Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Cooperation and Conflict
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ANDERSSON, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

United Nations Intervention by United Democracies?

State Commitment to UN Interventions 1991-99

ANDREAS ANDERSSON

Department of Political Science, Karlstad University, SE-651 88 Karlstad, Sweden. andreas.andersson{at}kau.se

An ongoing study of the impact of democracy on the incidence of state commitment to UN interventions is examined, with a focus on state participation in UN interventions. It is hypothesized that, of potential committing states, democracies show the greatest propensity to participate in UN interventions. In contrast to the existing literature, which comprises mainly case studies, basic descriptive statistics are utilized in this article to probe the hypothesis on polity and commitment to UN interventions. The less-democratic states are less committed to UN interventions. Overall, the hypothesis is supported by the empirical results in that (a) democracies commit more than other polities to UN interventions, (b) the difference between democracies and anocracies is relatively small and ambiguous in significance compared to the difference between autocracies and democracies/anocracies, and (c) the empirical track record is by and large consistent with previous research on the effect of polity within the realms of war and conventional interventions.

Key Words: commitment • democracy • norms • UN-interventions

Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 37, No. 4, 363-386 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/001083602762574469
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
E. Neumayer
A New Moral Hazard? Military Intervention, Peacekeeping and Ratification of the International Criminal Court
Journal of Peace Research, September 1, 2009; 46(5): 659 - 670.
[Abstract] [PDF]