The democratic and territorial peace arguments explain interstate peace via distinct mechanisms. Yet they can be integrated. I theoretically derive both the unique domains in which each argument might operate and the ways in which the two arguments might reinforce one another. An analysis of the period 1816–2001 demonstrates support for a more integrative approach. Within contiguous dyads, border settlement significantly reduces conflict, even for non-democratic dyads. Democratic dyads, however, experience no such effect in the absence of border settlement. Nonetheless, the democratic peace functions strongly in non-contiguous dyads, and even the most peaceful, contiguous dyads require both democracy and border settlement. Such findings offer a foundation for further theoretical development that integrates the two arguments.
BrecherMWilkenfeldJ (2000) A Study of Crisis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
5.
Bueno de MesquitaBSmithASiversonRMMorrowJD (2003) The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
6.
ChanS (2012) Programmatic research on the democratic peace. In: MitchellSMDiehlPFMorrowJD (eds), Guide to the Scientific Study of International Processes. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 151–170.
DiehlPFGoertzG (2000) War and Peace in International Rivalry. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
9.
FazalTM (2004) State death in the international system. International Organization58(2): 311–344.
10.
FearonJD (1994) Domestic political audiences and the escalation of international disputes. American Political Science Review88(3): 577–592.
11.
FearonJD (1995) Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization49(3): 379–414.
12.
FrederickBAHenselPRMacaulayC (2016) The provisional Issue Correlates of War Territorial Claims data: Procedures and description. Unpublished manuscript.
13.
GhosnFPalmerGBremerSA (2004) The MID3 Data Set, 1993–2001: Procedures, coding rules, and description.Conflict Management and Peace Science21(2): 133–154.
14.
GiblerDM (2012) The Territorial Peace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
GiblerDM (2014) Contiguous states, stable borders, and the peace between democracies. International Studies Quarterly58(1): 126–129.
16.
HenselPR (2001) Contentious issues and world politics: The management of territorial claims in the Americas, 1816–1992. International Studies Quarterly45(1): 81–109.
17.
HermannCF (1963) Some consequences of crisis which limit the viability of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly8(1): 61–82.
18.
HuthPK (1996) Standing Your Ground: Territorial Disputes and International Conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
19.
HuthPKAlleeTL (2002) The Democratic Peace and Territorial Conflict in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
IrelandG (1938) Boundaries, Possessions, and Conflicts in South America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
JamesPParkJChoiS (2006) Democracy and conflict management: Territorial claims in the Western Hemisphere revisited. International Studies Quarterly50(4): 803–817.
22.
LeedsBARitterJMMitchellSMLongAG (2002) Alliance treaty and obligations provisions, 1815–1944. International Interactions28(3): 237–260.
23.
MaozZ (1989) Joining the club of nations: Political development and international conflict, 1816–1976. International Studies Quarterly33(2): 199–231.
24.
MaozZRussettB (1993) Normative and structural causes of democratic peace, 1946–1986. American Political Science Review87(3): 624–638.
25.
MarshallMGJaggersK (2009) Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800–2006. Polity IV Project. Available at: http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity4.htm
26.
MitchellSM (2002) A Kantian system: Democracy and third-party conflict resolution. American Journal of Political Science46(4): 749–759.
27.
MitchellSMPrinsBC (1999) Beyond territorial contiguity: Issues at stake in democratic militarized interstate disputes. International Studies Quarterly43(1): 169–183.
28.
MorrowJDBueno de MesquitaBSiversonRMSmithA (2006) Selection institutions and war aims. Economics of Governance7(1): 31–52.
29.
MostBAStarrH (1989) Inquiry, Logic, and International Politics. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
30.
OwsiakAP (2012) Signing up for peace: International boundary agreements, democracy, and militarized interstate conflict. International Studies Quarterly56(1): 51–66.
31.
OwsiakAP (2013) Democratization and international border agreements. Journal of Politics75(3): 717–729.
32.
OwsiakAPVasquezJA (2016) The cart and the horse redux: The timing of border settlement and joint democracy. Working Manuscript.
33.
OwsiakAPCuttnerAKBuckB (2016) The International Border Agreements Dataset. Conflict Management and Peace Science, in press.
34.
ParkJColaresiMP (2014) Safe across the border: The continued significance of the democratic peace when controlling for stable borders. International Studies Quarterly58(1): 118–125.
RussettBOnealJ (2001) Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organization. New York: W.W. Norton.
37.
SchultzKS (1999) Do domestic institutions constrain or inform? Contrasting two institutional perspectives on democracy and war. International Organization53(2): 233–236.
38.
SenesePD (2005) Territory, contiguity, and international conflict: Assessing a new joint explanation. American Journal of Political Science49(4): 769–779.
39.
SingerJD (1987) Reconstructing the Correlates of War Dataset on Material Capabilities of States, 1816–1995. International Interactions14(2): 115–132.
40.
SlantchevBL (2006) Politicians, the media, and domestic audience costs. International Studies Quarterly50(2): 445–477.
41.
StinnettDMTirJSchaferPDiehlPFGochmanC (2002) The Correlates of War Project Direct Contiguity Data, version 3. Conflict Management and Peace Science19(2): 58–66.
42.
ThompsonWR (1996) Democracy and peace: Putting the cart before the horse?International Organization50(1): 141–174.
43.
TillyC (1992) Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990–1992. Cambridge: Blackwell.
44.
TirJVasquezJA (2010) Geography and territory. In: DenemarkRA (ed.), The International Studies Encyclopedia (ISE), Vol. V. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
45.
TuckerR (1999) BTSCS: A Binary Time-Series-Cross-Section Data Analysis Utility, Version 4.0.4. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
46.
VasquezJA (2009) The War Puzzle Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47.
ZacherMW (2001) The territorial integrity norm: International boundaries and the use of force. International Organization55(2): 215–250.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
