The ultimate sacrifice
Conscription, Inequality, and Partisan Support for War
Douglas Kriner & Francis Shen
Journal of Conflict Resolution, forthcoming
Abstract:
While recent scholarship suggests that conscription decreases support for military action, we argue that its effect is contingent both on a draft's consequences for inequality in military sacrifice and on partisanship. In an experiment examining public support for defending South Korea, we find that reinstating the draft significantly decreases support for war among Democrats; however, this effect is diminished if the draft reduces inequality in sacrifice. Support for war among Republicans, by contrast, responds neither to information about conscription nor its inequality ramifications. A follow-up experiment shows that conscription continues to significantly decrease support for war, even in the context of a retaliatory strike against a foreign state that targeted American forces. Moreover, partisanship and the inequality ramifications of the draft continue to moderate the relationships between conscription and public opinion. More broadly, our study emphasizes the importance of examining how Americans evaluate foreign policy–relevant information through partisan lenses.
---------------------
Insurgency and Small Wars: Estimation of Unobserved Coalition Structures
Francesco Trebbi & Eric Weese
NBER Working Paper, May 2015
Abstract:
Insurgency and guerrilla warfare impose enormous socioeconomic costs and often persist for decades. This paper studies the detection of unobserved coalitions of insurgent groups in conflict areas, and their main socioeconomic determinants. We present a novel methodology based on daily geocoded incident-level data on insurgent attacks, and provide an application in the context of the Afghan conflict during the 2004-2009 period. We show statistically that the Afghani Taliban are not an umbrella coalition, but rather a highly unified group, and that their span of control has grown substantially beyond ethnic Pashtun areas post-2007.
---------------------
Vladimir Bejan & William Parkin
Economics Letters, August 2015, Pages 55–58
Abstract:
This paper examines the impact of repressive and conciliatory actions by Israel on terrorist activity using vector autoregression. Increases in repressive actions lead to a significant reduction in terrorist attacks. Conciliatory actions, on the other hand, have no effect.
---------------------
Johannes Hörner, Massimo Morelli & Francesco Squintani
Review of Economic Studies, forthcoming
Abstract:
This article applies mechanism design to the study of international conflict resolution. Standard mechanisms in which an arbitrator can enforce her decisions are usually not feasible because disputants are sovereign entities. Nevertheless, we find that this limitation is inconsequential. Despite only being capable of making unenforceable recommendations, mediators can be equally effective as arbitrators. By using recommendation strategies that do not reveal that one player is weak to a strong opponent, a mediator can effectively circumvent the unenforceability constraint. This is because these strategies make the strong player agree to recommendations that yield the same payoff as arbitration in expectation. This result relies on the capability of mediators to collect confidential information from the disputants, before making their recommendations. Simple protocols of unmediated communication cannot achieve the same level of ex ante welfare, as they preclude confidentiality.
---------------------
The Production of Medical Isotopes without Nuclear Reactors or Uranium Enrichment
Seth Hoedl & Derek Updegraff
Science & Global Security, Summer 2015, Pages 121-153
Abstract:
This article examines the current capability of accelerator technology, which is rapidly improving, to produce medical isotopes. A detailed analysis of 12 medical isotopes that are in active diagnostic and therapeutic use and typically made in nuclear reactors shows that accelerator-based technologies, such as linear accelerators, cyclotrons, and spallation neutron sources, could meet medical demand for these isotopes, without the use of enriched uranium and with low proliferation risk. The feasibility of accelerator-based production of an additional 70 isotopes that have a potential medical use is also discussed. A simple estimate suggests that accelerators can produce isotopes at a cost comparable to reactors. This article includes four case studies that illustrate the recent choices that emerging market countries have made when expanding domestic medical isotope production. Technical, commercial, and regulatory steps for commercialization are also described. The article concludes with policy suggestions that would increase the adoption of accelerator-based medical isotope production.
---------------------
The Strategist's Curse: A Theory of False Optimism as a Cause of War
Daniel Altman
Security Studies, Spring 2015, Pages 284-315
Abstract:
This article proposes a new theory of false optimism as a cause of war. Named for its similarity to the winner's curse in auctions, this theory explains how and why established sources of misperception (cognitive, psychological, bureaucratic, and organizational) interact with the selection of one military strategy from a set of alternatives to produce a surprising amount of additional false optimism. Even if a state's general perceptions of how well it will fare in a potential war are not biased toward optimism, this theory explains why its perceptions of the particular strategy on which it will base its plans for fighting that war will be systematically biased toward optimism. Simulations and formal modeling confirm the logic of the theory and suggest that the strategist's curse can sharply increase the probability of war due to false optimism.
---------------------
Dictators and Death: Casualty Sensitivity of Autocracies in Militarized Interstate Disputes
Cigdem Sirin & Michael Koch
International Studies Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
Why are some authoritarian regimes so quick to surrender amid lower numbers of casualties while others prove willing to incur significant casualty counts to continue their war efforts? In this study, we explore the propensity of different authoritarian regime types to sustain casualties in interstate conflicts. We argue that authoritarian leaders with smaller winning coalitions find it easier to distribute the costs of militarized conflicts outside of those coalitions. This diminishes their sensitivity to casualties. Applying a theoretical model based on an inverse divide-the-dollar game (with respect to the distribution of public "bads"), we find that personalist regimes tend to sustain the highest number of casualties in militarized interstate disputes when compared to other autocracies. Our findings suggest that along with the audience cost abilities of an autocratic adversary, target states should also consider an autocratic regime's casualty sensitivity in deciding whether to reciprocate with military action.
---------------------
Jonathan Joseph Reilly
Political Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
In this article, I present findings from a survey experiment in which Chinese university students exposed to a treatment designed to increase feelings of national threat were — based on their responses to the four-item postmaterialism values-priority battery — significantly more likely to be classified as "pure materialists." These findings are presented in support of the proposition that perception of a hostile international environment may tend to exaggerate citizens' authoritarian and nationalistic sentiments at the expense of more democratically favorable value orientations. Media and political figures in the West who rail against the evils of China's authoritarian leadership might believe that they are championing and encouraging democratic aspirations among the Chinese people, but might instead be inciting impulses and attitudes that are far less "democracy-friendly."
---------------------
A Two-Way Street on Iraq: On the Interaction of Citizen Policy Preferences and Presidential Approval
Michael Bailey & Clyde Wilcox
American Politics Research, forthcoming
Abstract:
To the extent voters respond at all to presidential policy positions, they may do so by changing their views on the policy or by changing their views of the president. Presidents need to account for both changes as they care both about citizen approval and citizen policy views. We explore this dynamic in response to the Iraq War using multiple statistical methods. We find consistent evidence that citizen views of President Bush influenced their support for the war even as citizen views of the war affected their approval of Bush. Net changes in aggregate public opinion were smaller than gross changes because of simultaneous movement in both directions on both the war and the president. Recognizing this two-way movement of opinion helps us to better understand the challenges facing presidents in leading public opinion.
---------------------
Transnational Terrorism as an Unintended Consequence of a Military Footprint
Alex Braithwaite
Security Studies, Spring 2015, Pages 349-375
Abstract:
Terrorist groups commonly cite the local presence of foreign troops as a motivation for their violence. This article examines the validity and robustness of the proposition that the deployment of military capabilities overseas provokes terrorist violence against the deploying state's global interests. A cross-national dataset, combining data on foreign troop deployments and transnational terrorist violence directed against states' global interests, is used to create a series of empirical models at the directed-dyad-year level of analysis. Descriptive statistics and multivariate analyses provide corroborative evidence of territorial terrorism. These findings are robust to a wide variety of alternative specifications and to the use of instrumental variables regression to model the potential endogeneity of terrorism to troop deployment decisions.
---------------------
Democracy and War Effort: An Experiment
Andrew Bausch
Journal of Conflict Resolution, forthcoming
Abstract:
This article uses a laboratory experiment to explore how groups' internal rules for leader selection affect how leaders select into and fight conflicts. The findings reveal that, counter to expectations, leaders of democratic groups were more likely than leaders of autocratic groups to select into a conflict rather than accept a negotiated settlement. Conditional on conflict occurring, democratic leaders did not mobilize more resources for war than autocratic leaders. However, democratic leaders were less likely to accept a settlement once a war was underway and they expended more effort in the last round of conflict, suggesting once they entered a war they fought for a decisive victory. Domestically, democratic leaders were punished for losing wars more often than autocratic leaders, while winning wars did not benefit democratic leaders significantly.
---------------------
Seen Like a State: How Illegitimacy Shapes Terrorism Designation
Winston Chou
Social Forces, forthcoming
Abstract:
Why are only some violent political actors designated as terrorists? To answer this question, I examine formal terrorism designations made by the US government. Conceptualizing terrorism designation as a marker of organizational illegitimacy, I hypothesize that groups that appear more like a state — effective, representative, and secular — are more likely to be seen as legitimate contenders for political power. As a result, these groups have a lower risk of being designated as terrorists. Conversely, groups that target more legitimate states have a higher risk of being designated as terrorists. Empirically, I demonstrate several facts in support of these hypotheses. First, the United States has disproportionately labeled weak and politically non-representative groups as terrorists. Second, it has disproportionately labeled groups in countries with greater state capacity as terrorists. Third, especially in recent years, it has disproportionately labeled Islamist groups as terrorists.
---------------------
Pro- and Anti-Americanism in Sub-Saharan Africa
Felicity Duncan, Devra Moehler & Laura Silver
International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Summer 2015, Pages 220-243
Abstract:
Do theories developed to explain widespread anti-Americanism in some regions generalize to countries where pro-Americanism is the norm? Anti-Americanism has intensified in most places, yet sentiments remain relatively positive in sub-Saharan Africa. We compare survey responses from Africa with those from other regions in the developing world to determine why Africans are more pro-American than others. The evidence indicates that personal contacts with individuals in the United States, support for international engagement, and admiration of the American model generate goodwill in Africa. Notably, these individual-level drivers of approval in Africa are similar to those in other regions. We conclude that Africans are relatively favorable toward the United States because more Africans than non-Africans have attitudes, traits, and experiences that encourage pro-American sentiments.
---------------------
Nicole Syringa Harth & Nurit Shnabel
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, forthcoming
Abstract:
Third parties, particularly if neutral, have been found to promote instrumental conflict resolution. Using the needs-based model's theoretical framework, we investigated whether third parties can also promote socioemotional reconciliation. Study 1 (N = 124) revealed that in the context of fraud between universities, conciliatory messages from either the other conflict party or a third party sharing common identity with it increased group members' willingness to reconcile more than equivalent messages from a neutral third party. Replicating and extending this pattern, Study 2 (N = 177) exposed Israeli Jewish participants to texts which reminded them of historical transgressions conducted by Palestinians or against them. We found that compared to a control condition, messages supposedly conveyed by either Palestinians or Jordanians, but not by the UN, increased Israeli Jews' willingness to reconcile with Palestinians. These effects were mediated by the extent to which the official conveying these messages was perceived as representing the other conflict party.
---------------------
The United States and Nicaragua: Understanding the Breakdown in Relations
Robert Hager & Robert Snyder
Journal of Cold War Studies, Spring 2015, Pages 3-35
Abstract:
Although the United States and Nicaragua maintained cooperative relations for a period after the Sandinista revolution of 1979, ties between the two states deteriorated. What explains the shift from cordial to hostile relations? The two dominant explanations have been that the aggressive policies of the new Reagan administration forced the Sandinista regime into a defensive position of hostility or that a downward spiral occurred based on the security dilemma. This paper rejects both and offers an alternative: The Sandinistas for ideological and domestic political reasons chose antagonistic relations when they opted to arm and support the rebels in El Salvador in violation of an earlier agreement between the two states. Drawing on research that shows the aggressive tendencies of revolutionary states, the article contrasts this theory with the spiral model. Moreover, analysis of the archives of the early Reagan administration shows that it wanted to find an accommodation with Managua. Although the revolutionary Sandinistas were motivated by ideology, Washington was more influenced by geopolitical concerns.
---------------------
Predicting Jewish-Israeli Recognition of Palestinian Pain and Suffering
Rotem Nagar & Ifat Maoz
Journal of Conflict Resolution, forthcoming
Abstract:
Recognition is vital for conflict resolution. This study was designed to learn more about the factors underlying the willingness to recognize the pain and suffering of the opponent in the asymmetrical protracted conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Data were collected through a public opinion survey conducted with a representative sample of Israeli-Jewish adults (N = 511). Perceptions of threat/distrust toward Palestinians and dehumanization of Palestinians each made a significant contribution to explaining Jewish-Israeli (un)willingness to recognize Palestinian pain and suffering (R2 = .36). Hawkishness made an added significant contribution to the overall explanatory power of the model (R2 = .38). Higher scores on the threat/distrust scale and the dehumanization scale, as well as higher hawkishness predicted decreased willingness to recognize Palestinian pain and suffering. The implications of our findings for understanding the role of recognition and of moral concern in conflict resolution are discussed.
---------------------
Images of Injury: Graphic News Visuals' Effects on Attitudes Toward the Use of Unmanned Drones
Erica Scharrer & Greg Blackburn
Mass Communication and Society, forthcoming
Abstract:
In this study, sanitized coverage of the United States' use of military drone strikes in foreign countries is pitted against more graphic news images in an experimental setting to determine effects on attitudes toward the use of US. military drones. Additionally, multiple news exposures are tested to determine whether individuals can become emotionally inured to war coverage, even when images are more graphic. Key results find those who viewed graphic news visuals did not show evidence of desensitization after repeated viewing, and expressed higher levels of concern regarding drone use, but not reduced support for U.S. drone policy.