Search

The authors introduce and describe a new variable for interstate conflict research for use in conjunction with the Militarized Interstate Disputes (MID) dataset. This variable, First Use of Violent Force (FUVF), covers the period 1980-2001 and identifies which state involved in a violent militarized interstate dispute was the first to actually use violence rather than threatening or displaying force. This article introduces the variable, which, along with all of the supporting documentation, is now publicly avail able, describes its creation, discusses its utility, and uses both multivariate regression and measures of association to draw attention to theoretically interesting patterns in first use of violent force that are worthy of further exploration. The authors find that non-democratic states are more likely than democracies to be the first to resort to violent force when involved in a militarized interstate dispute; also, minor powers are more likely to use violent force first, compared with major powers. Measures of association also indicate that states that use violent force first in a MID are much more likely to be revisionist states, but that first users of violent force are unlikely to achieve victory in the dispute as a result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rogue states have typically been characterized as those states that consistently violate accepted international norms of behavior. While US foreign policymakers and policy analysts have identified rogue states as those violating a narrow set of international norms of external conduct, specifically terrorism sponsorship and illicit pursuit of banned weapons, this article proposes an alternative understanding of rogue state status that harks back to earlier notions of international pariah states, isolated from the rest of international society, owing to their egregious treatment of their own citizens. Building on Galtung's concept of structural violence and feminist insights concerning the interconnectedness of violence at all levels of human society, the authors develop a rogue state index to identify human rights rogues, based on ethnic and gender discrimination and the violation of personal integrity rights. An important part of the rogue state formula developed by policymakers over the recent decades is the expectation that such states represent dangers to international peace and stability. Focusing on the recognized international human rights norms of non-discrimination and security of person, and informed by the causal mechanisms inherent in the normative explanation for the democratic peace, this article tests whether human rights rogues are more likely to become involved in militarized interstate conflicts and violent interstate conflicts. The results of the analysis show that human rights rogues are more likely to become involved in militarized interstate disputes in general, and violent interstate disputes specifically, than other states during the period 1980-2001, suggesting that policymakers must keep a close watch on serial human rights abusers, while seeking to identify future threats to international security. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]