Colonial War and the Democratic Peace
Colonial War and the Democratic Peace
复制标题
殖民战争与民主和平
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Han Dorussen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hilde Ravlo;N. P. Gleditsch;Han Dorussen
民主和平的支持者因未能讨论殖民战争而受到批评。民主国家多次打过这样的战争，批评者认为这与民主和平理论不相容。有三个原因可以解释为什么殖民战争没有使民主和平的论点无效。首先，尽管民主国家很少（如果有的话）相互开战，但它们参与战争的次数与非民主国家一样多。因此，混合的政治阵营有最大的战争倾向。如果非国家对手通常被认为是不民主的，那么民主国家应该更频繁地进行殖民战争。其次，随着时间的推移，殖民冲突的性质发生了变化。民主和殖民战争之间的关系是考察在殖民时期，帝国主义和后殖民时期。最后，对民主和平论点的正确评估需要依赖于一个多元模型。有了一组合适的控制变量，战争和民主之间的积极关系就消失了。我们还观察到，在第二次世界大战后时期，民主国家打殖民战争的频率低于非民主国家。我们推测，这可能与非欧洲民族的观念变化有关。
Proponents of the democratic peace have been criticized for failing to discuss colonial wars. Democratic countries have repeatedly fought such wars, which critics hold to be incompatible with democratic peace theory. Three reasons are suggested to explain why colonial wars do not invalidate the democratic peace argument. First, although democracies rarely, if ever, fight one another, they participate in war as much as nondemocracies. Thus, mixed political dyads have the greatest propensity for war. If nonstate adversaries are commonly perceived to be nondemocratic, democracies should fight colonial wars more frequently. Second, the nature of colonial conflict has changed over time. The relationship between democracy and colonial war is examined in colonial, imperialist, and postcolonial periods. Finally, a correct assessment of the democratic peace argument needs to rely on a multivariate model. With a suitable set of control variables, the positive relationship between war and democracy disappears. We also observe that in the post-World War II period, democracies fight colonial wars less frequently than non-democracies. We surmise that this might be related to changes in the perception of non-European peoples.