民主与转移性冲突:外部透明度与国内约束

IF 0.3 4区 社会学 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
S. Jung
{"title":"民主与转移性冲突:外部透明度与国内约束","authors":"S. Jung","doi":"10.22883/KJDA.2021.33.1.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines two institutional explanations of the presence or absence of diversionary conflict. The two approaches emphasize different factors―external transparency and domestic constraints, respectively―in describing the relationship between domestic institutions and diversionary actions. Up to this point, they have not been compared theoretically and empirically in an explicit way. The present study contrasts their causal explanations and tests two competing sets of hypotheses, using cases derived from directed dyad-years from 1950 to 2000. The results show that either external transparency (strategic interaction) or internal constraints (domestic checks and balances) discourages diversionary conflict, and that mature democracies, domestically constrained and externally transparent, are least likely to initiate diversionary conflict.","PeriodicalId":43274,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democracy and Diversionary Conflict: External Transparency and Domestic Constraints\",\"authors\":\"S. Jung\",\"doi\":\"10.22883/KJDA.2021.33.1.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study examines two institutional explanations of the presence or absence of diversionary conflict. The two approaches emphasize different factors―external transparency and domestic constraints, respectively―in describing the relationship between domestic institutions and diversionary actions. Up to this point, they have not been compared theoretically and empirically in an explicit way. The present study contrasts their causal explanations and tests two competing sets of hypotheses, using cases derived from directed dyad-years from 1950 to 2000. The results show that either external transparency (strategic interaction) or internal constraints (domestic checks and balances) discourages diversionary conflict, and that mature democracies, domestically constrained and externally transparent, are least likely to initiate diversionary conflict.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43274,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22883/KJDA.2021.33.1.007\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Defense Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22883/KJDA.2021.33.1.007","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了转移性冲突存在与否的两种制度解释。在描述国内制度与转移行动之间的关系时,这两种方法分别强调不同的因素——外部透明度和国内约束。到目前为止,它们还没有在理论上和经验上进行明确的比较。目前的研究对比了他们的因果解释,并测试了两组相互竞争的假设,使用了从1950年到2000年的直接双年的案例。结果表明,无论是外部透明度(战略互动)还是内部约束(国内制衡)都会阻碍转移性冲突,而成熟的民主国家,国内约束和外部透明,最不可能发起转移性冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Democracy and Diversionary Conflict: External Transparency and Domestic Constraints
This study examines two institutional explanations of the presence or absence of diversionary conflict. The two approaches emphasize different factors―external transparency and domestic constraints, respectively―in describing the relationship between domestic institutions and diversionary actions. Up to this point, they have not been compared theoretically and empirically in an explicit way. The present study contrasts their causal explanations and tests two competing sets of hypotheses, using cases derived from directed dyad-years from 1950 to 2000. The results show that either external transparency (strategic interaction) or internal constraints (domestic checks and balances) discourages diversionary conflict, and that mature democracies, domestically constrained and externally transparent, are least likely to initiate diversionary conflict.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Korean Journal of Defense Analysis
Korean Journal of Defense Analysis INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Since its first publication in 1989, The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis has been covering a broad range of topics related to foreign policy, defense and international affairs in the Asia-Pacific region. As the oldest SSCI registered English journal of political science in Asia, The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis has promoted efforts to provide an arena for sharing initiatives and new perspectives on military and security issues of the Asia-Pacific region. To offer better support to this idea of active intercommunication amongst scholars and defense experts around the globe, The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis made a decision to publish quarterly, starting from 2005.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信