国内危机烈度与冲突对象选择

Domestic Unrest Severity and Diversionary Target Selection

转移视线战争理论是影响力较大的战争解释理论之一,其核心假设是国内危机会促使决策者通过发动对外战争来转移民众视线,增加民众支持度。作者试图将冲突对象带回转移视线战争理论,探讨领导人面对重重国内危机是否会通过向之前有过冲突的国家开战来转移国内问题。作者提出一个基于国内危机烈度的对象选择理论,即一国是否选择"敌国"作为转移视线战争的对象取决于国内危机的严重程度。国内危机烈度越高,决策者越不倾向于向"敌国"挑起战争来维持统治:一方面,高烈度国内危机会使对手采取战略回避,刻意避免与国内危机重重的领导人发生正面冲突;另一方面,随着国内危机严峻程度的提升,决策者更倾向于利用复活赌博机制而非聚旗效应机制,因为相较于聚旗效应带来的短期支持率的上升,通过赢得战争展现实力更能够缓解决策者的国内困境。而向"敌国"挑衅,对手准备充分,战争结果不确定性小且规模不易控制,不能满足复活赌博机制的要求。对于1920—2000年1659次国际军事争端的分析结果为这一假设提供了支持。

As one of the most influential theories on war,diversionary theory of war claims that domestic unrest will motivate unpopular leaders to divert public attention and boost their support by initiating an international conflict. Most relevant studies have focused on leaders’ motivation to go to war during domestic strife,which leaves issues such as conflict target selection much unstudied. Therefore,this article tries to bring conflict target back to diversionary theory of war and investigates whether desperate leaders will fight enemies for diversionary purposes. The article proposes that the decision to choose an enemy as a diversionary target is contingent on the severity of domestic unrest. If the domestic unrest is more severe, the leader is less likely to fight an enemy. That is out of the following two reasons. First,the high intensity of domestic strife will induce the target to strategically avoid the conflict. Second, the high intensity of domestic strife will predispose the leader to gamble for resurrection rather than produce the rally-around-the-flag effect. With domestic unrest intensifying,gambling for resurrection can better prolong the political life of unpopular leaders as the rally-around-the-flag effect only boosts short-term popularity. Thus, countries with previous conflict history are not good diversionary targets since they are better prepared for war and a war with them has less uncertainty in the outcome but more possibility of escalation. Statistical analyses of the international militarized dispute initiations by leaders under domestic strife from 1920 to 2000 reveal strong support for these arguments.