The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory
Abstract
Democratic peace theory is probably the most powerful liberal contribution to the debate on the causes of war and peace. In this paper I examine the causal logics that underpin the theory to determine whether they offer compelling explanations for the finding of mutual democratic pacifism. I find that they do not. Democracies do not reliably externalize their domestic norms of conflict resolution and do not trust or respect one another when their interests clash. Moreover, elected leaders are not especially accountable to peace loving publics or pacific interest groups, democracies are not particularly slow to mobilize or incapable of surprise attack, and open political competition does not guarantee that a democracy will reveal private information about its level of resolve thereby avoiding conflict. Since the evidence suggests that the logics do not operate as stipulated by the theory's proponents, there are good reasons to believe that while there is certainly peace among democracies, it may not be caused by the democratic nature of those states.
Cite this
Sebastian Rosato (2003). The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory. American Political Science Review. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055403000893
@article{sebastian2003the,
title = {The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory},
author = {Rosato, Sebastian},
year = {2003},
journal = {American Political Science Review},
doi = {10.1017/s0003055403000893}
}Citations in this library
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 543 citations exist upstream.