Between indifference and coercion: Third-party intervention techniques in ongoing disputes

Renato Corbetta

Conflict Management and Peace Science, 2015, vol. 32, issue 1, 3-27

Abstract: Research on third parties’ conflict management has traditionally proposed a stark dichotomy between neutral mediators and non-neutral military joiners. Recent studies have blurred this dichotomy but have not investigated joiners’ use of techniques other than military action. Using data from Corbetta and Dixon (2005) on non-neutral interventions in post-Second World War interstate disputes, this paper explores non-neutral third parties’ choice of diplomatic, economic or military intervention techniques. It hypothesizes that such a choice is a function of third parties’ intensity of preferences for one side in conflict and antagonism toward the other side, which result from social proximity to the disputants.

Keywords: Bias; conflict management technique; intervention; third-party states (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0738894214544879 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:compsc:v:32:y:2015:i:1:p:3-27

DOI: 10.1177/0738894214544879

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Conflict Management and Peace Science from Peace Science Society (International)
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().