Search

Policymakers frequently make sweeping generalizations about the positive relationship between the democracy agenda and U.S. national security. These generalizations are buttressed by important assumptions about the effects the spread of democracy has on national security priorities. This study examines the degree to which political science research to date substantiates these assumptions. A content analysis of each official White House National Security Strategy from 1986-2001 reveals four primary assumptions: the spread of democracy decreases interstate conflict and increases stability, human rights, and economic development. A review of the literature finds that several of these assumptions are only justified by mature democracies that have passed through the gray zone of transition to democratic consolidation. In contrast, those democracies that occupy the intermediate or gray zone actually pose a threat to U.S. national security. It is consequently recommended that the democracy agenda prioritize democratic consolidation of the gray zone above all else. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies have found that democracies trade more openly with each other than do mixed regimes or autocracies. While this phenomenon is strongly supported by empirical evidence, it lacks well developed theoretical justification. The literature suggests that the institutional constraints on and the preferences of democratic policy makers increase the likelihood of trade liberalization. Although some models account for the idea that this is in contrast to authoritarian trade policy, the accompanying theories fail to explain why this is so. The consequence is interesting empirical results explained by lopsided theories. Therefore, this paper proposes a theory that explains what it is about less democratic regimes that fosters more protectionist trade policies. Existing literature responds primarily by noting the absence of liberal institutions. However, it is dangerous to attempt to explain phenomena by the identification of a void. Non-democracies are more protectionist because of existing conditions. It is proposed that, as Dai (2002) suggests is the case for democratic regimes, authoritarian trade policy is an outcome of the interaction between institutional constraints and leader preferences. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policymakers frequently make sweeping generalizations about the positive relationship between the democracy agenda and U.S. national security. These generalizations are buttressed by important assumptions about the affects the spread of democracy has on national security priorities. This study examines the degree to which political science research to date substantiates these assumptions. A content analysis of each official White House National Security Strategy from 1986-2001 reveals four primary assumptions: the spread of democracy decreases interstate conflict and increases stability, human rights, and economic development. A review of the literature finds that several of these assumptions are only justified by mature democracies that have passed through the gray zone of transition to democratic consolidation. In contrast, those democracies that occupy the intermediate or gray zone actually pose a threat to U.S. national security. It is consequently recommended that the democracy agenda prioritize democratic consolidation of the gray zone above all else. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]