V&H, Chapters 3&4 Betts, pages 379-415 Arms Races and War V&H, Chapters 3&4 Betts, pages 379-415

Defining Arms Races Two or more states increase their military more rapidly than normal The buildup occurs in peacetime The race is a result of external competition, not domestic politics Parity?

Two Competing Models Para Bellum Model If you desire peace, prepare for war Anarchic self-help system; nations must be ready to defend their sovereignty

Two Competing Models Armaments-Tension Spiral Model Arms races increase tension and hostility (security dilemma) Arms races increase uncertainty This produces a spiral of arms buildups and tensions, which can lead to conflict

The Wallace Study Hypothesis: Disputes which are accompanied by arms races are more likely to result in war. Data: Great Power disputes from 1816-1965 Arms races: both sides averaging at least 10% growth in military expenditures over a 10 year period.

Wallace’s findings Crisis escalation to war No escalation to war Total Arms Race 23 5 28 No Arms Race 3 68 71 26 73 99

Wallace’s findings Strong relationship between arms races and dispute escalation to war (Yule’s Q=.98) 23 of 26 crises during arms races (88.5%) escalated to war Only 5 of 73 non-arms-race crises (6.8%) escalated to war 23 of 28 wars (82.1%) began during arms races

Limitations (Diehl) Dyadic measure of conflict (26 cases -> 8 wars) Inclusion of disputes not independent of ongoing wars (WWI and WWII account for 80% of his cases) Definition of arms race problematic

Diehl’s replication Only 25% of disputes preceded by a mutual military buildup escalated to war (one case is WWI, the other two are WWII) Arms races may play a role in bringing about large global wars In this regard, they are similar to alliances