The Struggle Of Democratic Peace

796 Words4 Pages
Although countries in South America are not democratic for most of the last century, it has the fewest inter-state wars there, which can be explained by geopolitics with balance-of-power, the trade-off between benefits and costs, and relations among countries in this area.

According to the theory of Democratic Peace, since democratic leaders have a larger wining coalitions, in order to keep in office, they need to gain support from selectorate, and “democratic leaders facing with war are more inclined to shift extra resources into the war effort than are autocrats”. “In addition to trying harder, democrats are more selective in their choice of targets” and “democrats only initiate wars they expect to win.” As a generalization, it is an empirical law that “democracies do not fight wars with one another”. On the contrary, with a small winning coalition, non-democrats leaders are facing “less risk of being deposed than are their democratic counterparts”, therefore, they are not constrained by the selectorate and they are inclined to choose war when the expected benefit is larger than the cost of conflict, or larger than the benefit from negotiation. This may lead to the conclusion that non-democrats are more likely to have conflicts with other countries.
However, when we look at South America, “despite the differences between some of the continent’s countries, it has not experienced full-scale interstate warfare in over 80 years”. This is puzzling, since the
Get Access