Relational similarity: An introduction and an application to military alliances

Peter M. Li

Abstract


The ability of military alliances to deter depends on their credibility: the degree to which others believe that allies will fulfill their commitments. One way to measure credibility is to compare nations' lists of allies. The more similar those lists are, the more similar are those nations' security interests. This increases the credibility and the deterrent capability of resulting alliances and, consequently, decreases the amount of militarized conflict. In order to measure the similarity of alliance lists, one needs to account for the possibilities that countries can have multiple allies, can be indirectly linked to one another by their allies, and can be part of mutually exclusive groups of directly and indirectly related allies. Using a new measure called relational similarity, this article finds support for the credibility argument and also finds that relational similarity better explains observed patterns of conflict than existing measures.

Keywords


International relations; alliances; war and conflict; signaling; social network analysis

Full Text:

PDF

References


Braumoeller, B.F. 2004. “Hypothesis Testing and Multiplicative Interaction Terms.” International Organization. Vol. 58, No. 4, pp. 807-820.

Bueno de Mesquita, B. 1975. “Measuring Systemic Polarity.” Journal of Conflict Resolution. Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 187-216.

Everitt, B.S. and S. Rabe-Hesketh. 1997. The Analysis of Proximity Data. London: Arnold.

Gibler, D.M. and M. Sarkees. 2004. “Measuring Alliances: The Correlates of War Formal Interstate Alliance Data Set, 1816-2000.” Journal of Peace Research. Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 211-222.

Jones, D.M., S.A. Bremer and J.D. Singer. 1996. “Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns.” Conflict Management and Peace Science. Vol. 15, pp. 163-213.

Kaufman, L. and P.J. Rousseeuw. 1990. Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Leeds, B.A, et al. 2002. “Alliance Treaty Obligations And Provisions, 1815–1944.” International Interactions. Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 237-260. http://atop.rice.edu.

Marshall, M.G. and K. Jaggers. 2002. Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800-2002. http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/polity/.

Schelling, T.C. 1960. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Signorino, C.S. and J.M. Ritter. 1999. “Tau-b or Not Tau-b: Measuring the Similarity of Foreign Policy Positions.” International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 43, No. 1, pp. 115-144.

Singer, J.D., S. Bremer, and J. Stuckey. 1972. “Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820-1965,” pp. 19-48 in B. Russett, ed. Peace, War, and Numbers. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Smith, J.M. and D. Harper. 2003. Animal Signals. New York: Oxford University Press.

Spence, A.M. 1973. “Job Market Signaling.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 87, No. 3, pp. 355-374.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15355/epsj.5.1.12

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.