Journal Article - Journal of Conflict Resolution
Restraint or Propellant? Democracy and Civilian Fatalities in Interstate Wars
Abstract
This article investigates the effect of regime type on the number of civilian fatalities that states inflicted in interstate wars between 1900 and 2003. As opposed to several previous studies, the author finds little support for normative arguments positing that democracies kill fewer civilians in war. In fact, the author finds that democracies are significantly more likely than nondemocracies to kill more than fifty thousand noncombatants. Democracies also kill more civilians when they are involved in wars of attrition and kill about as many (and perhaps more) noncombatants than autocracies in such wars. These findings provide qualified support for institutional arguments about democratic accountability. Other implications of the institutional view, however, are not upheld, such as the argument that democracies select easy wars that should result in few civilian casualties because they are won quickly and decisively. Finally, democracies do not appear to kill fewer civilians in more recent wars.
For more information on this publication:
Please contact
International Security
For Academic Citation:
Downes, Alexander B.. “Restraint or Propellant? Democracy and Civilian Fatalities in Interstate Wars.” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 51. no. 6. (December 2007): 872-904 .
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Audio
- Radio Open Source
JFK in the American Century
Analysis & Opinions
- The Washington Post
This Summer's Black Lives Matter Protesters Were Overwhelmingly Peaceful, Our Research Finds
Analysis & Opinions
- Project Syndicate
Post-Pandemic Geopolitics
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief
- Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy
Abstract
This article investigates the effect of regime type on the number of civilian fatalities that states inflicted in interstate wars between 1900 and 2003. As opposed to several previous studies, the author finds little support for normative arguments positing that democracies kill fewer civilians in war. In fact, the author finds that democracies are significantly more likely than nondemocracies to kill more than fifty thousand noncombatants. Democracies also kill more civilians when they are involved in wars of attrition and kill about as many (and perhaps more) noncombatants than autocracies in such wars. These findings provide qualified support for institutional arguments about democratic accountability. Other implications of the institutional view, however, are not upheld, such as the argument that democracies select easy wars that should result in few civilian casualties because they are won quickly and decisively. Finally, democracies do not appear to kill fewer civilians in more recent wars.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Audio - Radio Open Source
JFK in the American Century
Analysis & Opinions - The Washington Post
This Summer's Black Lives Matter Protesters Were Overwhelmingly Peaceful, Our Research Finds
Analysis & Opinions - Project Syndicate
Post-Pandemic Geopolitics
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief - Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy


