In the early 80s political scientists discovered that they overlooked something.
Earlier there was an agreement that democracies act as war prone in their foreign policy as non-democracies. The US was fighting in Vietnam; Great Britain in the Falklands and France was fighting in India and Africa, only to name three examples.
It was generally assumed that domestic politics had no influence on the foreign policy of a state. Michael Doyle initiated a dramatic change in this point of view in 1983.1 He suggested that there was a huge and important difference
between democracies and non-democracies: democracies do not – or very
seldom – fight each other. Since this time uncountable numbers of essays were published, which tried to find an answer for this correlation called the DPP – the Democratic Peace Proposition. Most of them take a liberal approach, and today the liberal approach for explaining the DPP is the leading one. Although there are a lot of scientists working in this field, there are still questions, which cannot be answered with a liberal approach. In the first part of my thesis I will introduce the main arguments and aspects of the liberal explanation of the DPP and show in a separate part where this approach failed. Based on these findings I will introduce the (neo)-realistic approach as an alternative explanation for the DPP – particularly the explanation that is represented by Erol Henderson. As well as in the first section I will show at the end the problems and contradictions of this theory. In the last part of my thesis I will bring these two approaches together and try to give an answer to question, if today a (neo) realistic approach – faced by a superior number of liberal explanations – can help to explain the DPP or show aspects of the DPP which can not be analysed by a liberal point of view. I will also give a short overview of research fields which consider if perhaps both theories, the liberal and the realistic one, failed in a context of globaliziation.
[...]
1 Hasenclever, Andreas, 2003, Liberale Ansätze zum „demokratischen Frieden“. In: Siegfried Schieder and Manuela Spindler, Theorien der Internationalen Beziehungen, Oppladen, p. 199.
Table of Contents
- Abstract
- I. Introduction
- II. A liberal approach of the DPP
- II. I The main liberal explanations for the DPP
- II. II Criticism of a liberal DPP interpretation
- III. An Alternative explanations for the DPP
- III. I The end of an illusion? Henderson's explanation of the DPP
- III. II Critic of Hendersons explanation
- IV. The Democratic Peace meets the International Institutions
- V. The future of the DPP?
- VI. Need for more complex theories
- VII. References
Objectives and Key Themes
This thesis examines whether a liberal approach remains the sole explanation for the Democratic Peace Proposition (DPP). It investigates alternative explanations, specifically Henderson's (neo)realistic and institutional approach, to determine whether a purely liberal or realistic perspective adequately explains the DPP in the current global context. The study explores the limitations of both liberal and realistic models and proposes the need for more complex theories that integrate various perspectives to better account for the DPP's persistence.
- The sufficiency of liberal explanations for the Democratic Peace Proposition.
- Evaluation of alternative (neo)realistic explanations for the DPP.
- The impact of globalization and international institutions on the DPP.
- The limitations of traditional liberal and realist approaches in explaining the DPP.
- The need for more complex and adaptable theories to explain the DPP.
Chapter Summaries
I. Introduction: This introductory chapter establishes the context of the Democratic Peace Proposition (DPP), highlighting the historical shift from the assumption that democracies are as war-prone as non-democracies to the recognition of the DPP—the observation that democracies rarely fight each other. It introduces Michael Doyle's pivotal work and the subsequent research focusing primarily on liberal interpretations. The chapter outlines the thesis's objective: to assess whether a purely liberal approach suffices to explain the DPP and to explore alternative explanations, particularly Henderson's (neo)realistic approach, acknowledging the limitations of both perspectives in the face of globalization and evolving international relations.
II. A liberal approach of the DPP: This chapter delves into the core arguments of liberal interpretations of the DPP. It emphasizes the connection between domestic power structures and foreign policy behavior, arguing that democratic systems foster a more peaceful approach due to factors such as citizen accountability, the need for government justification for war, and the inherent difficulties in privatizing the gains and socializing the costs of war. The chapter also explores the role of political culture, emphasizing the "live-and-let-live" attitude often associated with democracies and the resulting implications for relations with other states. The limitations of this solely liberal interpretation are also hinted at, setting the stage for alternative perspectives.
Keywords
Democratic Peace Proposition (DPP), Liberalism, (Neo)realism, International Relations, War, Peace, Democracy, Institutions, Globalization, Erol Henderson, Michael Doyle, Kant's Perpetual Peace.
Frequently Asked Questions: A Comprehensive Analysis of the Democratic Peace Proposition
What is the main topic of this thesis?
This thesis critically examines the Democratic Peace Proposition (DPP), questioning whether a solely liberal approach adequately explains why democracies rarely fight each other. It investigates alternative explanations, particularly a (neo)realist perspective, and explores the limitations of both approaches in the context of globalization and evolving international relations.
What are the key themes explored in the thesis?
The thesis explores several key themes, including: the sufficiency of liberal explanations for the DPP; the evaluation of alternative (neo)realistic explanations, specifically Henderson's approach; the impact of globalization and international institutions on the DPP; the limitations of traditional liberal and realist approaches; and the need for more complex theories to fully account for the DPP.
What are the main arguments presented in the liberal approach to the DPP?
The liberal approach emphasizes the link between domestic political structures and foreign policy. It argues that democratic systems promote peace due to factors like citizen accountability, the need for government justification for war, and the difficulties in privatizing war's gains and socializing its costs. The role of a peaceful political culture among democracies is also highlighted.
How does the thesis critique the solely liberal interpretation of the DPP?
The thesis acknowledges the strengths of the liberal interpretation but also points out its limitations. It argues that a purely liberal perspective may not fully capture the complexities of the DPP in the current global context, paving the way for exploring alternative explanations.
What alternative explanation to the DPP is explored in the thesis?
The thesis examines Henderson's (neo)realistic and institutional approach as an alternative explanation to the DPP. This perspective offers a different lens through which to understand the phenomenon, challenging the sufficiency of purely liberal interpretations.
What is the role of international institutions and globalization in the thesis?
The thesis considers the impact of globalization and international institutions on the DPP. It recognizes that these factors add complexities to the relationship between democracy and peace, highlighting the limitations of traditional approaches that may not fully account for these influences.
What conclusion does the thesis reach regarding the explanation of the DPP?
The thesis concludes that neither a purely liberal nor a purely realist perspective fully explains the DPP. It advocates for more complex and adaptable theories that integrate multiple perspectives to offer a more comprehensive understanding of this enduring phenomenon.
What are the key chapters and their content?
The thesis is structured as follows: An introduction establishing the context and objective; a chapter detailing the liberal approach to the DPP and its limitations; a chapter exploring Henderson's alternative explanation; a chapter examining the interaction of the DPP with international institutions; a chapter speculating on the future of the DPP; a chapter arguing for more complex theories; and finally, a chapter containing references.
What are the keywords associated with this thesis?
The key terms include: Democratic Peace Proposition (DPP), Liberalism, (Neo)realism, International Relations, War, Peace, Democracy, Institutions, Globalization, Erol Henderson, Michael Doyle, Kant's Perpetual Peace.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Jörg Walter (Autor:in), 2004, A liberal approach - the only explanation for the Democratic Peace Proposition? (ein liberaler Zugang - die einzige Erklärung für den "demokratischen Frieden"?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/41733
