Liberalismus in den Internationalen Beziehungen

Chapter
Part of the Springer Reference Sozialwissenschaften book series (SRS)

Zusammenfassung

Die Frage nach dem, was eine liberale Perspektive in den Internationalen Beziehungen (IB) ausmacht, ist unter ihren Protagonisten notorisch umstritten. Deshalb nähert sich der Beitrag dem Liberalismus in den IB aus der Perspektive seiner GegnerInnen: Was fordert VertreterInnen von Realismus, Konstruktivismus oder Kritischer Theorie heraus, wenn sie sich mit liberalen Ansätzen auseinandersetzen? Jetzt treten zwei Merkmale hervor. Auf der einen Seite werden diese Ansätze mit einem spezifischen Optimismus verbunden. Nach liberaler Überzeugung lässt sich internationale Politik so organisieren, dass alle Menschen ein selbstbestimmtes Leben ohne Furcht und Not führen können. Auf der anderen Seite wird Liberalismus in den IB mit drei konkreten Friedensstrategien verbunden. Es geht um Frieden durch Demokratie, Frieden durch wirtschaftlichen Austausch und Frieden durch internationale Institutionen. Der Beitrag diskutiert vor dem Hintergrund der Einwände von Realismus, Konstruktivismus und kritischer Theorie systematisch die Stärken und Schwächen der drei liberalen Friedensstrategien. Dabei wird zunächst jeweils das traditionelle liberale Argument für die Wirksamkeit von Demokratie, Handel und internationalen Institutionen präsentiert. Anschließend werden die aktuellen empirischen Befunde referiert, um dann die neueren theoretischen Interpretationen dieser Befunde durch liberale Autoren zu diskutieren. Jeder Abschnitt schließt mit einer knappen Präsentation der Einwände aus anderen Denkschulen und der kritischen Würdigung liberaler Hoffnungen. Im Ergebnis wird sichtbar, dass die liberalen Hoffnungen nach wie vor Bestand haben und durch die empirische Realität internationaler Politik (noch) nicht widerlegt sind. Gleichzeitig sollten sich aber die Protagonisten der liberalen Perspektive in den IB intensiver als bisher um angemessene theoretische Modelle zur Erklärung der oft komplexen empirischen Befunde bemühen.

Schlüsselwörter

Liberalismus Demokratischer Frieden Handel Interdependenz Internationale Institutionen 

Literatur

  1. Adler, Emanuel, und Michael Barnett. 1999. Security communities in theoretical perspective. In Security communities, Hrsg. Emanuel Adler und Michael Barnett, 3–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Altvater, Elmar, und Birgit Mahnkopf. 2007. Konkurrenz für das Empire. Die Zukunft der Europäischen Union in der globalisierten Welt. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.Google Scholar
  3. Barbieri, Katherine. 1996. Economic interdependence: A path to peace or a source of interstate conflict? Journal of Peace Research 33(1): 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barkawi, Tarak, und Mark Laffey. 1999. The imperial peace: Democracy, force and globalization. European Journal of International Relations 5(4): 403–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barkawi, Tarak, und Mark Laffey. 2001. Introduction: The international relations of democracy, liberalism, and war. In Democracy, liberalism, and war. Rethinking the democratic peace debate, Hrsg. Tarak Barkawi und Mark Laffey, 1–23. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  6. Bennett, D. Scott, und Allan C. Stam. 2000. Research design and estimator choices in the analysis of interstate dyads. When decisions matter. Journal of Conflict Resolution 44(5): 653–685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bentham, Jeremey. [1789] 1953. Grundsätze für ein künftiges Völkerrecht und einen dauernden Frieden (Principles of International Law). In Ewiger Friede. Friedensrufe und Friedenspläne seit der Renaissance, Hrsg. Kurt von Raumer, 379–417, Freiburg: Alber.Google Scholar
  8. Blaney, David L. 2001. Realist spaces/liberal bellicosities: Reading the democratic peace as world democratic theory. In Democracy, liberalism, and war. Rethinking the democratic peace debate, Hrsg. Tarak Barkawi und Mark Laffey, 25–44. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  9. Blattman, Christopher, und Edward Miguel. 2010. Civil war. Journal of Economic Literature 48(1): 3–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boehmer, Charles, Erik Gartzke, und Timothy Nordstrom. 2004. Do intergovernmental organizations promote peace? World Politics 57(1): 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borras, Saturnino M., und Jennifer C. Franco. 2012. Global land grabbing and trajectories of agrarian change: A preliminary analysis. Journal of Agrarian Change 12(1): 34–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, Michael E., Owen Coté, Sean J. Lynn-Jones, und Steven E. Miller. Hrsg. 2011. Do democracies win their wars? An international security reader. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Brühl, Tanja. 2011. Internationale Organisationen, Regime und Verrechtlichung. In Friedens- und Konfliktforschung, Hrsg. Peter Schlotter und Simone Wisotzki, 225–251. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  14. Buchan, Bruce. 2002. Explaining war and peace. Kant and liberal IR theory. Alternatives 27(4): 407–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, James Morrow, Randolph M. Siverson, und Alastair Smith. 1999. An institutional explanation of the democratic peace. American Political Science Review 93(4): 791–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Burchill, Scott. 2009. Liberalism. In Theories of international relations, 4. Aufl., Hrsg. Burchill Scott et al., 57–85. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Bussmann, Margit, und Gerald Schneider. 2007. When globalization discontent turns violent: Foreign economic liberalization and internal war. International Security 51(1): 79–97.Google Scholar
  18. Bussmann, Margit, Gerald Schneider, und Nina Wiesehomeier. 2005. Foreign economic liberalization and peace: The case of Sub-Saharan Africa. European Journal of International Relations 11(4): 551–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Callinicos, Alex. 2005. Iraq: Fulcrum of world politics. Third World Quarterly 26(4–5): 593–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Callinicos, Alex. 2007. Does capitalism need the state system? Cambridge Review of International Affairs 20(4): 533–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cederman, Lars-E., Simon Hug, und Lutz F. Krebs. 2010. Democratization and civil war: Empirical evidence. Journal of Peace Research 47(4): 377–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chan, Steve. 2012. Programmatic research on the democratic peace. In Guide to the scientific study of international processes, Hrsg. Sara M. McLaughlin Mitchell, Paul F. Diehl, und James D. Morrow, 151–170. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Chiozza, Giacomo, und Henk E. Goemans. 2004. International conflict and the tenure of leaders: Is war still ex post inefficient? American Journal of Political Science 48(3): 604–619.Google Scholar
  24. Choi, Seung-Whan. 2010. Beyond Kantian liberalism: Peace through globalization? Conflict Management and Peace Science 27(3): 272–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Choi, Seung-Whan. 2011. Re-evaluating capitalist and democratic peace models. International Studies Quarterly 55(3): 759–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Chojnacki, Sven. 2006. Democratic wars and military interventions, 1946–2002: The monadic case reconsidered. In Democratic wars. Looking at the dark side of democratic peace, Hrsg. Anna Geis, Lothar Brock, und Harald Müller, 13–37. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Chojnacki, Sven, und Verena Namberger. 2013. Vom Konflikt zum Krieg: Ursachen und Dynamiken’. In Studienbuch Politikwissenschaft, Hrsg. Manfred G. Schmidt, Frieder Wolf, und Stefan Wurster, 495–520. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cox, Robert W. 1992. Multilateralism and world order. Review of International Studies 18(2): 161–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Cox, Robert W. 1996. Globalization, multilateralism, and democracy. In Approaches to world order, Hrsg. Robert W. Cox, 524–536. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Czempiel, Ernst-Otto. 1998. Friedensstrategien: Eine systematische Darstellung außenpolitischer Theorien von Machiavelli bis Madariaga. 2. Aufl. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dafoe, Allan. 2011. Statistical critiques of the democratic peace: Caveat emptor. American Journal of Political Science 55(2): 247–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dafoe, Allan, John R. Oneal, und Bruce Russett. 2013. The democratic peace: Weighing the evidence and cautious inference. International Studies Quarterly 57(1): 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Dai, Xinyuan. 2007. International institutions and national policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Debs, Alexandre, und Henk E. Goemans. 2010. Regime type, the fate of leaders, and war. American Political Science Review 104(3): 430–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Dembinski, Matthias, Andreas Hasenclever, und Wolfgang Wagner. 2004. Towards an executive peace? International Politics 41(4): 543–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Devin, Guillaume. 2011. Who makes the peacemaking institutions? In Making peace. The contribution of international institutions, Hrsg. Guillaume Devin und Roger Leverdier, 1–13. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  37. Dixon, William, und Paul D. Senese. 2002. Democracy, disputes, and negotiated settlements. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46(4): 547–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Dorussen, Han. 2006. Heterogeneous trade interests and conflict: What you trade matters. Journal of Conflict Resolution 50(1): 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Dorussen, Han, und Hugh Ward. 2008. Intergovernmental organizations and the Kantian peace: A network perspective. Journal of Conflict Resolution 52(2): 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Doyle, Michael W. 1997. Ways of war and peace. Realism, liberalism, and socialism. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  41. Doyle, Michael W., und Stefano Recchia. 2011. Liberalism in international relations. In International encyclopedia of political science, Hrsg. Bertrand Bertrand Badie, Dirk Berg-Schlosser und Leonardo Morlino, 1434–1439. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. Dunne, Timothy. 2008. Liberalism. In The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations. 4. Aufl, Hrsg. John Baylis, Steve Smith und Patricia Owens, 108–123. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Fearon, James. 1994. Domestic political audience and the escalation of international disputes. American Political Science Review 88(3): 577–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Fearon, James. 1995. Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization 49(3): 379–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Fiala, Andrew. 2009. The democratic peace myth: From Hiroshima to Baghdad. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 68(1): 77–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Finel, Bernard, und Kristin M. Lord. 1999. The surprising logic of transparency. International Studies Quarterly 43(2): 315–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Fortna, Virginia P., und Lise M. Howard. 2008. Pitfalls and prospects in the peacekeeping literature. Annual Review of Political Science 11(1): 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gartzke, Erik. 2007. The capitalist peace. American Journal of Political Science 51(1): 166–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Gartzke, Erik, Quan Li, und Charles Boehmer. 2001. Investing in the peace: Economic interdependence and international conflict. International Organization 55(2): 391–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Geis, Anna. 2001. Diagnose: Doppelbefund – Ursache: ungeklärt? Die Kontroversen um den demokratischen Frieden. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 42(2): 282–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Geis, Anna. 2011. Of bright sides and dark sides: Democratic peace beyond triumphalism. International Relations 25(2): 18–24.Google Scholar
  52. Geis, Anna, und Wolfgang Wagner. 2011. How far is it from Königsberg to Kandahar? Democratic peace and democratic violence in international relations. Review of International Studies 37(4): 1555–1577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Geis, Anna, Harald Müller, und Niklas Schörnig, Hrsg. 2013. Militant face of democracy. Liberal forces for good. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Geller, Daniel S., und David J. Singer. 1998. Nations at war. A scientific study of international conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Gelpi, Christopher F., und Michael Griesdorf. 2001. Winners or losers? Democracies in international crisis, 1918–1994. American Political Science Review 95(3): 633–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Gilpin, Robert. 1981. War and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Gleditsch, Nils Petter, und Havard Hegre. 1997. Peace and democracy. Three levels of analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(2): 283–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Gleditsch, Skrede Kristian and Andrea Ruggeri 2010. Political Opportunity Structures, Democracy, and Civil War. Journal of Peace Research 47(3), 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Goenner, Cullen F. 2004. Uncertainty of the liberal peace. Journal of Peace Research 41(5): 589–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Gowa, Joanne. 1999. Ballots and bullets: The elusive democratic peace. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Gowa, Joanne. 2011. The democratic peace after the cold war. Economics & Politics 23(2): 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Grieco, Joseph M. 1997. Realist international theory and the study of world politics. In New thinking in international relations theory, Hrsg. Michael Doyle und John G. Ikenberry, 163–201. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  63. Haftel, Yoram Z. 2007. Designing for peace: Regional integration arrangements, institutional variation, and militarized interstate disputes. International Organization 61(1): 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Hansen, Holley E., Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, und Stephen C. Nemeth. 2008. IO mediation of interstate conflicts: Moving beyond the global versus regional dichotomy. Journal of Conflict Resolution 52(2): 295–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Harnisch, Sebastian. 2003. Theorieorientierte Außenpolitikforschung in einer Ära des Wandels. In Die neuen Internationalen Beziehungen. Forschungsstand und Perspektiven in Deutschland, Hrsg. Gunther Hellmann, Klaus Dieter Wolf und Michael Zürn, 313–360. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  66. Hartzell, Caroline A., Matthew Hoddie, und Molly Bauer. 2010. Economic liberalization via IMF structural adjustment: Sowing the seeds of civil war. International Organization 64(2): 339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Harvey, David. 2007. Neoliberalism as creative destruction. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 610(1): 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hasenclever, Andreas. 2001. Die Macht der Moral in der internationalen Politik. Militärische Interventionen westlicher Staaten in Somalia, Ruanda und Bosnien-Herzegowina. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
  69. Hasenclever, Andreas. 2002. The democratic peace meets international institutions – Überlegungen zur internationalen Organisation des demokratischen Friedens. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 9(1): 75–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Hasenclever, Andreas, und Britta Weiffen. 2006. International institutions are the key. A new perspective on the democratic peace. Review of International Studies 32: 563–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Hasenclever, Andreas, Peter Mayer, und Volker Rittberger. 1997. Theories of international regimes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Haydt, Claudia, Tobias Pflüger, und Jürgen Wagner. 2003. Globalisierung und Krieg. Hamburg: VSA-Verlag.Google Scholar
  73. Hegre, Håvard. 2014. Democracy and armed conflict. Journal of Peace Research 51(2): 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Hegre, Håvard, Ranveig Gissinger, und Nils Petter Gleditsch. 2003. Globalization and internal conflict. In Globalization and armed conflict, Hrsg. Gerald Schneider, Katherine Barbieri, und Nils Petter Gleditsch, 251–276. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  75. Heldt, Birger. 1997. The dependent variable of the domestic-external conflict relationship: Anecdotes, theories and systematic studies. Journal of Peace Research 34(1): 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Hobson, Christopher. 2011. Towards a critical theory of democratic peace. Review of International Studies 37(4): 1903–1922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Höffe, Otfried. 1999. Demokratie im Zeitalter der Globalisierung. München: Beck.Google Scholar
  78. Holsti, Kalevi J. 1991. Peace and war: Armed conflicts and international order 1648-1989. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Huntington, Samuel P. 1996. Der Kampf der Kulturen. Die Neugestaltung der Weltpolitik im 21. Jahrhundert. München: Europaverlag.Google Scholar
  80. Ish-Shalom, Piki. 2006. Theory as a hermeneutical mechanism: The democratic-peace thesis and the politics of democratization. European Journal of International Relations 12(4): 565–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Jäger, Thomas, und Niels Lange. 2001. Isolierte Partner im europäischen Integrationsprozeß. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 8(1): 105–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Jahn, Beate. 2010. Universal languages?: A reply to Moravcsik. International Theory 2(1): 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Jørgensen, Knud E. 2010. International relations theory. A new introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  84. Kadera, Kelly M., Mark J.C. Crescenzi, und Megan L. Shannon. 2003. Democratic survival, peace, and war in the international system. American Journal of Political Science 47(2): 234–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Kant, Immanuel. [1795] 1965. Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  86. Keohane, Robert O. 1989. International institutions and state power: Essays in international relations theory. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  87. Keohane, Robert O. 1990. International liberalism reconsidered. In The economic limits to modern politics, Hrsg. John Dunn, 165–194. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Keohane, Robert O., und Lisa Martin. 1995. The promise of institutionalist theory. International Security 20(1): 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Kim, Hyung Min, und David L. Rousseau. 2005. The classic liberals were half right (or half wrong): New tests of the ‘Liberal Peace’, 1960–88. Journal of Peace Research 42(5): 23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Kinne, Brandon J. 2013. IGO membership, network convergence, and credible signaling in militarized disputes. Journal of Peace Research 50(6): 659–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Klein, Naomi. 2007. Die Schock-Strategie. Der Aufstieg des Katastrophen-Kapitalismus. Frankfurt: S. Fischer.Google Scholar
  92. Krell, Gert. 2009. Weltbilder und Weltordnung. Einführung in die Theorie der internationalen Beziehungen. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  93. Lake, David A. 1992. Powerful pacifists: Democratic states and war. American Political Science Review 86(1): 24–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Le Billon, Philippe. 2012. Wars of plunder: Conflicts, profits and the politics of resources. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Leeds, Brett Ashley. 1999. Domestic political institutions, credible commitments, and international cooperation. American Journal of Political Science 43(4): 979–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Leeds, Brett Ashley, und David R. Davis. 1997. Domestic political vulnerability and international disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(6): 814–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Levy, Jack S. 1989. The divisionary theory of war: A critique. In Handbook of war studies, Hrsg. Manus L. Midlarsky, 259–288. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  98. Levy, Jack S. 2003. Economic interdependence, opportunity costs, and peace. In: Economic interdependence and international conflict. New perspectives on an enduring debate. Hrsg. Mansfield, Edward D. and Brian Pollins, 127–147. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan PressGoogle Scholar
  99. Long, David. 1995. The Harvard school of liberal international theory: A case for closure. Millennium 24(3): 489–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Mansfield, Edward D., und Jon C. Pevehouse. 2000. Trade blocs, trade flows and international conflict. International Organization 54(4): 775–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Mansfield, Edward D., und Brian Pollins. 2003. Economic interdependence and international conflict. New perspectives on an enduring debate. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Mansfield, Edward D., Helen V. Milner, und Peter B. Rosendorff. 2000. Free to trade: Democracies, autocracies, and international trade. American Political Science Review 94(2): 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Mason, David T., Mehmet Gurses, Patrick T. Brandt, und Jason Michael Quinn. 2011. When civil wars recur: Conditions for durable peace after civil wars. International Studies Perspectives 12(2): 171–189.Google Scholar
  104. McDonald, Patrick J. 2009. The invisible hand of peace. Capitalism, the war machine, and international relations theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. McLaughlin Mitchell, Sara. 2002. A Kantian system? Democracy and third-party conflict resolution. American Journal of Political Science 46(4): 749–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. McLaughlin Mitchell, Sara. 2012. Norms and the democratic peace. In What do we know about war? Hrsg. John A. Vasquez, 167–188. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  107. McLaughlin Mitchell, Sara, und Paul R. Hensel. 2007. International institutions and compliance with agreements. American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 721–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. McMillan, Susan M. 1998. Interdependence and conflict. Mershon International Studies Review 41(1): 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Mearsheimer, John J. 1994. The false promise of international institutions. International Security 19(3): 5–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Mearsheimer, John J. 2001. The tragedy of great power politics. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  111. Mercer, Jonathan. 1995. Anarchy and identity. International Organization 49(2): 229–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Midtgaard, Trude M., Krishna C. Vadlamannati, und Indra de Soysa. 2014. Does the IMF cause civil war? A comment. The Review of International Organizations 9(1): 107–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Moravcsik, Andrew. 1997. Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization 51(4): 513–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Moravcsik, Andrew. 2008. The new liberalism. In The Oxford handbook of international relations, Hrsg. Christian Reus-Smit und Duncan Snidal, 255–266. Oxford: Oxford Univ Press.Google Scholar
  115. Mousseau, Michael. 1997. Democracy and militarized interstate collaboration. Journal of Peace Research 34(1): 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Müller, Harald. 1993. Die Chance der Kooperation: Regime in den internationalen Beziehungen. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  117. Müller, Harald. 2002a. Antinomien des demokratischen Friedens. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 43(1): 46–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Müller, Harald. 2002b. Institutionalismus und Regime. In Internationale Politik, Hrsg. Mir A. Ferdowsi, 87–104. München: W. Fink.Google Scholar
  119. Müller, Harald. 2004. The antinomy of democratic peace. International Politics 41(4): 494–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Müller, Harald, und Jonas Wolff. 2006. Democratic peace: Many data, little explanation? In Democratic wars. Looking at the dark side of democratic peace, Hrsg. Anna Geis, Lothar Brok und Harald Müller, 41–73. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  121. Nielebock, Thomas. 2004. Der Friede zwischen den Demokratien: Friede den Palästen, Krieg den Hütten? In Weltpolitik heute. Grundlagen und Perspektiven, Hrsg. Volker Rittberger, 165–192. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  122. Oneal, John R., Bruce Russett, und Michael L. Berbaum. 2003. Causes of peace: Democracy, interdependence and international organization, 1885–1992. International Studies Quarterly 47(3): 371–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Owen, John M. 1997. Liberal peace, liberal war. American politics and international security. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  124. Park, Johann. 2013. Forward to the future? The democratic peace after the cold War. Conflict Management and Peace Science 30(2): 178–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Peceny, Mark, Caroline C. Beed, und Shannon Sanchez-Terry. 2002. Dictatorial peace? American Political Science Review 96(1): 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Pevehouse, Jon C., und Bruce Russett. 2006. Democratic international governmental organizations promote peace. International Organization 60(4): 969–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Prins, Brandon C., und Ursula E. Daxecker. 2008. Committed to peace: Liberal institutions and the termination of rivalry. British Journal of Political Science 38(1): 17–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Raknerud, Arvid, und Havard Hegre. 1997. The hazard of war: Reassessing the evidence for the democratic peace. Journal of Peace Research 34(4): 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Reiter, Dan, und Allan Stam. 2003. Identifying the culprit: Democracy, dictatorship, and dispute initiation. American Political Science Review 97(2): 333–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Reus-Smit, Christian. 2001. The strange death of liberal international theory. European Journal of International Law 12(3): 573–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Richardson, James L. 1997. Contending liberalism: Past and present. European Journal of International Relations 3(1): 5–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Richardson, James L. 2001. Contending liberalisms in world politics. Ideology and power. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  133. Risse-Kappen, Thomas. 1995. Democratic peace - warlike democracies? A social constructivist interpretation of the liberal argument. European Journal of International Relations 1(4): 491–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Rittberger, Volker. Hrsg. 2001. German foreign policy since unification: Theories and case studies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  135. Rittberger, Volker, und Bernhard Zangl. 2003. Internationale Organisationen. Politik und Geschichte, 3. Aufl. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Rittberger, Volker, und Michael Zürn. 1990. Towards regulated anarchy in east-west relations. In International regimes in east-west politics, Hrsg. Rittberger Volker, 9–63. London: Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
  137. Rittberger, Volker 1993. Research on international regimes in Germany: The adaptive internalization of an american social science concept. In Regime theory and international relations, Hrsg. Rittberger, Volker with the assistance of Peter Mayer, 3–22. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  138. Rosato, Sebastian. 2003. The flawed logic of democratic peace theory. American Political Science Review 97(4): 585–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Rosato, Sebastian. 2005. Explaining the democratic peace. American Political Science Review 99(3): 467–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Rummel, Rudolph J. 1995. Democracies ARE less warlike than other regimes. European Journal of International Relations 1(4): 457–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Russett, Bruce, und John R. Oneal. 2001. Triangulating peace: Democracy, interdependence, and international organizations. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  142. Schieder, Siegfried. 2010. Neuer liberalismus. In Theorien der Internationalen Beziehungen, Hrsg. Siegfried Schieder und Manuela Spindler, 175–211. Opladen: Leske + Budrich (UTB).Google Scholar
  143. Schimmelfennig, Frank. 1995. Debatten zwischen Staaten: eine Argumentationstheorie internationaler Systemkonflikte. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Schneider, Gerald. 2010. Economics and conflict. In The international studies encyclopedia, Hrsg. Robert A. Denemark, 1284–1300. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  145. Schneider, Gerald. 2014. Globalization and social transition. In Routledge handbook of civil wars, Hrsg. Edward Newman und Karl R. DeRouen, 186–196. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  146. Schultz, Kenneth A. 1999. Do democratic institutions constrain or inform? Contrasting two institutional perspectives on democracy and war. International Organization 53(2): 233–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Schultz, Kenneth A. 2001. Democracy and coercive diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Senghaas, Dieter. 2004. Zum irdischen Frieden. Erkenntnisse und Vermutungen. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  149. Shannon, Megan, Daniel Morey, und Frederick J. Boehmke. 2010. The influence of international organizations on militarized dispute initiation and duration. International Studies Quarterly 54(4): 1123–1141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Siverson, Randolph M. 1995. Democracies and war participation: In defense of the institutional constraints argument. European Journal of International Relations 1(4): 481–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 1995. International law in a world of liberal states. European Journal of International Law 6(4): 503–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Smith, Michael J. 1992. Liberalism and international reform. In Traditions of international ethics, Hrsg. Terry Nardin und David Mapel, 201–217. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Teusch, Ulrich, und Martin Kahl. 2001. Ein Theorem mit Verfallsdatum? Der “Demokratische Friede” im Kontext der Globalisierung. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 8(2): 287–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Tomz, Michael R., und Jessica L. Weeks. 2013. Public opinion and the democratic peace. American Political Science Review 107(4): 849–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Vasquez, John. 2000. What do we know about war. In What do we know about war, Hrsg. John A. Vasquez, 335–370. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  156. Wagner, Wolfgang. 2013. Zum Verhältnis von Demokratie und Krieg. In Handbuch Politische Gewalt. Formen - Ursachen - Legitimation – Begrenzung, Hrsg. Birgit Enzmann, 319–333. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. Wallander, Celeste A. 2000. Institutional assets and adaptability: NATO after the cold war. International Organization 54(4): 705–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Waltz, Kenneth N. 2000. Structural realism after the cold war. International Security 25(1): 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Ward, Michael D., Randolph M. Siverson, und Xun Cao. 2007. Disputes, democracies, and dependencies: A reexamination of the Kantian peace. American Journal of Political Science 51(3): 583–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Weede, Erich. 2003. Globalization: Creative destruction and the prospect of a capitalist peace. In Globalization and armed conflict, Hrsg. Gerald Schneider, Katherine Barbieri, und Nils Petter Gleditsch, 311–323. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  161. Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Wolf, Klaus Dieter. 1999. The new „Raison d’État“ as a problem for democracy in world society. European Journal of International Relations 5(3): 333–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Wolf, Reinhard. 2000. Was hält siegreiche Verbündete zusammen? Machtpolitische, institutionelle und innenpolitische Faktoren im Vergleich. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 7(1): 33–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. Zacher, Mark W., und Richard A. Matthew. 1995. Liberal international theory: Common threads, divergent strands. In Controversies in international relations theory: Realism and the neoliberal challenge, Hrsg. Charles W. Kegley Jr., 107–150. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
  165. Zürn, Michael. 1997. Vom Nutzen internationaler Regime für eine Friedensordnung. In Frieden machen, Hrsg. Dieter Senghaas, 465–481. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für Politikwissenschaft (IfP)Universität TübingenTübingenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations