Peace and Conflict Studies - Spring 2014

Peace and Conflict Studies Volume 21, Number 1 88 theories. Some (Bilgin & Morton, 2002; Jackson, 1993) have questioned the relevance of the very concept of “the state” to the developing world and argued that many third world states lack central features of a standard Western state, such as sovereignty, legitimacy, and self- sustenance. Wallerstein (1974) contended that whereas the economic development of the Western countries and the increasing wealth and power of the bourgeoisie were accompanied by the construction of “strong” states, the dependent situation of the Third World countries and their openness and vulnerability to the manipulations of the core countries resulted in the creation of “weak” states. Somewhat as an elaboration on these arguments, some others argued that the “ in security dilemma”, which derives from the internal “weakness” of the Third World countries, rather than the oft-argued security dilemma, shapes the security strategies of the Third World countries (Ayoob, 1995; Glenn, 1997; Job, 1992). There were also other scholars who problematized the “independence” of Third World states (Clapham, 1999; Escude, 1998; Hey, 1995) and maintained that the economic and political dependence of the Third World countries to the developed world render the “hierarchical” nature of the international system more relevant to the foreign policy behavior of developing states than its “anarchical” structure. Neuman (1998) makes an interesting summary of these arguments: For many LDCs [less developed countries], then, the realist focus on a sharp boundary between domestic “order” and international “anarchy” may be applicable, but in reverse. It is the hierarchical structure of the world that provides them with an ordered reality, and a “condition of unsettled rules” that afflict them at home. (p. 3) In line with these theoretical concerns, some recent empirical research also suggested a categorical difference between certain regions of the world. Henderson (2003) and Goldsmith (2006) tested the regional contingency of the prominent democratic peace argument and found that democracy loses its conflict-dampening effect outside the developed West (Western Europe and North America). Similarly, other studies found democracy has no or miniscule peaceful effect in poor countries (Mousseau, 2000, 2002; Mousseau, Hegre, & Oneal, 2003). These empirical findings suggest that the purported categorical differences between the developed world and the developing world are not mere constructs of the minds of critical IR theorists. Thus, I believe that it is appropriate and necessary to make separate tests for the developing world if we are to gauge the effects of capitalism and democracy on international conflicts of developing countries. Empirical Analyses: Militarized Interstate Disputes in the Developing World