Oliver Westerwinter

Networked international politics Complex interdependence and the diffusion of conflict and peace

Network theory and methods are becoming increasingly used to study the causes and consequences of conflict. Network analysis allows researchers to develop a better understanding of the causal dynamics and structural geometry of the complex web of interdependencies at work in the onset, incidence, and diffusion of conflict and peace. This issue features new theoretical and empirical research demonstrating how properly accounting for networked interdependencies has profound implications for our understanding of the processes thought to be responsible for the conflict behavior of state and non-state actors. The contributors examine the variation in networks of states and transnational actors to explain outcomes related to international conflict and peace. They highlight how networked interdependencies affect conflict and cooperation in a broad range of areas at the center of international relations scholarship. It is helpful to distinguish between three uses of networks, namely: (1) as theoretical tools, (2) as measurement tools, and (3) as inferential tools. The introduction discusses each of these uses and shows how the contributions rely on one or several of them. Next, Monte Carlo simulations are used to illustrate one of the strengths of network analysis, namely that it helps researchers avoid biased inferences when the data generating process underlying the observed data contains extradyadic interdependencies.

The complex structure of commercial peace contrasting trade interdependence, asymmetry, and multipolarity

Researchers continue to debate the impact of trade on interstate conflict. While many view trade as pacifying, others argue that dependencies increase friction and the risk of war. We provide a theory that explains how cross-border economic ties alternately enhance or impede international cooperation. Three main factors account for the heterogeneous effects of trade on conflict: interdependence, asymmetry, and multipolarity. Interdependence can act as a substitute for, or as a deterrent to, militarized violence. In the former case, interdependence actually increases more modest non-militarized conflict, while also discouraging militarized disputes. Asymmetry diminishes the conflict-inhibiting effect of trade ties, as dependency cannot simultaneously be used to coerce and to inform. Multilateral trade networks alternately moderate or enhance the bilateral effects of interdependence and asymmetry on interstate peace. Our theory and evidence reveal complex, cross-cutting consequences of economic interdependence on conflict behavior and also demonstrate effects well beyond the dyad, suggesting the need to include extradyadic ties in future theoretical and empirical research studying the commercial peace.

Formal and Informal Governance in the UN Peacebuilding Commission

Post-conflict peacebuilding — understood as efforts undertaken at the end of a civil war to create conditions under which peace is consolidated and violence will not recur (Boutros-Ghali 1992: 15) — has traditionally been a matter of states and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs).1 National governments consult with their international partners to develop and implement projects aimed at the political, economic, and social reconstruction of war-torn societies. Non-state actors, particularly local civil society organizations and armed groups, are usually considered addressees of post-conflict recovery programs. The new generation of peacebuilding operations, however, goes beyond this intergovernmental approach (Otobo 2009, Paris 2009, Paris and Sisk 2009). Not only a variety of actors including the United Nations (UN) but also many Western governments and donor organizations have acknowledged that the exclusion of non-state actors is problematic, and they have started to promote local ownership as a new guiding principle of post-conflict governance (e.g. OECD Paris Declaration 2005). As a result, there has been a rapid growth in the involvement of non-state actors in post-conflict peacebuilding both at the international and domestic level. The frequency, scope, and depth of non-state-actor involvement has changed, ranging from assistance in the implementation of projects to participation in decision-making and monitoring.