The Razor’s Edge: A Review of Contiguity in Conflict Studies and an Argument for Redefining Neighbors

Yıl 2008, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, - , 30.05.2016

Michaelene Cox

Öz

Political scientists generally agree that contiguity is a significant predictor of interstate conflict; that is, they observe that it is neighbors that most frequently fight one another. Defining contiguity, however, is an unsettled matter. Still dominating conflict studies is the view that neighbors are those who share physical borders, or spatial delineations, between one sovereign territory and another. Yet an increasingly integrated international system, accompanied with shifting political identities and technological advances in communication and transport, suggest that power relations are more than a function of sheer corporeal distance. To anticipate contemporary interstate relations, therefore, we might tap the potential of constructivist theory to derive new understanding of what it means to be a neighbor.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Contiguity, geography, geopolitics, conflict

Kaynakça

• Booth, Ken (1991). ―Security and Anarchy: Utopian Realism in Theory and Practice.‖ International Affairs 67 (3), 527-542.
• Boulding, Kenneth (1962). Conflict and Defense. New York: Harper and Row.
• Braithwaite, Alex (2005). ―Location, Location, Location…Identifying Hot Spots of International Conflict.‖ International Interactions 31 (4), 251-273.
• Braithwaite, Alex (2006). ―The Geographic Spread of Militarized Disputes.‖ Journal of Peace Research 43 (5), 507-522.
• Bremer, Stuart (1982). ―The Contagiousness of Coercion: The Spread of Serious International Disputes, 1900-1976.‖ International Interactions 9 (1), 29-55.
• Bremer, Stuart (1992). ―Dangerous Dyads: Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Interstate War, 1816-1965.‖ Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36 (2), 309-341.
• Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce (1981). The War Trap. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Cobb, Roger and Charles Elder (1970). International Community: A Regional and Global Study. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
• Cohen, Saul B. (1994). ―Geopolitics in the New World Era: A New Perspective on an Old Discipline.‖ Reordering the World: Geopolitical Perspectives on the Twenty-First Century. George J. Demko and William B. Wood, ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Cox, Kevin R. (1998). ―Spaces of Dependence, Spaces of Engagement and the Politics of Scale, or: Looking for Local Politics.‖ Political Geography 17 (1), 1-23.
• Cuddy-Keane, Melba (2003). ―Modernism, Geopolitics, Globalization.‖ Modernism/ Modernity. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press 10 (3), 539-558.
• Curzon, Lord of Kedleston (1969). The Romanes Lectures, 1908: Frontiers. Reprinted in Oxford Lectures on History, 1904-1923. Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press.
• Diehl, Paul F. (1985). ―Contiguity and Military Escalation in Major Power Rivalries, 1980.‖ Journal of Politics 47 (4), 1203-1211.
• Diehl, Paul F. (1991). ―Geography and War: A Review and Assessment of the Empirical Literature.‖ International Interactions, 17 (1), 11-27.
• Demko, George J. and William B. Wood, ed. (1994). Reordering the World: Geopolitical Perspectives on the Twenty-First Century. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Finnemore, Martha and Kathryn Sikkink (2001). ―Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics.‖ Annual Review of Political Science 4, 391-416.
• Giddens, A. (1987). The Nation-State and Violence: Volume Two of a Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. Los Angeles, CA: University of California at Berkeley.
• Gleditsch, Nils Petter (1995). ―Geography, Democracy, and Peace.‖ International Interactions 20 (4), 297-323.
• Gochman, Charles (1991). ―Interstate Metrics: Conceptualizing, Operationalizing, and Measuring the Geographic Proximity of States since the Congress of Vienna.‖ International Interactions 17 (1), 93-112.
• Gochman, Charles and Zeev Maoz (1984). ―Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816 ‖ Journal of Conflict Resolution 28 (4), 585-615.
• Halter, Kristel (2002). ―The Political Geography of Peace.‖ Washington Report on Middle East Affairs 21 (6), 94.
• Hebron, Lui and John F. Stack, Jr. (2009). Globalization: Debunking the Myths. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice-Hall.
• Hoisti, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
• Hohne, Markus V. (2006). ―Political Identity, Emerging State Structures and Conflict in Northern Somalia.‖ Journal of Modern African Studies 44 (3), 397-414.
• Houweling, Henk and Jan Siccama (1985). ―The Epidemiology of War, 1960-1980.‖ Journal of Conflict Resolution 29 (4), 641-663.
• Huntington, Samuel P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Johnston, R.J. (1994). ―One World, Millions of Places: The End of History and the Ascendancy of Geography.‖ Political Geography 13 (2), 111-121.
• Kratochwil, Friedrich (1985). Peace and Disputed Sovereignty: Reflections on Conflict Over Territory. Lanham, MD: Columbia University Institute of War and Peace Studies.
• Lemke, Douglas (1995). ―The Tyranny of Distance: Redefining Relevant Dyads.‖ International Interactions 21 (1), 23-38.
• Luke, Timothy W. (1996) ―Governmentality and Contragovernmentality: Rethinking Sovereignty and Territoriality after the Cold War.‖ Political Geography 15 (6/7), 491-
• Mackinder, Halford J. (1904). ―The Geographical Pivot of History.‖ Geographical Journal 23 (2), 421-444.
• Mackinder, Halford J. (1919). Democratic Ideals and Reality. New York: Henry Holt.
• Mahan, Alfred Thayer (1890). The Influence of Sea Power Upon History 1660-1783. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
• Mandel, Robert (1980). ―Roots of Modem Interstate Border Disputes.‖ Journal of Conflict Resolution 24 (3), 427-454.
• Marden, Peter (1997). ―Geographies of Dissent: Globalization, Identity and the Nation.‖ Political Geography 16 (1), 37-64.
• Matthews, Olen Paul and Dan St. Germain (2007). ―Boundaries and Transboundary Water Conflicts.‖ Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 133 (5), 386-296.
• Most, Benjamin and Harvey Starr (1980). ―Diffusion, Reinforcement, Geopolitics and the Spread of War.‖ American Political Science Review 74 (4), 932-946.
• Most, Benjamin and Harvey Starr (1989). Inquiry. Logic and International Politics. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
• Murdoch, Jon (2005). Post-Structuralist Geography: A Guide to Relational Space. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Nijman, Jan (1991). ―The Dynamics of Superpower Spheres of Influence: U.S. and Soviet Military Activities, 1948-1978.‖ International Interactions 17, 63-79.
• O‘Loughlin, John and Luc Anselin (1991). ―Bringing Geography Back to the Study of International Relations: Spatial Dependence and Regional Context in Africa, 1966 ‖ International Interactions 17 (1), 29-61.
• Oneal, John R. and Bruce Russett (1997). ―The Classical Liberals Were Right: Democracy, Interdependence and Conflict.‖ International Studies Quarterly 41 (2), 267- 294
• Prescott, J.R.V. (1965). The Geography of Frontiers and Boundries. Chicago: Aldine.
• Richardson, Lewis (1960). Statistics of Deadly Quarrels. Pittsburgh: Boxwood.
• Rosecrance, Richard (1996). ―The Rise of the Virtual State.‖ Foreign Affairs 75 (4), 45
• Rosenau, James N. (2003). Distant Proximities: Dynamics beyond Globalization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Sack, Robert (1983). ―Human Territoriality: A Theory.‖ Annals, Association of American Geographers 73 (1), 55-74.
• Schaller, Mark and A. M. N. D. Abeysinghe (2006). ―Geographical Frame of Reference and Dangerous Intergroup Attitudes: A Double-Minority Study in Sri Lanka.‖ Political Psychology 27 (4), 615-406.
• Singer, J. David, ed. (1979). The Correlates of War II: Testing Some Realpolitik Models. New York: The Free Press.
• Singer, J. David and Melvin Small (1972). The Wages of War, 1816-1965: A Statistical Handbook. New York: John Wiley.
• Singer, J. David and Melvin Small (1989). Nation Members of the Interstate System, 1985: Correlates of War Project. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
• Singer, Max and Aaron Wildavsky (1996). The Real World Order: Zones of Peace, Zones of Turmoil. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.
• Siverson, Randolph and Harvey Starr (1990). ―Opportunity, Willingness and the Diffusion of War.‖ American Political Science Review 84 (3), 47-67.
• Sprout, Harold and Margaret Sprout (1965). The Ecological Perspective on Human Affairs. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Sprout, Harold and Margaret Sprout (1969). ―Environmental Factors in the Study of International Politics.‖ International Politics and Foreign Policy, James Rosenau. New York: Free Press.
• Spykman, Nicholas (1944). The Geography of the Peace. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
• Starr, Harvey (1978). ―Opportunity and Willingness as Ordering Concepts in the Study of War.‖ International Interactions 4 (4), 363-387.
• Starr, Harvey (1991). ―Joining Political and Geographic Perspectives: Geopolitics and International Relations.‖ International Interactions 17 (1), 1-9.
• Stefano Guzzini and Anna Leander, eds. (2006). Constructivism and International Relations: Alexander Wendt and his Critics. London: Routledge.
• Staeheli, Lynn A. (2008). ―Citizenship and the Problem of Community.‖ Political Geography 27 (1), 5-21.
• Touraine, Alain (1985). ―An Introduction to the Study of Social Movements.‖ Social Research 52 (4), 749-787.
• Vasquez, John (1995). ―Why Do Neighbors Fight? Proximity, Interaction, or Territoriality.‖ Journal of Peace Research 32 (3), 277-293.
• Wallensteen, Peter (1981). ―Incompatibility, Confrontation and War: Four Models and Three Historical Systems: 1816-1976.‖ Journal of Peace Research 18 (1), 57-90.
• Wendt, Alexander (1992). "Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.‖ International Organization 46 (2), 391-425.