"International Security Journal" Highlights

Newsletter Article, Belfer Center Newsletter, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School

Summer 2009

Belfer Center Programs or Projects: International Security

According to the latest Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports, International Security tied for the highest 2007 Impact Factor rating, a measure of how often articles are cited. IS ranked first out of more than fifty journals of international relations in 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004, 2005, and 2006, and has been in the top five every year since 1995. Thomson Reuters also ranks journals by two other measures: Cited Half-Life, which indicates whether older articles are cited, and Immediacy Index, a measure of whether articles are cited shortly after publication. International Security's Cited Half-Life has almost tripled since 1996 and consistently ranks in the top five international relations journals by this measure. IS also ranks highly for its Immediacy Index. The trend suggests that IS articles attract attention soon after publication and that they continue to be read and cited for many years.

Spring 2009; Vol. 33, No. 4

"How Smart and Tough Are Democracies? Reassessing Theories of Democratic Victory in War"

Alexander B. Downes

New evidence challenges the near-conventional argument that democracies are more likely than nondemocracies to win. A reanalysis of original data on war outcomes and an in-depth case study of the Johnson administration's decisions regarding Vietnam in 1965 demonstrates that democracies of all types are not significantly more likely to win wars. Furthermore, they are constrained by domestic politics and are often pressured into unwinnable wars.

"The Social Market Roots of Democratic Peace"

Michael Mousseau

Democracy does not cause peace among nations. An analysis of conflicts from 1961 to 2001 shows that the absence of war between democratic countries depends on domestic economic factors-such as a contract-intensive economy-rather than on democracy. Because China and Russia lack this type of economy, an economic divide will define great power politics in the coming decade. Democratic leaders of nations with contract-intensive economies would do better to support global economic opportunity than to promote democracy abroad.

"Bridge over Troubled Water? Envisioning a China-Taiwan Peace Agreement"

Phillip C. Saunders and Scott L. Kastner

The new Taiwan president and senior leaders in China have indicated a willingness to reach a cross-strait agreement. Such an agreement could reduce the possibility of a military confrontation in the Taiwan Strait. Although obstacles remain, if China negotiates a formal and generous agreement. With Taiwan, a peace agreement could endure.

"Long Time Coming: Prospects for Democracy in Iraq"

Bruce E. Moon

The odds of Iraq achieving democracy in the next twenty-five years are nearly zero, at best about two in thirty, but probably worse. Since the end of the nineteenth century, thirty nations have had long-lasting autocracies as extreme as Iraq's. Of those, only seven are now democratic. Their average transition time was fifty years, and only two managed it in twenty-five years. Their collective political experience indicates a similarly pessimistic future for Iraq and comparable nations. Furthermore, Iraq lacks the structural conditions necessary for a successful democratic transition. Thus the sober question of whether Iraq can democratize should deter policymakers from considering regime change in Iran or North Korea.

"Power without Influence: The Bush Administration's Foreign Policy Failure in the Middle East"

Jeremy Pressman

Given the Bush administration's failure in the Middle East, scholars should examine why material power does not automatically translate into international influence. The Bush administration did not defeat terrorism, promote democracy in the region, or stop nonconventional proliferation. It was unsuccessful because it relied too heavily on military force, showed an unwillingness to learn and adapt, and did not resolve long-standing policy contradictions. Although many studies focus on the future of U.S. primacy, the last eight years indicate that it is worth assessing how material power does not automatically translate into international influence.

For more information about this publication please contact the Belfer Center Communications Office at 617-495-9858.

For Academic Citation: