Nationalist political elites and territorial disputes: A cross-national investigation
Jaebeom Kwon
Division of Language & Diplomacy, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Nam Kyu Kim
Department of Political Science and International Relations, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea
Correspondence
Nam Kyu Kim, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorJaebeom Kwon
Division of Language & Diplomacy, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul, South Korea
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Nam Kyu Kim
Department of Political Science and International Relations, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea
Correspondence
Nam Kyu Kim, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorFunding information: Nam Kyu Kim was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A3A2A02092791) and a Korea University Grant (K2217951). This work was supported by Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Research Fund (Jaebeom Kwon).
Abstract
This study explores the consequences of nationalist governing elites for states' territorial behaviours. We argue that political elites who promote nationalist ideologies and stoke nationalistic fervour are often more inclined to initiate or escalate territorial disputes with other nations. They are likely to perceive greater values of territory, while they underestimate the perceived costs associated with territorial disputes. Analysing all territorial claims from 1901 to 2001, our research reveals compelling evidence that nationalistic political elites are more likely to initiate territorial disputes and less likely to seek peaceful resolutions, particularly when the contested territory possesses intangible salience.
Supporting Information
| Filename | Description |
|---|---|
| nana13073-sup-0001-Supporting_Information.pdfPDF document, 349.9 KB |
Figure A1. Dynamics of nationalism around the initiation of territorial dispute. Control variables are included. Dots display coe_cient estimates, and vertical lines display the 95% con_dence intervals. Table A1. Alternative lag structures (CRE logit estimates). Robust standard errors clustered at the directed dyads are in parentheses. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Table A2. Using alternative measures of elite nationalism (CRE logit estimates). Models 1 and 2 use the threshold of 30% to identify nationalism, Models 3 and 4 use the threshold of 50% to identify nationalism, Models 5 and 6 use the interaction between ideological legitimation and the proportion of choosing nationalism, and Models 7 and 8 use the proportion of choosing nationalism. Robust standard errors clustered at the directed dyads are in parentheses. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Table A3. Including additional controls (CRE logit estimates). Robust standard errors clustered at the directed dyads are in parentheses. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Table A4. Including additional ideology variables (CRE logit estimates). Robust standard errors clustered at the directed dyads are in parentheses. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Table A5. Employing alternative estimators. Robust standard errors clustered at the directed dyads are in parentheses. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Table A6. Addressing rare events bias. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.A-. Table A7. Examining only new onsets. Robust standard errors clustered at the directed dyads are in parentheses. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Table A8. Monadic analysis (CRE logit estimates). The dependent variable of the _rst three model is the binary indicator for territorial claim initiation, while the dependent variable of the next three models is the number of territorial claim initiation. Robust standard errors clustered at the country level are in parentheses. +p < 0.1, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01. Table A9. Summary statistics |
Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
REFERENCES
- Abramson, S. F., & Carter, D. B. (2016). The historical origins of territorial disputes. American Political Science Review, 110(4), 675–698. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055416000381
- Anders, T., Fariss, C. J., & Markowitz, J. N. (2020). Bread before guns or butter: Introducing surplus domestic product (SDP). International Studies Quarterly, 64(2), 392–405. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaa013
10.1093/isq/sqaa013 Google Scholar
- Anderson, J. (1988). Nationalist ideology and territory. In R. J. Johnston, et al. (Eds.), Nationalism self-determination and political geography (pp. 18–39). Croom Helm. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315749761-2
- Beissinger, M. R. (2002). Nationalist mobilization and the collapse of the Soviet State. Cambridge University Press. 2002
10.1017/CBO9780511613593 Google Scholar
- Bertoli, A. D. (2017). Nationalism and conflict: Lessons from international sports. International Studies Quarterly, 61(4), 835–849. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqx029
- Brubaker, R. (2004). Ethnicity without groups. Harvard University Press.
10.4159/9780674258143 Google Scholar
- Choi, S.-W. (2023). When does liberal peace fail? Trade and nationalism. Review of International Political Economy, 30(5), 1907–1932. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2022.2130959
10.1080/09692290.2022.2130959 Google Scholar
- Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Knutsen, C. H., Lindberg, S. I., Teorell, J., Alizada, N., Altman, D., Bernhard, M., Agnes, C., Steven Fish, M., Gastaldi, L., Gjerløw, H., Glynn, A., Grahn, S., Hicken, A., Hindle, G., Ilchenko, N., Kinzelbach, K., Krusell, J., … Ziblatt, D. (2022). V-Dem [country-year/country-date] dataset v12. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. https://doi.org/10.23696/vdemds22
10.23696/vdemds22 Google Scholar
- Downs, E. S., & Saunders, P. C. (1999). Legitimacy and the limits of nationalism: China and the Diaoyu Islands. International Security, 23(4), 114–146. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.23.3.114
10.1162/isec.23.3.114 Google Scholar
- Etherington, J. (2007). Nationalism, exclusion and violence: A territorial approach. Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 7(3), 24–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9469.2007.tb00160.x
10.1111/j.1754-9469.2007.tb00160.x Google Scholar
- Fang, S., & Li, X. (2020). Historical ownership and territorial disputes. Journal of Politics, 82(1), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1086/706047
10.1086/706047 Google Scholar
- Feinstein, Y. (2022). Rally'round the flag: The search for national honor and respect in times of crisis. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197629710.001.0001
10.1093/oso/9780197629710.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Frederick, B. A., Hensel, P. R., & Macaulay, C. (2017). The issue correlates of war territorial claims data, 1816-2001. Journal of Peace Research, 54(1), 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343316676311
- Freyaldenhoven, S., Hansen, C., Pérez, J. P., & Shapiro, J. M. (2021). Visualization, identification, and estimation in the linear panel event-study design. National Bureau of Economic Research. No. w29170
10.3386/w29170 Google Scholar
- Gartzke, E., & Rohner, D. (2011). Prosperous pacifists: The effects of development on initiators and targets of territorial conflict. Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich.
- Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and nationalism. Cornell University Press.
- Gibler, D. M. (2012). The territorial peace: Borders, state development, and international conflict. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139060233
- Gibler, D. M., Hutchison, M. L., & Miller, S. V. (2012). Individual identity attachments and international conflict: The importance of territorial threat. Comparative Political Studies, 45(12), 1655–1683. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414012463899
- Girvin, B. (2023). Putin, national self-determination and political independence in the twenty-first century. Nations and Nationalism, 29(1), 39–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12876
- Greenfeld, L. (1992). Nationalism: Five roads to modernity. Harvard University Press.
- Gruffydd-Jones, J. (2017). Dangerous days: The impact of nationalism on interstate conflict. Security Studies, 26(4), 698–728. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2017.1336393
- Han, K.-K. (1998). The Japanese view of Korean people and culture. Korea Journal, 38(3), 228–243.
- Hassner, R. E. (2003). “To halve and to hold”: Conflicts over sacred space and the problem of indivisibility. Security Studies, 12(4), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410390447617
- Hensel, P. R., & Mitchell, S. M. L. (2005). Issue indivisibility and territorial claims. GeoJournal, 64(4), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-005-5803-3
10.1007/s10708-005-5803-3 Google Scholar
- Herrmann, R. K. (2017). How attachments to the nation shape beliefs about the world: A theory of motivated reasoning. International Organization, 71(S1), S61–S84. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818316000382
- Huth, P. K. (2009). Standing your ground: Territorial disputes and international conflict. University of Michigan Press.
- Huth, P. K., & Allee, T. L. (2002). Domestic political accountability and the escalation and settlement of international disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46(6), 754–790. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200202237928
- Incerti, T., Mattingly, D., Rosenbluth, F., Tanaka, S., & Yue, J. (2021). Hawkish partisans: How political parties shape nationalist conflicts in China and Japan. British Journal of Political Science, 51(4), 1494–1515. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123420000095
10.1017/S0007123420000095 Google Scholar
- Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. Cambridge University Press.
- Jervis, R. (2004). The implications of prospect theory for human nature and values. Political Psychology, 25(2), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00367.x
- Johnson, Dominic DP, and Toft Monica Duffy. 2013/14. “Grounds for war: The evolution of territorial conflict.” International Security 38 (3): 7–38, https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00149
- Johnston, R. J. (1986). Placing politics: Colston society guest lecture, 3 April 1986. Political Geography Quarterly, 5(4), S63–S78. https://doi.org/10.1016/0260-9827(86)90058-3
10.1016/0260-9827(86)90058-3 Google Scholar
- Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 246(1), 160–173. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0182-160
- Kimmich, C. M. (1969). The Weimar Republic and the German-Polish borders. The Polish Review, 14(4), 37–45.
- Klabjan, B. (2018). Erecting fascism: Nation, identity, and space in Trieste in the first half of the twentieth century. Nationalities Papers, 46(6), 958–975. https://doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2017.1313216
10.1080/00905992.2017.1313216 Google Scholar
- Ko, J. (2023). Popular nationalism and war. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197684566.001.0001
10.1093/oso/9780197684566.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Ko, J., & Choi, S.-W. (2022). Nationalism and immigration control. Nations and Nationalism, 28(1), 12–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12801
- Kohn, H. (1944). The idea of nationalism: A study in its origins and background. Macmillan.
- Krcmaric, D., Nelson, S. C., & Roberts, A. (2020). Studying leaders and elites: The personal biography approach. Annual Review of Political Science, 23, 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-050718-032801
10.1146/annurev-polisci-050718-032801 Google Scholar
- Lake, D. A., & Rothchild, D. (1996). Containing fear: The origins and management of ethnic conflict. International Security, 21(2), 41–75. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.21.2.41
- Lemke, D., & Reed, W. (1996). Regime types and status quo evaluations: Power transition theory and the democratic peace. International Interactions, 22(2), 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629608434886
- Manekin, D., Grossman, G., & Mitts, T. (2019). Contested ground: disentangling material and symbolic attachment to disputed territory. Political Science Research and Methods, 7(4), 679–697. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.22
- Markowitz, J. N., Mulesky, S., Graham, B. A. T., & Fariss, C. J. (2020). Productive pacifists: The rise of production-oriented states and decline of profit-motivated conquest. International Studies Quarterly, 64(3), 558–572. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaa045
- Marx, A. W. (2005). Faith in nation: Exclusionary origins of nationalism. Oxford University Press.
- Mearsheimer, J. J. (2018). The great delusion. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv5cgb1w
10.2307/j.ctv5cgb1w Google Scholar
- de Mesquita, B., Bruce, A. S., Siverson, R. M., & Morrow, J. D. (2003). The logic of political survival. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4292.001.0001
10.7551/mitpress/4292.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Morgan, T. C., & Campbell, S. H. (1991). Domestic structure, decisional constraints, and war: So why Kant democracies fight? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 35(2), 187–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002791035002003
- Murphy, A. B. (1990). Historical justifications for territorial claims. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 80(4), 531–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1990.tb00316.x
- Mylonas, H., & Kuo, K. (2018). Nationalism and foreign policy. In C. G. Thies (Ed.), Oxford encyclopedia of foreign policy analysis (pp. 223–242). Oxford Univ. Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.452
- Mylonas, H., & Tudor, M. (2021). Nationalism: What we know and what we still need to know. Annual Review of Political Science, 24, 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-101841
- Mylonas, H., & Tudor, M. (2023). Varieties of nationalism: Communities, narratives, identities. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108973298
10.1017/9781108973298 Google Scholar
- Ross, R. S. (2009). China's naval nationalism: Sources, prospects, and the US response. International Security, 34(2), 46–81. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2009.34.2.46
- Sack, R. D. (1986). Human territoriality: Its theory and history. Cambridge University Press.
- Schrock-Jacobson, G. (2012). The violent consequences of the nation: Nationalism and the initiation of interstate war. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(5), 825–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002712438354
- Shelef, N. G. (2016). Unequal ground: Homelands and conflict. International Organization, 70(1), 33–63. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818315000193
- Shelef, N. G., & Koo, A. Z.-X. (2022). Homelands and nationalism. Nationalities Papers, 50(3), 417–429. https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2021.38
- Simmons, B. A. (2005). Rules over real estate trade, territorial conflict, and international borders as institution. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(6), 823–848. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002705281349
- Smith, A. D. (1986). The ethnic origins of nations. Blackwell Publisher.
- Smith, A. D. (1996). Culture, community and territory: The politics of ethnicity and nationalism. International Affairs, 72(3), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.2307/2625550
- Snyder, J. L. (2000). From voting to violence: Democratization and nationalist conflict ( Illustrated ed., Vol. 2000, pp. 304–308). W. W. Norton and Company. https://doi.org/10.1353/imp.2000.0026
- Stilz, A. (2009). Civic nationalism and language policy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 37(3), 257–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2009.01160.x
10.1111/j.1088-4963.2009.01160.x Google Scholar
- Tamir, Y. (2019). Not so civic: Is there a difference between ethnic and civic nationalism? Annual Review of Political Science, 22, 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-022018-024059
- Tannenberg, M., Bernhard, M., Gerschewski, J., Lührmann, A., & von Soest, C. (2021). Claiming the right to rule: Regime legitimation strategies from 1900 to 2019. European Political Science Review, 13(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773920000363
10.1017/S1755773920000363 Google Scholar
- Tir, J. (2010). Territorial diversion: Diversionary theory of war and territorial conflict. Journal of Politics, 72(2), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381609990879
- Toft, M. D. (2006). Issue indivisibility and time horizons as rationalist explanations for war. Security Studies, 15(1), 34–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410600666246
- Van Evera, S. (1994). Hypotheses on nationalism and war. International Security, 18(4), 5–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539176
- Vasquez, J. A. (2009). The war puzzle revisited. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627224
10.1017/CBO9780511627224 Google Scholar
- Walt, S. M. (1996). Revolution and war. Cornell University Press.
- Weeks, J. L. (2012). Strongmen and straw men: Authoritarian regimes and the initiation of international conflict. American Political Science Review, 106(2), 326–347. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055412000111
- White, G. W. (2000). Nationalism and territory: Constructing group identity in southeastern Europe. Rowman and Littlefield.
- Wiegand, K. E. (2005). Nationalist discourse and domestic incentives to prevent settlement of the territorial dispute between Guatemala and Belize. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 11(3), 349–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/13537110500255486
10.1080/13537110500255486 Google Scholar
- Wimmer, A. (2013). Waves of war: Nationalism, state formation, and ethnic exclusion in the modern world. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139198318
- Wimmer, A. (2019). Why nationalism works. Foreign Affairs, 98(2), 27–34.
- Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press.
- Zacher, M. (2001). The territorial integrity norm: International boundaries and the use of force. International Organization, 55(2), 215–250. https://doi.org/10.1162/00208180151140568
