Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Self-determination issues between ethnic minority groups and national governments involve employment of multiple strategies, and yet current literature on self-determination movements overlooks this important factor influencing secession attempts. In this project, we develop a theoretical argument incorporating this aspect of self-determination movements, and differentiate between peaceful and violent demands for independence. By providing an explanation of when and why ethnic minority groups seek self-determination violently or peacefully, and of when and why they change their strategies, we can also improve our understanding of government responses to secession challenges. We subject our argument to empirical analysis by looking at 350 minority groups over the period from 1900 to 2000.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Democratic peace theory focuses on democratic dyads that have a below-average propensity for interstate conflict. Rivalry research, by contrast, focus on dyads that have an above-average propensity for interstate conflict. The interaction of the two phenomena, the conflict behavior of democracies in rivalry offers opportunities for theory testing. I argue that the impact of democracy in rivalries is to moderate or de-escalate conflict behavior. Its effects can be shown after a mixed rivalry transits into a democratic one. Neoclassical realism would predict rivalry maintenance and democratic peace theory would predict rivalry de-escalation. Additionally, I argue that it is a critical test within democratic peace theory when power disparity is introduced into the rivalry. The institutional explanation being power sensitive, predicts rivalry escalation by the stronger rival whereas the normative explanation being power insensitive, expects both democratic rivals to negotiate and de-escalate their rivalry. Our confidence in democratic peace theory will be strengthened if it effects can be extended onto dyads with higher propensity for conflict such as rivalries. Additionally, power disparity in democratic rivalries has the potential to differentiate between causal mechanisms of democratic peace theory.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper makes two key claims. The first is that the United States is biased in favor of escalation following loss in inter-state war, and biased in favor of de-escalation following loss in peace operations. Both sets of biases are potentially problematic, leading to overstretch in inter-state wars, and precipitous withdrawal in peace operations that can undermine the success of the mission.

The second claim is that fighting multilaterally tends to promote restraint and de-escalation through four pathways: alliance incapacity, simple bargaining, complex bargaining, and political cover. Therefore, in terms of applying the optimum degree of force, the efficacy of multilateralism may depend upon the type of mission. In inter-state wars, fighting with allies and organizations can correct a bias in favor of escalation, thereby aiding American interests. But in peace operations, the presence of allies and organizations can serve to restrain the United States when it is already too restrained.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: While a great deal of research has been done on why certain actors may be more likely than others to choose to engage in political violence, little work addresses how non-state actors make choices among strategies of political violence. This paper will present a framework explaining such decisions: specifically under what conditions non-state actors select military vs. civilian targets in- vs. out-of-area. The paper will begin by defining the actors, their interests, and their available strategies. It will then explain the cost-benefit calculations underpinning the choice of target type and location, as well as how these calculations can change over time. Finally the model developed will be applied to several cases of current import drawn from Southwest Asia. Understanding how non-state actors select strategies will facilitate greater understanding of both the threat posed by such actors as well as how to best combat it.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Petroleum is a finite increasingly expensive resource, indeed the end of cheap oil may be in sight. Countries have already begun to probe for further access to oil. This study focuses on offshore oil areas where international disputes between at least two states exist. The cases include 40 dyads in disputed areas from all over the world. The study explores whether or not oil reserves in those disputed areas has an influence on the escalation of interstate conflicts.