IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v62y2018i7p1379-1405.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Civil-military Pathologies and Defeat in War

Author

Listed:
  • Vipin Narang
  • Caitlin Talmadge

Abstract

This article uses an original data set, the Wartime Civil-military Relations Data Set, to test arguments about the causes of victory and defeat in war. Our analysis provides strong initial support for the notion that civil-military relations powerfully shape state prospects for victory and defeat. Specifically, states whose militaries have a significant internal role or whose regimes engage in coup-proofing appear to have a substantially lower probability of winning interstate wars, even when we account for the role of other important variables, including regime type and material capabilities. Crucially, our measures of civil-military relations include coup incidence but also move beyond it to detect more subtle indicators of civil-military relations. The resulting analysis should give us confidence in acknowledging the importance of nonmaterial variables in explaining war outcomes, while also paving the way for further research that can utilize and extend the data set.

Suggested Citation

  • Vipin Narang & Caitlin Talmadge, 2018. "Civil-military Pathologies and Defeat in War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(7), pages 1379-1405, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:62:y:2018:i:7:p:1379-1405
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002716684627
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002716684627
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002716684627?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weeks, Jessica L., 2012. "Strongmen and Straw Men: Authoritarian Regimes and the Initiation of International Conflict," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 326-347, May.
    2. Weeks, Jessica L., 2008. "Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(1), pages 35-64, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew Wilson & Carla Martinez Machain, 2018. "Militarism and Dual-Conflict Capacity," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 156-172, January.
    2. Xiaojun Li & Dingding Chen, 2021. "Public opinion, international reputation, and audience costs in an authoritarian regime," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(5), pages 543-560, September.
    3. Axel Michaelowa, 2021. "Solar Radiation Modification ‐ A “Silver Bullet” Climate Policy for Populist and Authoritarian Regimes?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S1), pages 119-128, April.
    4. Melissa Carlson & Barbara Koremenos, 2021. "Cooperation Failure or Secret Collusion? Absolute Monarchs and Informal Cooperation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 95-135, January.
    5. Matthew Hauenstein, 2020. "The conditional effect of audiences on credibility," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(3), pages 422-436, May.
    6. Daehee Bak, 2020. "Autocratic political cycle and international conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(3), pages 259-279, May.
    7. Gregory J. Moore & Christopher B. Primiano, 2020. "Audience Costs and China’s South China Sea Policy," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 7(3), pages 325-348, December.
    8. Michael C. Horowitz & Philip Potter & Todd S. Sechser & Allan Stam, 2018. "Sizing Up the Adversary," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(10), pages 2180-2204, November.
    9. Svetlana Kosterina, 2017. "Ambition, personalist regimes, and control of authoritarian leaders," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(2), pages 167-190, April.
    10. Eryan Ramadhani, 2019. "Is Assertiveness Paying the Bill? China’s Domestic Audience Costs in the South China Sea Disputes," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 6(1), pages 30-54, April.
    11. Brandt, Patrick T. & George, Justin & Sandler, Todd, 2016. "Why concessions should not be made to terrorist kidnappers," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 41-52.
    12. Joseph Wright, 2009. "How Foreign Aid Can Foster Democratization in Authoritarian Regimes," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 552-571, July.
    13. Stephan Haggard, 2014. "Liberal Pessimism: International Relations Theory and the Emerging Powers," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Li, Yuan & Gilli, Mario, 2014. "Accountability in Autocracies: The Role of Revolution Threat," Stockholm School of Economics Asia Working Paper Series 2014-30, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm China Economic Research Institute, revised 06 Mar 2014.
    15. Casey Crisman-Cox, 2022. "Democracy, reputation for resolve, and civil conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(3), pages 382-394, May.
    16. Jeff Carter, 2017. "The Political Cost of War Mobilization in Democracies and Dictatorships," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(8), pages 1768-1794, September.
    17. Kimberly R Frugé, 2019. "Repressive agent defections: How power, costs, and uncertainty influence military behavior and state repression," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(6), pages 591-607, November.
    18. Travis W. Endicott, 2020. "Combat Experience and the Foreign Policy Positions of Veterans," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1413-1429, July.
    19. Bjørnskov, Christian & Pfaff, Katharina, 2021. "Differences matter: The effect of coup types on physical integrity rights," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    20. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How Does Democratic Accountability Shape International Cooperation?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 28-55, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:62:y:2018:i:7:p:1379-1405. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.