Revolutionary Ideals and International Aggression

Abstract

AbstractThis article assesses the international conflict propensity of leaders that come to power through revolutions. I argue that when revolutions result in the overthrow of governments perceived as enabling the interference of outside powers in internal affairs, the leaders that assume office afterward are especially inclined to provoke international conflict. I code these revolutions as “external” and juxtapose them against “internal” revolutions motivated by domestic grievances rather than animus against foreign meddling. Regression analysis and survival analysis suggest that leaders assuming office following external revolutions are more prone to conflict than leaders that assume office through internal revolutions. To illustrate the relationship between external revolution and international aggression, the paper utilizes a case study to examine Iranian foreign policy under Ayatollah Khomeini.