How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace

  title={How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace},
  author={John M. Owen},
  journal={International Security},
  pages={125 - 87}
  • John M. Owen
  • Published 23 January 1994
  • Political Science
  • International Security
democracies seldom if ever go to war against one another has nearly become a truism. The ”democratic peace” has attracted attention for a number of reasons. It is “the closest thing we have to an empirical law in the study of international relations,” reports one scholar.’ It poses an apparent anomaly to realism, the dominant school of security studies. And it has become an axiom of U.S. foreign policy. ”Democracies don’t attack each other,” President Clinton declared in his 1994 State of the… 

Figures from this paper

The Implicit Imperialism of Democratic Peace
“Democracies don’t attack each other” (Clinton 1994). This was the statement made by President Clinton in his 1994 State of the Union address, arguing that “ultimately the best strategy to ensure our
Democracy and Peace
Certain topics have currency If one is to judge from scholarly publications and statements by foreign policy elites, the relationship between democracy and peace is one of those topics. There have
The Democratic Peace Theory
It has been argued that the absence of war between democratic states ‘comes as close as anything we have to an empirical law in international relations.’[1] Although statistically the probability of
“Democratic Peace” and “Asian Democracy”: A Universalist-Particularist Tension
Democracy is generally considered to be the cornerstone of “the good,” in terms of contemporary domestic political forms.1 The desirability of domestic democracy is also now reflected in an
Is Democracy a Cause of Peace?
The democratic peace theory has been described as ‘the closest thing we have to an empirical law in the study of International relations’ and has heavily influenced US foreign policy.’ [1] President
How far is it from Königsberg to Kandahar? Democratic peace and democratic violence in International Relations
Abstract Over the last two decades, there has been a ‘democratic turn’ in peace and conflict research, that is, the peculiar impact of democratic politics on a wide range of security issues has
Does Democratic Peace Theory Genuinely Envision Global Peace? A Critical Approach
Democratic Peace Theory has been one of the most hotly debated topics ever since the 1980s. From Kant to the present day, the meaning of Democratic Peace Theory has changed, while the theory
The Democratic Peace
In their introduction to the Fall 1994 issue on the democratic peace, the editors of International Security called it (p. 3) "the conventional wisdom."' If it has become conventional wisdom, or seems
A new measure of the ‘Democratic Peace’
While the existence of a ‘Democratic Peace’ (DP) is widely accepted, the various DP theories that seek to explain why democracies rarely fight one another are highly contested. A
Peace Through Democratization
Is successful democratic transition an effective tool for building international peace? Overall, the evidence presented in this book suggests a positive answer to this question. Although it does not


Kant or Cant: The Myth of the Democratic Peace
Democratic peace theory has also come to have a real-world importance as well: Policymakers who have embraced democratic peace theory see a crucial link between America’s security and the spread of democracy, which is viewed as the antidote that will prevent future wars.
War and the liberal conscience
It is said that war is rooted in the vested interests of the ruling class, but haven't democracies proved to be just as bellicose as other states? It is believed that political disputes should be
Wars between democracies: Rare, or nonexistent?
It is often asserted that democratic states never fight wars against each other, but there is a rather lengthy list of exceptions to that rule that are consistently or prominently mentioned in the
The Insignificance of the Liberal Peace
This article challenges "The Liberal Peace" described in work by Michael Doyle from three standpoints. First, it questions whether the statistical tests (which were performed and published by
Powerful Pacifists: Democratic States and War.
Democracies are less likely to fight wars with each other. They are also more likely to prevail in wars with autocratic states. I offer an explanation of this syndrome of powerful pacifism drawn from
Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict.
The research reported here develops an explanation for the often-noted absence of international war between democratic states. This explanation is derived from a theoretical rationale centered on
Domestic Structure and Preventive War: Are Democracies More Pacific?
Realists have long viewed uneven rates of growth among states as a major cause of wars. According to strict logic of realpolitik, a declining dominant power should launch a preventive war against a
Normative and structural causes of democratic peace, 1946-1986
Democratic states are in general about as conflict- and war-prone as nondemocracies, but democracies have rarely clashed with one another in violent conflict. We first show that democracy, as well as
Polities and Peace
In this paper, we review the central claim of a growing literature: that is, that democratic states rarely, if ever, wage war against and are very unlikely to engage in militarized disputes with
Building on a growing literature in international political science, I reexamine the traditional liberal claim that governments founded on a respect for individual liberty exercise “restraint†and