Aftershocks: Postwar leadership survival, rivalry, and regime dynamics

25Citations
Citations of this article
39Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Under what conditions are leaders replaced after a war? Past research has reported that the outcome of the war and regime type affect postwar leadership tenure. Yet, this does not exhaust the conditions that could potentially influence political survival. In this article, I reexamine the links between regime type and leadership replacement after a war. I show that past research has failed to account for the dynamics of political leadership, and in the process has misrepresented the evidence supporting previous theories. I then show, using event history techniques, that both internal and external factors can alter leadership trajectories after a war. Specifically, war outcomes significantly affect the job security of a leader outside of international rivalry, but have less of an effect within rivalry. Additionally, relaxing various assumptions concerning the relationship between leadership survival and regime type leads to a richer understanding of the process of postwar leadership turnover. Finally, several propositions concerning the interaction between regime type and the costs of war are not supported in this analysis. © 2004 International Studies Association.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Colaresi, M. (2004). Aftershocks: Postwar leadership survival, rivalry, and regime dynamics. International Studies Quarterly, 48(4), 713–728. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-8833.2004.00322.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free