Territory, River, and Maritime Claims in the Western Hemisphere: Regime Type, Rivalry, and MIDs from 1901 to 2000

Issues remain at the core of armed conflict. Territory, in particular, appears to increase substantially the probability of inter-state violence and is concluded by many to be one of the most critical correlates of war onset. While scholars have called for an issue-based approach to the study of international relations for some time, recent data collection efforts allow the emergence and management of contentious issues over time to be studied more directly. Our argument and evidence suggest that territory is not necessarily contentious by itself, but is contentious in dyadic contexts characterized by rivalry. Using data from the Issue Correlates of War project, which codes specific government assertions of ownership to territory, river, and maritime locations, we find strategic rivalry, coupled with territorial claims, produces some of the most conflict-prone dyads. Further, jointly democratic domestic institutions do not appear to reduce the hazard of violent conflict over territorial issues within the context of rivalry, although they substantially reduce the hazard of violent conflict among states outside the context of rivalry.

争端议题始终是武装冲突的核心所在。具体而言，领土问题似乎会大幅提升国家间暴力冲突的发生概率，且众多学者均将其视为战争爆发的关键关联因素之一。尽管长期以来学界便呼吁采用基于议题的研究路径开展国际关系研究，但近期的数据收集工作使得我们能够更直接地追踪争议性议题随时间推移的产生与处置过程。本研究的论证与实证结果表明，领土本身未必天然具有争议性，仅在以对抗性竞争关系（rivalry）为特征的双边关系情境中，领土才会成为争议性议题。本研究采用战争议题关联项目（Issue Correlates of War Project）所采集的数据——该项目对各国政府就领土、河流及海域的所有权主张进行了标准化编码——研究发现，战略对抗性竞争关系与领土主张相结合，会催生诸多高冲突风险的双边国家组合。此外，在对抗性竞争关系的情境下，双边均实行民主的国内治理体制似乎并未降低领土议题相关暴力冲突的发生风险；而在非对抗性竞争关系的情境中，这类体制则会大幅降低国家间暴力冲突的发生风险。