Diversionary conflict: Demonizing enemies or demonstrating competence?

Abstract

How do embattled leaders hope to secure their hold on power by initiating conflict abroad? The literature on diversionary war has emphasized two distinct mechanisms by which leaders stand to gain from conflict — the “rally around the flag” and “gambling for resurrection” theories. But despite a massive literature on the subject, these competing theories of diversionary incentives have never been subjected to comparative empirical evaluation. This article seeks to fill this gap. I argue that the rally and gambling theories predict diversionary conflicts to target different types of states. Diversionary conflicts driven by a rally logic will target traditional enemies and out-groups, including rivals, neighbors, and geopolitically incompatible states. Gambling for resurrection, on the other hand, pushes leaders to target powerful states in order to demonstrate competence to their constituents. Challenging the conventional wisdom, I find little evidence to support the rally mechanism. The results offer substantial support for the gambling for resurrection theory, indicating that diversionary conflict may be primarily driven by unpopular leaders attempting to prove their competence domestically.

Explaining patterns in the onset of interstate war

“…Tarar, 2006;Chiozza and Goemans, 2011); shocks must be of sufficiently large size to induce the behavior (Oneal and Tir, 2006) and they must affect supporters of the incumbent rather than the population more generally (Nicholls et al, 2010). Much like recent evidence that power preponderance rather than parity leads to conflict (Gibler, 2017), it has been found that leaders facing domestic problems will target powerful states (Haynes, 2017). This is paired with the observation that states with access to fewer financial resources are more likely to partake in adventurous foreign policy when confronted with domestic strife (Oakes, 2012;Powell, 2014).…”

Bi̇lardo Topunun Yapisinin Sökümü: Diş Poli̇ti̇ka Anali̇zi̇

“…Dış çatışmanın kamuoyu üzerinde yarattığı varsayılan etkilerden hareketle, hedef saptırma amaçlı dış politika tezi üzerine yapılan çalışmalar, sebepsonuç ilişkisindeki nedensellik okunun yönünü tersine çevirerek iç politika da yaşanan çatışma veya sorunların dış politika üzerine yaptığı etkilerini ve liderlerin hangi şartlar altında iç politikadan hedef saptırma amacıyla saldırgan bir dış politika eğilimine sahip olduklarını açıklamaya çalışır (Haynes, 2017). Bu yaklaşım, ekonomik sıkıntılar gibi iktidarlarını tehdit eden gelişmeler karşısında bu tehditleri bertaraf etmek veya bunlardan dikkatleri dağıtmak için günah keçisi olarak tanımlanan bir ülkeye karşı saldırgan ve çatışmacı bir dış politika izleme yolunu seçtiklerini savunur.…”

Inequality and Social Identity: Micro-Level Evidence Using a Measure of Perceived Economic Position

“…. A third prediction evolves from the "rally around the flag" mechanism of a diversionary inter-state conflict or foreign policy crisis (Haynes 2017). The international diversionary theory (IDT) claims that a leader threatened by domestic political unrest, due to inequality in our case, manufactures external threat or a foreign policy crisis as a "scapegoating mechanism."…”