The Military, External Peace, and Internal Violence

Abstract

The preceding chapters identified and discussed the theoretical foundations and implications of the most germane realist and liberal hypotheses for an explanation of the long period of peace in South America. Upon the empirical testing of these propositions, it became evident that only dyadic general deterrence is a partial explanation for the absence of war among some pairs of countries in this region. Also, it was established that among the three diplomatic techniques most often used by international organizations to manage and mediate crises and prevent war in the region, only peaceful judicial settlement had a greater, albeit limited, impact on keeping regional peace in South America. Other alternative realist and liberal explanations did not explain well the absence of war or the permanence of interstate peace. Several cases and situations defied the explanatory logic of the two main paradigms in world politics. Thus, having found no appropriate specific explanation for the paradoxical evolution and endurance of peace for most cases, this chapter advances and tests the militarist peace hypothesis. This is an alternative explanation that may prove particularly useful in explaining some of those intractable cases and the general pattern of internal violence and external peace in the region.