All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Parliamentary War Powers and European Participation in the Iraq War 2003: Bridging the Divide Between Parliamentary Studies and International Relations
Unformatted Document Text:  2 Abstract Referring to Kant, liberal peace theory claims that citizens who are unwilling to risk their lives or spend their money for warfare will induce democratically elected governments to refrain from making risky and costly security policy decisions. Liberal constructivists add the argument that in democracies citizens are socialized to respect the law and refrain from violence; this translates into the civilized foreign policy behavior of democracies. However, empirical research does not seem to give sufficient evidence for this so-called “monadic” version of the liberal/democratic peace theory. In our paper we contend that institutional shortcomings of democratic foreign policy-making could be part of the answer to this puzzle. More specifically, we point to the lack of appropriate parliamentary “war powers” to effectively constrain governments’ military interventionism. We present findings of our research project on the parliamentary war powers of the European Union’s member and accession states at the time of the 2003 Iraq war. By selecting this case we were able to focus on the variance of institutional checks and balances whilst simultaneously controlling for other independent variables such as citizens’ preferences or the international environment. We discuss how parliamentary war powers can be measured and if, and how, these are linked to the degree of war involvement of the EU-governments. We found a remarkable variance regarding the war powers of national parliaments in Europe, ranging from best practices in Austria, Germany, or Finland to the deficient cases of France, the UK, or Greece. As we had expected, we also found that states with strong parliamentary war powers tended to be significantly less involved in the Iraq war. However, our findings also revealed some empirical evidence that the hypothesized relationship is not as straightforward as we had thought: first, low scale military support for the war, such as transit or use of bases, was generally not restricted by parliamentary control. Second, there are the deviant cases of Denmark and Lithuania, which were involved in the Iraq intervention despite of strong parliamentary war powers. Contents 1. Introduction 1.1 The puzzle of the democratic peace 1.2 Parliaments and the Iraq war 2003 2. The monadic perspective on the “democratic peace” 2.1 Main features of the research program on the democratic peace 2.2 The monadic “revival” and the dyadic separate peace 2.3 “Unpacking democracy” 3. Parliamentary “War Powers” 3.1 Measuring parliamentary power 3.2 A new typology of parliamentary war powers 4. European involvement in the 2003 Iraq war 5. Combining parliamentary war powers and war involvement 6. Conclusion and future research perspectives Bibliography

Authors: Dieterich, Sandra., Marschall, Stefan. and Hummel, Hartwig.
first   previous   Page 2 of 32   next   last



background image
2
Abstract
Referring to Kant, liberal peace theory claims that citizens who are unwilling to risk their lives or
spend their money for warfare will induce democratically elected governments to refrain from
making risky and costly security policy decisions. Liberal constructivists add the argument that in
democracies citizens are socialized to respect the law and refrain from violence; this translates into
the civilized foreign policy behavior of democracies. However, empirical research does not seem to
give sufficient evidence for this so-called “monadic” version of the liberal/democratic peace theory.
In our paper we contend that institutional shortcomings of democratic foreign policy-making could
be part of the answer to this puzzle. More specifically, we point to the lack of appropriate
parliamentary “war powers” to effectively constrain governments’ military interventionism. We
present findings of our research project on the parliamentary war powers of the European Union’s
member and accession states at the time of the 2003 Iraq war. By selecting this case we were able to
focus on the variance of institutional checks and balances whilst simultaneously controlling for
other independent variables such as citizens’ preferences or the international environment. We
discuss how parliamentary war powers can be measured and if, and how, these are linked to the
degree of war involvement of the EU-governments.
We found a remarkable variance regarding the war powers of national parliaments in
Europe, ranging from best practices in Austria, Germany, or Finland to the deficient
cases of France, the UK, or Greece. As we had expected, we also found that states with
strong parliamentary war powers tended to be significantly less involved in the Iraq war.
However, our findings also revealed some empirical evidence that the hypothesized relationship is
not as straightforward as we had thought: first, low scale military support for the war, such as transit
or use of bases, was generally not restricted by parliamentary control. Second, there are the
deviant cases of Denmark and Lithuania, which were involved in the Iraq intervention
despite of strong parliamentary war powers.
Contents
1.
Introduction
1.1
The puzzle of the democratic peace
1.2
Parliaments and the Iraq war 2003
2.
The monadic perspective on the “democratic peace”
2.1
Main features of the research program on the democratic peace
2.2
The monadic “revival” and the dyadic separate peace
2.3
“Unpacking democracy”
3.
Parliamentary “War Powers”
3.1
Measuring parliamentary power
3.2
A new typology of parliamentary war powers
4.
European involvement in the 2003 Iraq war
5.
Combining parliamentary war powers and war involvement
6.
Conclusion and future research perspectives
Bibliography


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 2 of 32   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.