Patterns of Negotiation in Non-War Disputes

Abstract

Studies of militarized interstate dispute (MID) outcome variables have focused particularly on whether or not these disputes have resulted in war. With a few exceptions, this simple dichotomous dependent variable categorization largely ignores numerous militarized disputes with outcomes that fall short of war along with their respective settlement method. We propose that theories and findings on war might not apply to non-war disputes. This is especially true when considering approaches to conflict management. We find that: (I) the outcome of war almost always results in one side prevailing. Negotiated settlement and compromise are more likely outcomes of non-war disputes. (2) Power relations play a key role in outcomes of war but have a much-reduced impact on non-war outcomes. (3) Territorial issues are associated with dispute occurrence and war. Territorial issues, at the same time, seem to lend themselves to negotiated and compromise outcomes. (4) Ripeness occurs at the mid-severity range as opposed to lower or higher levels.