Abstract
Why do individual case studies reveal evidence in favor of diversionary behavior by states, yet quantitative studies often produce many mixed results? In this paper, I help to explain this puzzle by arguing that there is a curvilinear relationship between internal conflict and external diversionary behavior as opposed to a linear one. By looking at contentious issues mainly in the Western Hemisphere from 1962 to 2001 using data from the Issue Correlates of War (ICOW) project, I find that countries with moderate levels of domestic unrest are most likely to initiate a militarized interstate conflict. Furthermore, I find that in times of elite unrest, states are more likely to have diversionary behaviors. In contrast, mass unrest is unlikely to incentivize states to use foreign policy adventures to rally domestic support. Such a finding helps deepen our understanding of the complex conditions leading to diversionary actions.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
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.