ISSUE SALIENCE, POLITICAL SURVIVAL AND DIVERSIONARY USE OF FORCE

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3, 172 - 195, 30.09.2017

İmran Demir

https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.332364

Öz

Earlier research examining
the effects of regime type on diversionary use of force has overlooked the
possibility that leaders of different regimes are vulnerable to different domestic
pressures. This study seeks to develop a more complete perspective on
diversionary behavior of leaders executing under different institutional
constraints by emphasizing issue salience. It contends that leaders of
different regimes will divert under different domestic political and economic
pressures. Empirical results demonstrate that while autocratic leaders divert
more regularly under the pressure of domestic unrest, democratic leaders pursue
aggression in foreign policy when they experience declines in GDP per capita.
Leaders of mixed regimes, on the other hand, display external aggression under
inflationary pressures. It is argued that the differential impact of GDP per
capita and inflation on diversionary behavior of democratic and mixed regimes
is the consequence of separate economic policy choices, which are conditioned
by concern for political survival.    

Anahtar Kelimeler

Diversion, Conflict, Regime Type, İssue Salience, Political Survival

SORUN EHEMMİYETİ, İKTİDARIN İDAMESİ ve HEDEF SAPTIRMA AMAÇLI SALDIRGAN DIŞ POLİTİKA

Öz

Rejim şeklinin hedef
saptırma amaçlı saldırgan dış politika eğilimlerine yaptığı etki üzerine
yapılan geçmiş çalışmalar rejim liderlerinin rejim farklılıklarından kaynaklanan
sebeplerden dolayı farklı sorunlara farklı tepki gösterebileceği olasılığını
göz ardı etmiş bulunuyor. Bu çalışma rejim farklılıklarından kaynaklanan zafiyet
farklılıklarının dikkate alınması gerektiğini öne sürerek rejim şekli ve hedef
saptırma amaçlı saldırgan dış politika arasındaki ilişkiye daha kapsamlı bir perspektif
geliştirmektedir. Çalışma, farklı rejim liderlerinin içerideki farklı ekonomik
ve politik baskılar karşısında hedef saptırma eğilimi taşıyacağını iddia etmektedir.
Elde edilen ampirik sonuçlar otokratik rejimlerin daha çok toplumsal çatışmalar
karşısında hedef saptırma eğiliminde olduklarını gösterirken demokratik rejim liderlerinin
dış politikadaki saldırgan eğilimlerinin gayri safi milli hasılada yaşanan
düşüşler karşısında arttığı gözlenmektedir. Karma rejim liderlerinin ise
enflasyon baskısı altında saldırganlaştığı görülmektedir. Gayri safi milli
hasıla ve enflasyonun demokratik ve karma rejimlerde yarattığı farklı tepkinin
iktidarlarını idame etme kaygısıyla izlenen ekonomik politikalardaki farklılıktan
kaynaklandığı ileri sürülmektedir. 

 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Hedef Saptırma, Çatışma, Rejim Türü, Konu Ehemmiyeti, İktidarın İdamesi

Kaynakça

• Beck, Nathaniel, Katz J.N., and Tucker R. (1998) “Taking Time Seriously: Time-Series-Cross-Section Analysis with a Binary Dependent Variable”, American Journal of Political Science, 42 (4): 33-61. Bennett, D. S. (1998) “Integrating and Testing Models of Rivalry”, American Journal of Political Science 42(4): 1200-1232. Brule, D. (2006) “Congressional Opposition, the Economy, and the US Dispute Initiation, 1946-2000”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50 (4): 463-483. Bueno de Mesquita, B. ve Siverson, R. M. (1997) “Nasty or Nice? Political Systems, Endogenous Norms, and the Treatment of Adversaries”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41 (1): 175-199. Bueno de Mesquita, B., Smith A., Siverson, R. M. ve Morrow, J. D. (2003) The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Bueno de Mesquita, B., ve Siverson, R. M. (1995) “War and the Survival of Political Leaders: A Comparative Study of Regime Types and Political Accountability”, American Political Science Review, 89 (4): 841-855. Bueno de Mesquita, B., Siverson, R. M. ve Woller, G. (1992) “War and the Fate of Regimes: A Comparative Analysis”, American Political Science Review, 86 (3): 638-646. Chiozza, G. ve Goemans, H.E. (2003) “Peace Through Insecurity: Tenure and International Conflict”, Journal of Conflict Resolution 47 (4): 443-467. Chiozza, G., ve Goemans, H. E. (2004) “Avoiding Diversionary Targets”, Journal of Peace Research, 41 (4): 423-443. Clark, D. H. (2003) “Can Strategic Interaction Divert Diversionary Behavior? Model of US Conflict Propensity”, The Journal of Politics 65 (4): 1013-1039. Coser, L. A. (1956). The Functions of Social Conflict. New York: Free Press. Cross-National Time-Series Data Archieve, 1815-2007 [Electronik Kaynak], (2007) Binghamton, NY: Databanks International. Davies, G. A. M. (2008) “Inside Out or Outside In: Domestic and International Factors Affecting Iranian Foreign Policy Towards the United States, 1990-2004”, Foreign Policy Analysis, 4: 209-225. Davies, G. A. M. (2002) “Domestic Strife and the Initiation of International Conflicts: A Directed Dyad Analysis, 1950-1982”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46 (5): 672-692. DeRouen Jr., K. R. (1995) “The Indirect Link: Politics, the Economy, and the Use of Force”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 39 (4): 671-695. Desai, R. M., Olofsgard, A. ve Yousef T. M. (2003) “Democracy, Inequality, and Inflation”, American Political Science Review, 97 (3): 391-406. Downs, G. W. ve Rocke, D. M. (1996) “Conflict, Agency, and Gambling for Resurrection: The Principal-Agent Problem Goes to War”, American Journal of Political Science, 38 (2): 362-380. Enterline, A. J., ve Gleditsch, K. S. (2000) “Threats, Opportunity, and Force: Repression and Diversion of Domestic Pressure, 1948-1982”, International Interactions, 26 (1): 21-53. Fordham, B. O. (1998) “Partisanship, Macroeconomic Policy, and US Uses of Force, 1949-1994”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42 (4): 418-439. Fordham, B. O. (2002) “Another Look at “Parties, Voters and the use of Force Abroad”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46 (4): 572-596. Fordham, B. O. (2005) “Strategic Conflict Avoidance and the Diversionary Use of Force”, The Journal of Politics 67 (1): 132-153. Foster, D. M. (2006a) “State Power, Linkage Mechanisms, and Diversion against Non-Rivals”, Conflict Management and Peace Science, 23, 1-21. Foster, D. M. (2006b) An “Invitation to Struggle”? The Use of Force Against “Legislatively Vulnerable” American Presidents”, International Studies Quarterly, 50: 421-444. Gelpi, C. (1997) “Democratic Diversions: Governmental Structure and the Externalization of Domestic Conflict”, The Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(2): 255-282. Ghosn, Faten, Palmer G. ve Bremer S. (2004) “The MID3 Data Set, 1993–2001: Procedures, Coding Rules, and Description”, Conflict Management and Peace Science 21,133-154. Goemans, H.E. (2008) “Which Way Out? The Manner and Consequences of Losing Office”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52 (6):771-794. Goertz, G. ve Diehl, P. (1992) “The Empirical Importance of Enduring Rivalries”, International Interactions 18(2): 15 1-63. Goldstein, J. S. (1992) “A Conflict-Cooperation Scale for WEIS Events Data”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36(2): 369–85. Haas, M. (1968) “Social Change and National Aggressiveness, 1900-1960.” In Quantitative International Politics: Insights and Evidence, J. David Singer, ed. New York: Macmillan Co., The Free Press, 215-244. Haynes, K. (2017) “Diversionary Conflict: Demonizing enemies or demonstrating competence?”, Conflict Management and Peace Science 34 (4): 337-358. Hazelwood, L. (1975) Diversion Mechanisms and Encapsulations Processes: The Domestic Conflict-Foreign Conflict Hypothesis Reconsidered. In Sage International Yearbook of Foreign Policy Studies, P. J. McGowan, ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 213-43. Heldt, B. (1999) “Domestic Politics, Absolute Deprivation, and the Use of Armed Forces in Interstate Territorial Disputes”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 43 (4): 451-478. Hellwig, T. ve Samuels, D. (2007) “Electoral Accountability and the Variety of Democratic Regimes”, British Journal of Political Science, 37: 1-26. Hess, G. D. ve Orphanides, A. (1995) “War, Politics: An Economic, Rational-Voter Framework”, American Economic Review, 85 (4): 828-846. Hess, G. D. ve Orphanides, A. (2001) “War and Democracy”, Journal of Political Economy, 109 (4): 776-810. Jaggers, K. ve Gurr, T. R. (1995) “Tracking Democracy’s Third Wave with the Polity III Data”, Journal of Peace Research, 32 (4): 469-482. James, P ve Oneal, J. (1991) “The Influence of Domestic and International Politics on the President’s Use of Force”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 35 (2): 307-332. Jones, D. M., Bremer, S. A. ve Singer, J. D. (1996) “Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns”, Conflict Management and Peace Science 15 (2): 163:213. Kisangani, E. F. ve Pickering, J. (2011) “Democratic Accountability and Diversionary Force: Regime Types and the Use of Benevolent and Hostile Military Force”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 55 (6): 1021-1046. Kisangani, E. F. ve Pickering, J. (2007) “Diverting with Benevolent Military Force: Reducing Risks and Rising above Strategic Behavior”, International Studies Quarterly, 51, 277-299. Klein, J., Goertz, G. ve Diehl, P. F. (2006) “The New Rivalry Data Set: Procedures and Patterns”, Journal of Peace Research, 43 (3): 331-348. Leeds, B. A. ve Davis, D. R. (1997) “Domestic Political Vulnerability and International Disputes”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41 (6): 814-34. Levy, J. S. (1989) “Diversionary Theory of War.” In Manus I. Midlarsky (ed.), Hand Book of War Studies, Winchester, Mass.: Unwin Hyman, Inc. Mansfield, E. D. ve Snyder, J. (1995) “Democratization and the Danger of War”, International Security, 20 (1): 5-38. Mansfield, E. D. ve Snyder, J. (2002) “Democratic Transitions, Institutional Strength and War”, International Organization, 56 (2): 297-337. Meernik, J. ve Waterman, P. (1996) “The Myth of the Diversionary Use of Force by American Presidents”, Political Research Quarterly 49 (3): 573-590. Miller, R. A. (1999) “Regime Type, Strategic Interaction, and the Diversionary Use of Force”, Journal of Conflict Resolution 43 (3): 388-402. Miller, R. A. (1995) “Domestic Structures and the Diversionary Use of Force”, American Journal of Political Science 39 (3): 760-785. Mitchell, S. M. ve Prins, B. C. (2004) “Rivalry and Diversionary Uses of Force”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 48 (6): 937-961. Morgan, C. T. ve Bickers, K. N. (1992) “Domestic discontent and the External Use of Force”, Journal of Conflict Resolution 36(1): 25-52. Morgan, T. C. ve Anderson, C. J. (1999) “Domestic Support and Diversionary External Conflict in Great Britain, 1950- 1992”, The Journal of Politics 61 (3): 799-814. Morgan, T. C. ve Campbell, S. H. (1991) “Domestic Structure, Decisional Constraints, and War: So Why Kant Democracies Fight?”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 35 (2): 187-211. Ostrom, C. W. ve Job, B. L. (1986). “The President the Use of Force.” American Political Science Review, 80 (2): 541-566. Polity IV Project. (2000) Polity IV Dataset. [Computer File; Version p4v20001.]College Park: Center for International Development and Conflict Management, University of Maryland. Richards, D., Morgan, T.C., Wilson, R. K., Schwebach, V. L. ve Young, G. D. (1993) “Good Times, Bad Times, and the Diversionary Use of Force: A Tale of Some Not-So-Free Agents”, Journal of Conflict Resolution 37 (3): 504-535. Rummel, R. J. (1963) “Dimensions of Conflict Behavior Within and Between Nations, General Systems Yearbook, 8:1-50. Russett, B. M. (1990) Economic Decline, Electoral Pressure, and the Initiation of Interstate Conflict.” In Prisoners of War, edited by Charles S. Goachmen ve Alan Ned Sabrosky, 123-40. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Simmell, G. (1898) “The Persistence of Social Groups”, American Journal of Sociology, 4: 662-98, 829-36. Singer, J. D. (1987) “Reconstructing the Correlates of War Dataset on Material Capabilities of States, 1816–1985”, International Interactions 14, 115–32. Small, M. ve Singer, J. D. (1982) Resort to Arms. Beverly Hills: Sage. Smith, A. (1996a) “Testing Theories of Strategic Choice: The Example of Crisis Escalation”, American Journal of Political Science, 43 (4): 231-246. Smith, A. (1996b) “Diversionary Foreign Policy in Democratic Systems”, International Studies Quarterly, 40 (1): 133-153. Smith, A. (1998) “International Crises and Domestic Politics”, The American Political Science Review, 92(3): 623-638. Stinnett, D. M. ve Diehl, P. F. (2001) “The Path(s) to Rivalry: Behavioral and Structural Explanations of Rivalry Development”, Journal of Politics 63 (3): 717-740. Stinnett, D. M., Tir, J., Schafer, P, Diehl, P. F. ve Gochman C. (2002) “The Correlates of War Project Direct Contiguity Data, Version 3”, Conflict Management and Peace Science 19(2):58-66. Tanter, R. (1966) “Dimensions of Conflict Behavior within and between Nations, 1958-1960”, Journal of Conflict Resolution 10 (1): 4144. Thompson, W. R. (2001) “Identifying Rivals and Rivalries in World Politics”, International Studies Quarterly 45(4): 557-86. Vincent, J. E. (1981) “Internal and External Conflict: Some Previous Operational Problems and Some New Findings”, Journal of Politics, 43 (1): 128-142. Ward, M. D. ve Widmaier, U. (1982) “The Domestic-International Conflict Nexus: New Evidence and Old Hypothesis”, International Interactions, 9 (1): 75-101. Wilkenfield, J. (1968) “Domestic and Foreign Conflict Behavior of Nations”, Journal of Peace Research, 5 (1): 56-69. Wilkenfield, J. (1969) “Some Further Findings Regarding the Domestic and Foreign Conflict Behavior of Nations”, Journal of Peace Research, 6 (2): 147-156. World Bank. (2007) World Development Indicators [CD-ROM]. London: World Bank.