Abstract
Armament policies are determined by domestic rather than international politics according to liberal IR perspectives. More specifically, military transformation processes in democratic countries are understood as being informed by the political need to limit the number of casualties during military operations. Consequently, liberal scholars assume a distinct democratic eagerness to resort to precision-guided munitions, drones, or even cyber attacks. Our analysis challenges this explanation of democratic armament policies. We evaluate the timing and programmatic choices of armament policies of 33 countries, democratic and non-democratic, combining different indicators of information technology procurement and usage by national militaries. Based on this data, countries are categorized into Revolution in Military Affairs leaders, uppers, followers, stragglers, entrants, and non-participants. Finally, we test the explanatory power of two competing independent variables, representing casualty shyness versus capability-based explanations of military transformation processes. Our results show that realist assumptions yield strong correlations, while liberal assumptions do not produce statistically significant results.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal: Canada's Journal of Global Policy Analysis
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
