The consequences of Not Loving thy neigbor as Thyself: Trade, democracy and military explainations behind India Pakistan rivalry
Conflict between Pakistan and India can be best understood in a multivariate framework where variables such as economic performance, multilateral trade with the rest of the world, bilateral trade, military expenditure, democracy scores and population are simultaneously taken into account. Our empirical investigation based on time series econometrics from 1950-2005, allowing us to truly address causality, suggests that reduced bilateral trade, greater military expenditure, less development expenditure, lower levels of democracy, lower growth rates and less general trade openness are all conflict enhancing, albeit with lags in some cases. Moreover, there is reverse causality between bilateral trade, militarization and conflict; low levels of bilateral trade and high militarization are conflict enhancing, equally conflict also reduces bilateral trade and raises militarization. Economic growth is conflict mitigating, but the reverse is not true. Globalization, or a greater openness to trade with the rest of the world, is the most significant driver of a liberal peace, corroborating a modified form of the capitalist peace, rather than a common democratic political orientation suggested by the pure form of the Kantian liberal peace.
|Date of creation:||10 Sep 2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Robst, John & Polachek, Solomon & Chang, Yuan-Ching, 2006.
"Geographic Proximity, Trade and International Conflict/Cooperation,"
IZA Discussion Papers
1988, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- John Robst & Solomon Polachek & Yuan-Ching Chang, 2007. "Geographic Proximity, Trade, and International Conflict/Cooperation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 1-24, February.
- Sims, Christopher A, 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-48, January.
- Martin, Philippe & Mayer, Thierry & Thoenig, Mathias, 2005.
"Make Trade not War?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
5218, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Polachek, Solomon W, 1997. "Why Democracies Cooperate More and Fight Less: The Relationship between International Trade and Cooperation," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 295-309, August.
- Polachek, Solomon & Seiglie, Carlos, 2006.
"Trade, Peace and Democracy: An Analysis of Dyadic Dispute,"
IZA Discussion Papers
2170, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Polachek, Solomon W. & Seiglie, Carlos, 2007. "Trade, Peace and Democracy: An Analysis of Dyadic Dispute," Handbook of Defense Economics, Elsevier.
- Graham Elliott & Thomas J. Rothenberg & James H. Stock, 1992.
"Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root,"
NBER Technical Working Papers
0130, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Charles H. Anderton & John R. Carter, 2001. "The Impact of War on Trade: An Interrupted Times-Series Study," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 38(4), pages 445-457, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:10429. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.