The idea of a separate (dyadic) peace among (liberal) democracies remains an alluring proposition for Western intellectuals and policy makers, despite criticism from non-Western circles. We contend that explanations of the democratic peace have degenerated into theoretical stalemate, with the structuralist bias depicted in (neo)realist theories and, conversely, the individualist nature of liberal theories of the democratic peace, providing little room for alternative conceptions. As a distinct theory of foreign policy in which the relationship between agents and structures, and their intersection across differing levels of analysis, is more fully explored, neoclassical realism could hold potential for transcending the explanatory dichotomies plaguing the theorisation of the democratic peace. Moreover, it could open up room for an alternative theoretical framework for theorising the dyadic peace and its implications for how peace-building initiatives are approached.View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02589346.2012.683942
展开▼
