Balance of Power, Empirical Findings, and Peace

  • Félix E. Martín


The previous chapter identified and discussed the theoretical foundations and implications of the most relevant realist hypotheses for an explanation of peace in South America. Chapters 3 and 4 will present an empirical evaluation of their explanatory value in order to determine if indeed they constitute sufficient conditions for the uncharacteristic lack of major interstate wars in the region. The data that will be presented and analyzed in these two chapters will not follow a strict chronological pattern, nor will they be treated as a series of separate case studies. Rather, the evidence will be culled selectively across time and regional space, depending on the type of data needed to corroborate or falsify the causal relation posited by the propositions expounded previously. For example, when dealing with the hypothesis on the deterrent capacity effected by a clear military superiority of one of the actors in a dyad, simultaneous references will be made to the military capabilities of all the contenders involved in several unconnected cases like the long-standing dispute between Colombia and Venezuela over the Gulf of Venezuela, the three Ecuadorian-Peruvian militarized disputes over territory in the Amazon, and the 1978 Argentine-Chilean dispute over the three islands in the Beagle Channel.


Military Expenditure South American Country International Interaction Complete Presentation General Deterrence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Glenn H. Snyder and Paul Diesing, Conflict Among Nations: Bargaining, Decision Making, and System Structure in International Crises (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977), especially pp. 28–31;Google Scholar
  2. Jack S. Levy, “The Polarity of the System and International Stability: An Empirical Analysis,” in Alan Ned Sabrosky, ed., Polarity and War: The Changing Structure of International Conflict (Boulder: Westview Press, 1985), specifically p. 47.Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    J. David Singer and Melvin Small, “Alliance Aggregation and the Onset of Wars, 1816–1945,” in J. David Singer, ed., Quantitative International Politics: Insights and Evidence (New York: Free Press, 1968), pp. 247–286;Google Scholar
  4. Michael Haas, “International Subsystems: Stability and Polarity,” American Political Science Review, vol. 64, no. 1 (March 1970), pp. 98–123;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, “Measuring Systemic Polarity,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 19, no. 2 (1975), pp. 187–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 3.
    Joseph L. Nogee, “Polarity: An Ambiguous Concept,” Orbis, vol. 18, no. 4 (Winter 1975), pp. 1193–1225;Google Scholar
  7. William D. Jackson, “Polarity in International Systems: A Conceptual Note,” International Interactions, vol. 4, no. 1 (1977), pp. 87–95;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. David P. Rapkin and William R. Thompson with Jon A. Christopherson, “Bipolarity and Bipolarization in the Cold War Era: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Validation,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 23, no. 2 (June 1979), pp. 261–295;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Frank Whelon Wayman, “Bipolarity and War: The Role of Capability Concentration and Alliance Patterns Among Major Powers, 1816–1965,” Journal of Peace Research, vol. 21, no. 1 (1984), pp. 61–78;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. R. Harrison Wagner, “What Was Bipolarity?” International Organization, vol. 47, no. 1 (Winter 1993), pp. 77–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 4.
    J. David Singer, Stuart Bremer, and John Stuckey, “Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820–1965,” in Bruce Russett, ed., Peace, War, and Numbers (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1972), pp. 19–49;Google Scholar
  12. Richard J. Stoll, “Bloc Concentration and the Balance of Power,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 28, no. 2 (March 1984), pp. 25–50;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Edward D. Mansfield, Power, Trade, and War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  14. 5.
    James Lee Ray, “The Measurement of System Structure,” in J. David Singer and Paul F. Diehl, eds., Measuring the Correlates of War (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1990), p. 106.Google Scholar
  15. 9.
    Randall L. Schweller, “Tripolarity and the Second World War,” International Studies Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 1 (March 1993), particularly p. 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 14.
    South America Weston H. Agor, “Latin American Interstate Politics: Patterns of Cooperation and Conflict,” Inter-American Economic Affairs, vol. 26 (Autumn 1972), pp. 19–33;Google Scholar
  17. Peter Calvert, Latin America: Internal Conflict and International Peace (New York: San Martin’s Press, 1969);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Norman V. Walbek and Sidney Weintraub, Conflict, Order, and Peace in the Americas, parts I and II (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1978).Google Scholar
  19. J. Amadeo Baldrich, Historia de la Guerra del Brazil (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Imprenta La Harlem, 1905);Google Scholar
  20. Isais José Garcia Enciso, La Gesta de Patagones (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial Universitaria de Buenos Aires, 1972), pp. 36–46;Google Scholar
  21. David Carneiro, História da Guerra Cisplantina (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Companhia Editora Nacional, 1946);Google Scholar
  22. Felix Best, Historia de las Guerras Argentinas (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Ediciones Peuser, 1960), vol. II, pp. 119–161.Google Scholar
  23. Luis Alberto de Herrera, Origenes de la Guerra Grande, Vols. I and II (Montevideo, Uruguay: Editorial “Por la Patria,” 1979);Google Scholar
  24. David McLean, War, Diplomacy and Informal Empire: Britain and the Republics of La Plata, 1836–1853 (London: British Academic Press, 1995), pp. 177–189;Google Scholar
  25. Alberto Concil Paz and Gustavo Ferrari, Argentina’s Foreign Policy, 1930–1962 (University of Notre Dame Press, 1966), particularly pp. 50–136;Google Scholar
  26. Wayne A. Selcher, “Recent Strategic Developments in South America’s Southern Cone,” in Heraldo Muñoz and Joseph S. Tulchin, eds., Latin American Nations in World Politics (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1984), particularly pp. 108–117.Google Scholar
  27. 18.
    Hélio Jaguaribe, “Brazil-Argentina: Breve Anâlisis de las Relaciones de Conflicto y Cooperación,” Estudios Internacionales, vol. 15, no. 57 (January–March 1982), pp. 9–27.Google Scholar
  28. Stephen M. Gorman, “Security, Influence, and Nuclear Weapons: The Case of Argentina and Brazil,” Parameters, vol. 9, no. 1 (March 1979), pp. 52–65;Google Scholar
  29. William H. Courtnet, “Nuclear Choices for Friendly Rivals,” in Joseph A. Yager, ed., Nonproliferation and U.S. Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1980), pp. 241–279.Google Scholar
  30. Susan Kaufman Purcell, “War and Debt in South America,” Foreign Affairs, vol. 61, no. 3 (1982), pp. 664–665;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wayne A. Selcher, “Brazilian-Argentine Relations in the 1980s: From Wary Rivalry to Friendly Competition,” Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, vol. 27, no. 2 (Summer 1985), pp. 29–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. EFE (Madrid) in Spanish, Monday, August 17, 1987 in Foreign Broadcast Information Service (FBIS), vol. 87, no. 159, Tuesday, August 18, 1987, p. O 1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Félix E. Martín 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Félix E. Martín

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations