International Conflict
RafaelGrasa
Why Study International
Conflict?
International relations studies both conflict and
cooperation that underlying the relationships
between countries.
Traditionally been concerned with conflict and its
consequences
Since 3600 B.C., only 292 years without war
Since 1816, each decade averages 22 wars
Since 3000 B.C., an estimated 150,000,000 war-
related deaths
96% occurred from 1500-2000
Since 1990, over 2,000,000 of war-related deaths
have been children
The preoccupation with war studies is not
surprising
Types of International Conflict
Types of Conflict
Interstate wars: wars between two or
more states in the international system
Internal wars: civil wars occurring
within states
Domestic unrest (insurgencies)
Sharp increase in internal wars since WWII
Terrorism: politically motivated
violence
Unconventional means
Noncombatant targets
What is War?
“War is the continuation of
politics by other means” -
Carl von Clausewitz
War is a political act for
political goals
Diplomacy by other means
How Should War be Defined?
Specifically, what are the
criteria for defining war?
Cannot study something if we do
not know what it is
Criteria
Actors involved?
Deaths?
Number of military personnel
engaged?
Losses in $?
Standard criteria: Over 1000
battle deaths
Best measure?
Studying the Causes of War
What causes war?
What causes peace?
Depends on the level of analysis
System (Anarchy)
States (Regime Type)
Dyad (Rivalry)
Groups (Ethnicity/Religion, Bureaucratic Politics)
Individuals (Human Nature, Perception/Misperception)
Level of analysis determines not only the questions
asked but also the answers
Systemic Explanations of War
Systemic analysis: characteristics of the international
system primary cause of war between states
Int’l structures cause consequences not intended by the
constituent states
Realism: Anarchy is the primary cause of interstate
war
System of self-help
Distribution of power in the international system
conditions the probability of war – Balance of Power
Causes the security dilemma
Alliances, Arms Races – self-
self-help tools
Creates paradox – more powerful you become, the less
secure you are
Systemic Explanations of War
Liberalism
Degree of interdependence conditions the
likelihood of war
↑ interdependence = ↑ costs of war = constraints
placed on state policy
International Organizations alleviate hostility –
share info, 3rd party grievance process
Systemic Explanations
Power Transition Theory
Anarchy overcome by the presence
of a dominant state
System split between satisfied and
dissatisfied states
Mechanism:
Rising state challenges the dominant
state in a bid for power
Dominant state launches a pre-
emptive war against the rising power
Power transitions ↑ probability of big
wars (Napoleonic, WWI, WWII)
Power Transition
State-Level Explanations of War
Type of Regime:
Marxist Tradition: Capitalist countries more conflict-prone
– fight over resources, markets
Liberalism (Kant): Democracies less war-prone than non-
democracies
Expectation of ‘peace-loving’ democracies because of social norms
and institutions
What institutions would constrain a democracy from
engaging in war?
How?
Dyadic Explanations – Democratic Peace
Dyad = pair of states
Concerned with relationship, interaction
Democracies are not generally more peaceful than
non-democracies
Engage in war with non-democracies
Democracies are more peaceful with other
democracies
No two democracies have ever fought a war
Democracies never launched a pre-emptive war
Dyadic Explanations – Democratic Peace
Why?
Cultural explanation: Expectation that conflicts be
resolved peacefully (compromise instead of violence)
Institutional explanation: Conflict is a bargaining process
and democratic institutions reduce uncertainty
Democratic institutions make it easy to observe opposition
Different from Kantian liberalism – peace is
consequence of interaction, not inherent quality
Dyadic Explanations - Rivalry
Certain pairs of states are more war-prone
than others
Rivalries formation: disputes over territory
or policy
Escalate over time
Rival perceived as ‘enemy’ by decision-
makers
Territorial rivalries are the most war-prone
dyads in the international system (example:
India-Pakistan)
Individual Causes of War
Leader and Elite Focused
Two Arguments:
War is product of rationality
Cost/benefit analysis
When is war rational?
War is product of deviation from rationality
Perception and Misperception
Cognitive Bias
Groupthink – Echo Chamber
Sound familiar?
Summary
Primary causes of war
Distribution of power, territory, rivalry
Factors for peace
Democracy, economic interdependence, international
organizations
What might be some future issues that may cause
conflict?
Oil?
Environment?
Water?
Internal Wars
Multiple causes of Internal Wars
Independence
Failed States
Ethnic rivalries
Resource disputes
All of these can be interrelated – makes it hard to
definitely pinpoint cause
Another difficulty: many internal wars are linked to
outside influences (i.e. South Africa and neighbors in
late 1970’s and 1980’s)
Civil Conflict
Civil conflict is not new - but increasing since the end of WWII
End of colonialism (1960’s) – wave of independence
Cold War – proxy conflicts
End of Cold War – new wave of independence and ethnic identity
Ethnic conflict: A leading cause of civil war?
Ethnic conflict:
militarized conflict
between two or more
groups organized along
ethnic divisions
Ethnic groups: shared
culture, history, and
language
Many ‘ethnic’ groups =
recent inventions by elites
(Yugoslavia or Rwanda)
Alternate explanation: wars fought for other goals, but elites
use ethnicity as an ‘organizing principle’
Ethnic Conflict
Estimates for the number of ‘ethnic groups’ range
from 275 to 875.
One source estimates that there are 575 groups with
aspirations to create an independent nation-state
Ethnic groups are often associated with insurgencies,
which seek to destabilize the state (i.e. Spain, Peru,
Russia, India, Israel)
Distinction between ‘terrorists’ and insurgencies are often
unclear
Usually decided by the winner of a conflict
Ethnic Conflict
Other causes
Failed states: states that lack the capacity to
maintain order over its territorial borders
Breeding ground for insurgencies and civil war
Lack of Resources
Theory of relative deprivation: groups that perceive
themselves as relatively worse off to mobilize in an
attempt to seize goods
An explanation for ethnic political mobilization
