Realist Hypotheses on Regional Peace

Merom, Gil

doi:10.1080/01402390308559310

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…). This last finding is consistent with a larger asymmetric war outcome literature theorizing that the time and casualty sensitivity of the interveners is crucial to the victory of weaker belligerents (Mack ; Merom ,b; Arreguín‐Toft ). In contrast, Mason et al.…”

Section: Foreign Interventionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Mack () argues that regime type is not a meaningful variable because both democratic and autocratic regimes experience high costs from protracted insurgencies. Several scholars, however, have argued that democratic states are especially prone to losing small wars because weak adversaries can exploit the casualty sensitivity and humanitarian sensibilities of democratic publics, while autocratic leaders face less accountability and have greater freedom to suppress domestic opposition to ongoing fighting (Horne ; Byman and Waxman ; Merom ,b; Arreguín‐Toft ; Galula and Nagl ; Zhukov ). Bapat contends that “leaders with total discretion have much greater capacity to fight insurgents than those that cannot pay the costs of war” (2005:710).…”

Section: State Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Do We Know about Civil War Outcomes?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does political science research have something to add to the counterinsurgency strategy debate? Should the discipline even concern itself with debates over military doctrine and strategy? After conducting a thorough review of the extant empirical literature, we argue that the answer to both of these questions is yes. Evaluating the theoretical and empirical findings of the last two decades, we identify three dimensions of civil wars affecting who prevails: (i) state capacity, (ii) the effects of violence against civilians, and (iii) foreign intervention. Domestic armed conflicts are characterized not only by military struggles, but equally importantly by contests of legitimacy between incumbent and rebel visions for the state. We conclude that the analyses of COIN strategy cannot be divorced from assessments of state capacity and the role of external actors in the conflict. We thus see the academic literature as instrumental in adding to practitioners' perspectives by more clearly identifying what COIN strategies can be applied under state capacity and legitimacy constraints to facilitate peace through both population-centered (legitimacy) and insurgent-centered (battlefield effectiveness) strategies. Our analysis identifies points of consensus, but also highlights the gaps in our knowledge, which need attention from both academe and practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Foreign Interventionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: State Capacitymentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do We Know about Civil War Outcomes?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Put differently, a region gains -or loses -in importance to external actors depending on its intrinsic, extrinsic and negative value. 43 The Africa policy of Saudi Arabia fits into this logic in multiple ways. First, official narratives regularly portray Africa as a region with negative value due to its importance to Riyadh's adversaries.…”

Section: Power Struggles Abroadmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sub‐Saharan Africa: A Theater for Middle East Power Struggles

Heibach

2020

Middle East Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The realist approach, while maintaining the centrality attributed to the systemic level, considers regions as expressions of material interests regardless of the presence of transnational and ideational factors. 22 The realist interpretation is particularly useful because it lists conditions that may lead extra-regional actors to intervene beyond their RSC: (1) the relative power of external actors must be greater than that of local actors; and (2) the former must find a specific interest to justify their engagement in a different RSC. 23…”

Section: Dynamics Of Rscsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetric alliances and high polarity: evaluating regional security complexes in the Middle East and Horn of Africa

Cannon

Donelli

2019

Third World Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Middle East and the Horn of Africa exist in two distinct regional security complexes (RSCs), groupings of states exhibiting intense security interdependence within a distinct region, but rarely between regions. Recent geopolitical changes and related analyses, however, point to either a subsuming or a joining of the two RSCs, potentially leading to a high degree of uncertainty in two conflict-prone regions. Given the importance of such developments, we question this theory of RSC expansion by offering a concise review of recent security interactions between the two RSCs as well as quantitatively and qualitatively measuring the material power capabilities of relevant states. Borrowing from and contributing to RSC theory, we also identify and analyse concepts and indicators such as threat perception and sub-regional alliances. Our findings demonstrate the Middle East RSC is not expanding to include that of the Horn of Africa. The two remain distinct and under internal consolidation, despite the current discourse. Rather, high polarity in the Middle East coupled with often-congruent interests in Horn of Africa states best explains the current pattern of their interaction, particularly as Middle East states pursue strategies that further their own security interests at the expense of rival states within their own RSC.

show abstract

Realist Hypotheses on Regional Peace

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

What Do We Know about Civil War Outcomes?

What Do We Know about Civil War Outcomes?

Sub‐Saharan Africa: A Theater for Middle East Power Struggles

Asymmetric alliances and high polarity: evaluating regional security complexes in the Middle East and Horn of Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About