Benjamin E. Goldsmith

A Liberal Peace in Asia

Drawing on recent liberal peace and Asian security research, this article assesses the relevance of prominent ‘Kantian’ hypotheses for understanding the international politics of Asia. While there is some evidence that the dynamics of war and peace are different in Asia than in other parts of the world, this does not mean that liberal theories are irrelevant. There is at best weak support for the pacific effects of democracy or international institutions in Asia. But liberal expectations, and those of some Asia analysts, about the importance of economic interdependence for reducing conflict in Asia are robustly confirmed. This result obtains even with a control for the simultaneous trade-dampening effect of conflict using structural equations. But the strong intra-Asian effect of trade interdependence does not translate into a robust pacific effect between Asian states and those outside the region. A more nuanced picture emerges; the democratic peace appears most relevant for interactions between Asian states and the rest of the world. The findings show that analysts can rely neither on beliefs that Asia is sui generis nor on purely realist models as guides to Asian security issues. Kantian and realist theories are both relevant. The results also indicate that some common assumptions of analysts, especially regarding the importance of alliances and institutions, are not in accord with the regularities of conflict and peace in Asia.

Spinning the Globe? U.S. Public Diplomacy and Foreign Public Opinion

Global public opinion has emerged as a prominent issue in international relations. But have U.S. public diplomacy efforts during the post-9/11 period successfully improved foreign publics’ appraisals of U.S. foreign policy? We examine this question by estimating the effects of U.S. high-level visits to foreign countries on public opinion in those countries. We base our theoretical arguments on the political communication literature, but extend them to consider transnational dynamics in international relations. Specifically, we argue that U.S. leaders’ credibility in the eyes of foreign publics is critical in shaping attitudes toward U.S. foreign policy. Empirically, we show that the effects of such visits were initially significantly large and positive, but weakened once the war in Iraq began and international media started reporting negative aspects of the “war on terror.” Most interestingly, we find some evidence that high-level visits eventually exhibited a backlash effect.

American Foreign Policy and Global Opinion: Who Supported the War in Afghanistan?

What affects global public opinion about U.S. foreign policy? The authors examine this question using a cross-national survey conducted during and immediately after the 2001 U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. They propose three models of global public opinion— interests, socialization, and influence—and discuss their empirical validity. Socialization variables (e.g., Muslim population and past terrorist incidents) tend to exhibit significant effects. A variable measuring shared security interests, North Atlantic Treaty Organization membership, has significant effects in favor of U.S. policy, but other mutual defense pacts with the U.S. have a backlash effect. Shared economic interests, represented by levels of trade, also have a positive influence. Variables measuring conflicting security interests as well as those measuring U.S. efforts to influence foreign public opinion have insignificant or weak effects.

Defense Effort and Institutional Theories of Democratic Peace and Victory Why Try Harder

Examining the relationship between regime type and defense effort provides evidence for reformulating theories of democratic peace. Consistent with liberal theories, regime type has substantively and statistically significant effects. In times of peace, democracies bear lower defense burdens than other states and keep proportionately fewer soldiers under arms. During times of war, however, democracies try harder and exert greater defense effort than non-democracies. Contrary to the results of some recent studies, all other things being equal, the arsenal of democracy appears to out-gun its opponents when it counts. Examining three components of democracy separately indicates that a largely overlooked factor, political competition, tends to drive these outcomes. Executive constraints are also associated with increased defense effort during war. But there is little evidence that wide participation or large winning coalitions have the predicted effects on defense effort. The results point to the flexible quality of defense effort in democracies, which is theoretically and empirically accounted for by the competitive political environment rather than institutional factors favored by existing theories.

A Universal Proposition? Region, Conflict, War and the Robustness of the Kantian Peace

This article assesses the robustness of the liberal or ‘Kantian’ peace propositions by challenging two common practices: pooling data for different geographic regions, and using conflict at any level as a proxy for interstate war. The findings indicate that there are substantial differences between regions in the effects of democracy, economic interdependence, and international organizations. Conflict (all MIDs) and war have considerably different relationships to these key variables, and to each other, across regions. While I do not argue that these results undermine the general Kantian peace propositions, they do represent powerful qualifications that provide insight into theoretical foundations and raise related questions of specification error. They also point to the continuing importance of concepts such as security communities and norms as liberal factors distinct from the Kantian variables.

Forecasting the onset of genocide and politicide: Annual out-of-sample forecasts on a global dataset, 1988–2003

We present what is, to the best of our knowledge, the first published set of annual out-of-sample forecasts of genocide and politicide based on a global dataset. Our goal is to produce a prototype for a real-time model capable of forecasting one year into the future. Building on the current literature, we take several important steps forward. We implement an unconditional two-stage model encompassing both instability and genocide, allowing our sample to be the available global data, rather than using conditional case selection or a case-control approach. We explore factors exhibiting considerable variance over time to improve yearly forecasting performance. And we produce annual lists of at-risk states in a format that should be of use to policymakers seeking to prevent such mass atrocities. Our out-of-sample forecasts for 1988–2003 predict 90.9% of genocide onsets correctly while also predicting 79.2% of non-onset years correctly, an improvement over a previous study using a case-control in-sample approach. We produce 16 annual forecasts based only on previous years’ data, which identify six of 11 cases of genocide/politicide onset within the top 5% of at-risk countries per year. We believe this represents substantial progress towards useful real-time forecasting of such rare events. We conclude by suggesting ways to further enhance predictive performance.

Letting Go Without a Fight: Decolonization, Democracy and War, 1900-94

Does the type of regime really make no difference to the likelihood of violent conflict over basic issues of stateness such as separatism and decolonization? Can democratic peace theory be successfully applied when dealing with the national identity or stateness question? This article extends the application of the democratic peace to the process of decolonization. It examines conflict between imperial states and their colonies during the process of decolonization and investigates the question of whether democracy affects the likelihood of conflict. The central finding is that, contrary to the implications of some prominent theories of state formation and democracy, democratic imperial states are significantly less likely to go to war with their colonial possessions in the process of achieving independence. Further, the authors find only a monadic, not dyadic, democratic peace effect. The regime type of the colony does not have a significant effect on the likelihood of war. It is the nature of the regime of imperial states, rather than that of colonies, that is a significant factor. In addition, the predominant source of this effect appears to be the institutional constraints placed on executive action within democracies, rather than the influence of mass politics or the effects of political competition. Regarding power-related factors, power parity between sovereign and colony makes conflict more likely (a colonial power-transition effect), but imperial decline actually makes war with colonies less likely. Sensitivity analysis reveals that a number of other hypothesized effects cannot find robust support. Simulations are used to assess the magnitude of the effect of regime type pre- and post-independence. Overall, the article contributes to theory development by investigating different institutional aspects of democracy and by distinguishing monadic and dyadic effects.

Doing Well by Doing Good: The Impact of Foreign Aid on Foreign Public Opinion

Does foreign aid extended by one country improve that countrys image among populations of recipient countries? Using a multinational survey, we show that a United States aid program targeted to address HIV and AIDS substantially improves perceptions of the U.S. Our identification strategy for causal inference is to use instrumental variables measuring the magnitude of the HIV/AIDS problem in aid recipient countries. Our finding implies that in addition to its potential humanitarian benefits, foreign aid that is targeted, sustained, effective, and visible can serve as an important strategic goal for those countries that give it: fostering positive perceptions among foreign publics. By doing good, a country can do well.

Regime Type and International Conflict: Towards a General Model

The authors take a new look at the relationship between regime type and deadly militarized conflict among pairs of states (dyads) in the international system. With the goal of describing the general functional form, they evaluate three perspectives: democratic peace, regime similarity and regime rationality. They employ both standard logistic regression (logit) and a recently developed machine learning technique, a support vector machine (SVM). Logit is dependent on assumptions that limit flexibility and make it difficult to discern the appropriate functional form. SVM estimation, on the other hand, is highly flexible and appears capable of discovering a relationship that is contingent on other variables in the model. SVM results indicate that regime similarity and joint democracy are important in most dyadic interactions. However, for the special but important case of the most dangerous dyads, regime rationality plays a role and the democratic peace effect is dominant. The results suggest that models of international conflict excluding distinct indicators for political similarity, joint democracy and joint autocracy may be misspecified. SVMs are an especially useful complement to conventional statistical methods.

International Trade and The Onset and Escalation of Interstate Conflict: More to Fight About, or More Reasons Not to Fight?

Although study of the relationship between international trade and militarized conflict has become more sophisticated, whether trade reduces the chance of conflict, exacerbates it, or has no effect, remains contested. Integrating expectations from schools of thought often portrayed as incompatible, I consider two aspects of trade – volume and interdependence – and model conflict as a two-stage process involving onset and escalation. This perspective leads to robust statistical findings that trade is Janus-faced, both facilitating and inhibiting conflict at different stages, supporting the conclusion that a focus on international conflict as a communication process promises better theory in international relations.