(Page 9 of 28) - Reaching for the Stars: Cooperation after Interstate War authored by Bayer, Resat.

(see Ackermann 1994). A dyad can exit from this stage by either fulfilling the
requirements to move to a higher level of peace, by experiencing war, or right censoring
in 1992, i.e., last year of observation, or an earlier year if the dyad does not last till that
point.

(Table 1)

The ending of pre-peace is also the start of negative peace for many dyads as once

diplomatic ties are established and/or when a peace treaty is signed, the dyad is seen as
being in negative peace. The presence of these factors indicates that the sides recognize
each other’s right to existence. Most of the time, the peace treaty comes first. For
example, Egypt and Israel are seen as entering this stage in 1979 with the signing of their
peace treaty. However, diplomatic ties can recommence before the final peace treaty is
signed. For example following World War I, diplomatic ties recommenced for many
dyads before the final peace treaties were signed. In World War II, Italy started fighting
the axis powers in 1943 before it concluded a peace treaty with the allies. In addition,
peace treaties were relied upon much less for much of the Cold War and this suggests that
this instrument might have fallen out of fashion. As such, it is necessary to consider both
in this study. A side in negative peace either has a substantive issue that it has not
resolved or has not signed sufficient agreements with the other side. A dyad can exit
from this stage by either fulfilling the requirements to move to a higher level of peace, by
going back to war, by not being able to fulfill the requirements of the stage (in the case
that diplomatic relations are ended) or right censoring due to data running out in 1992 or
an earlier year if the dyad does not last till that point.

(Table 2)

For a dyad in positive peace, the sides need to recognize each other, resolve all

outstanding problems, and undergo sufficient amount of interaction. A dyad is seen as
being in positive peace when a number of requirements are fulfilled. There must be
diplomatic relations. Second, the sides need to show that they have put the war to a rest.
This is mostly done through a peace treaty. However, for some dyads, while there is no
peace treaty, there are other sorts of agreements such as security or cooperation
agreements. The sides also need to have signed 10 different formal bilateral agreements
with each other (Rohn 1983; Perry 1969-1983). Other thresholds were considered but
this number was found to fit better with the data. In order to make sure that the
agreements were not just of one type, i.e., alliance or trade, I further required that the
agreements capture different issue types. I did experiment with both lower and higher
thresholds but found this to be a more reasonable threshold across the sample. These
agreements need to be indicative that the sides are willing to discuss and move beyond
the war. In addition, the sides need to indicate that they have resolved their main issues
of contention and ended their rivalry. In order to make sure that the higher level of peace
is not the same as the end date of a rivalry and the extent of ties that they have is not
clear, I require that in cases where the sides had issues of contention, they need to have 5
additional agreements from the end date of the rivalry. A dyad can exit from this stage
by going back to war, by not being able to fulfill the requirements of the stage, or right
censoring due to data running out in 1992 or an earlier year if the dyad does not last till
that point. For example, relating to sides at positive peace falling from this stage, in my
dataset Greece and Turkey are in the positive peace between 1946 and 1955 when
another rivalry starts and they fall to negative peace.