CDSn4001:
Conflict
Analysis
Domestic political/social
causes of war
December 1, 2020
Miriam Matejova
Agenda
• Domestic causes of war/peace
–Democratic peace
–Economic systems and interdependence
• A note on case studies and qualitative methods
–Identity politics
Democratic peace theory
• Two versions:
1) individual DP model, and
2) the cost of war and public opposition
Individual model
• Looks at behavior of individual states.
• Democracies in general are more peaceful
(than non-democratic states).  largely
discredited
– People are generally disinclined to go to war and
will stop it if allowed.
– Authoritarian leaders sometimes start wars to
distract the public from authoritarianism, a
motivation that democratic leaders do not have.
“The cost of war” model
• Dyadic model (i.e., focus on pairs)
• Toward autocracies democracies are just as warlike
as autocracies, but democracies do not fight each
other.
• Origins attributed to Kant – possibility of an
international federation of republics that could usher
the perpetual peace.
• Ordinary citizens are inherently peaceful because they
are the ones who have to fight wars.
• In democracies, citizens can vote to control politicians.
• Power-hungry governments go to war against citizens’
wishes.
In support of the dyadic model
• Structural argument:
– political disputes resolved by compromise, which carries over
into foreign policy
– democracies keep their promises
– audience costs
• Normative argument:
– mutual respect among democracies and disdain toward
autocratic states
• Institutional argument:
– rational choice theory – political institutions have two effects on
leaders.
– 1) democratic states are more likely to win wars (because
citizens are more likely to support war efforts).
– 2) leaders are more sensitive to political costs of losing a war.
Problems with DPT?
• Is the promotion of democracy a solution to
war and conflict?
Case studies and qualitative methods
• Case study: “the detailed examination of an
aspect of a historical episode to develop or
test historical explanations that may be
generalizable to other events” (George and
Bennett 2005)
• Types of case study:
– Atheoretical, interpretive, hypothesis generating,
theory testing (confirming or infirming), deviant
case studies, most-likely and least-likely case
studies
Causality
• Qualitative approach: about “suspected”
causes (Xs) and effects (Ys) (e.g., comparative
case studies)
• Quantitative approach: X – independent
variable, Y – dependent variable (e.g.,
regression analyses)
• Causality: cause precedes effect
– A process that embodies the connection between
X and Y can be identified
Causal effects and mechanisms
• Two steps in the analysis:
– compare across cases to see the patterns in X and Y
 causal effect of X and Y
– analyze within cases to see what steps link X and Y
 causal mechanism
• What links X and Y? How/why does X lead to Y?
– process-tracing
– X and Y can be linked with different causal
mechanisms in different cases
Static identity approach
• Assumes that identity is “fixed” or
“unchanging.”
• Relies on the observation of characteristics of
already-known entities (i.e., female or male).
• Often self-referential: i.e., women behave in a
certain way (feminine) and men in another
(masculine).
Dynamic identity approach
• Assumes that subjectivity (identity) is always a
product of discourses – national, ethnic,
sexual, racial, gendered, class, religious,
economic, etc. – that circulate at any given
time and place.
• Acknowledges that the possibilities for who
we are as an individual are not left up to the
individual, but rather set out in advance and
are also limited by society.
Primordialism
• Ethnic group = a group of people who share
blood allegiances, kinship, and cultural
attributes.
• Primordial ties become more significant
through recurrent reference to them in
symbolic and cultural attributes – through
myths, traditions, and heritage.
• A nation-state is a product of historical
processes
– Ethnic groups turn into political units
– Nation-state emergence as a natural process
Modernism
• Nationalism is a political phenomenon (not
natural) – driven by political elites (i.e., the state)
– “Nationalism is not awakening of nations to selfconsciousness;
it invents nations where they do not
exist.”
– Through communication and mass-education in a
standardized language, elites transform diverse ethnic
identities into a unified community.
• Emergence of nations is linked to the processes
of industrialization and modernization.
– Changes in mode of production and communication
created a need for “a culturally homogenous
community of centrally-educated people.”
Imagined communities
• Benedict Anderson – political scientist, historian
• Nation is imaginary
– A community that is large enough that its members cannot
personally know each other is imagined.
– People perceive themselves as part of the group.
• Print-capitalism and spread of vernacular languages enabled
nationalism, because people could relate to each other in new
ways.