Abstract
Nonaggression pacts are often concluded between states with conflicting interests, and we consider their use as conflict management devices. Because nonaggression pacts raise domestic and international audience costs for aggressors, they should reduce the likelihood of conflict. We test this proposition while taking into account possible selection bias in the conclusion of nonaggression pacts, and we find that nonaggression pacts indeed seem to reduce conflict between signatories. Our finding lends support to the liberal institutionalist argument that institutions can constrain state behavior and also suggests that nonaggression pacts are an effective conflict management tool.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
