling bias, 1919–1992. International Studies Quarterly47: 275–298.
41.
SignorinoCSRitterJM (1999) Tau-b or not tau-b: Measuring the similarity of foreign policy positions. International Studies Quarterly43(1): 115–144.
42.
SingerJDBremerSStuckeyJ (1972) Capability distribution, uncertainty, and major power war, 1820–1965. In: RussettB (ed.), Peace, War, and Numbers. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 19–48.
43.
StinnettDMTirJDiehlPFSchaferPGochmanC (2002) The Correlates of War (COW) Project Direct Contiguity Data, version 3.0. Conflict Management and Peace Science19(2): 59–67.
44.
ToftMD (2014) Territory and war. Journal of Peace Research51(2): 185–198.
45.
VasquezJA (1993) The War Puzzle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
VasquezJA (2001) Mapping the probability of war and analyzing the possibility of peace: The role of territorial disputes. Conflict Management and Peace Science18(2):145–174.
47.
VasquezJA (2004) The probability of war. International Studies Quarterly48: 1–27.
48.
VasquezJHenehanMT (2001) Territorial disputes and the probability of war, 1816–1992. Journal of Peace Research38(2): 123–138.
49.
WaltzK (1979) Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
50.
WeigandKE (2011) Enduring Territorial Disputes. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
51.
WernerS (1999) Choosing demands strategically: The distribution of power, the distribution of benefits, and the risk of conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution43(6): 705–726.
52.
WrightTMRiderTJ (2014) Disputed territory, defensive alliances, and conflict initiation. Conflict Management and Peace Science31(2): 119–144.
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.
