Managing the Dual Faces of International–Civil Militarized Conflict (I-CMC): The Interstate Dimension

Abstract

AbstractThis study examines how different conflict-management attempts over a broad time period affect the dynamics of one dimension of international–civil militarized conflict (I-CMC): the hostility–peace levels of relationships between states involved in those conflicts as well as the frequency and severity of their interactions. Using new data compilations on these conflicts and the management efforts embedded in them, we assess how effective each of the approaches and various contextual influences are in moderating state–state hostilities as well as the relative effectiveness (e.g., mediation versus military intervention). Our empirical analysis confirms that conflict-management efforts generally, and with respect to different management types, do not alter the overall hostile–peaceful relationships between states involved in I-CMCs. The empirical results on micro effects of conflict management produced clearer impacts from conflict-management approaches and contextual factors. In terms of mitigating conflict frequency, negotiation, military intervention, and peace operations had some negative effects on the time density of future militarized disputes. All approaches (the above three and mediation) were able to delay the onset of new disputes. Various contextual factors enhanced or mitigated the effects of conflict-management approaches.