Regime and Power in International Terror Crises: Strong Democracies Fight Back Hard

Ben‐Yehuda, Hemda; Levin-Banchik, Luba

doi:10.1080/09546553.2012.736891

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first approach focuses on the impact of the attributes of crisis actors, such as their political regime, military and economic capabilities, or possession of nuclear weapons (Asal and Beardsley, 2007; Ben-Yehuda and Levin-Banchik, 2010, 2014; Lektzian and Souva, 2009; Mishali-Ram, 2006). Some actor attributes, such as political regime, change rarely and slowly.…”

Section: Research On Crisis Escalation and Precrisis Hostilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precrisis military hostility and escalation in international crises

Levin-Banchik

2020

Conflict Management and Peace Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do some international crises escalate into violence while others do not? I argue that an understanding of crisis behavior necessitates awareness of the processes preceding a crisis and propose two mechanisms that link precrisis hostility with crisis violence. The population fatigue mechanism suggests that precrisis hostility interrupts the everyday life of a population, strengthening its demand for a harsher response. If leaders behave with restraint during a crisis and after the crisis hostilities resume, leaders risk facing greater dissatisfaction from their now even more fatigued population. The baseline for resolve mechanism suggests that if states are actively hostile before a crisis, they must maintain hostility during a crisis to credibly demonstrate resolve. Findings on international crises between 1918 and 2010 support the interphase relationship: a crisis escalation is significantly more likely after a hostile precrisis period. The behavior of opponents can indicate how crises might unfold even before they begin.

show abstract