[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/10429.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The consequences of Not Loving thy neigbor as Thyself: Trade, democracy and military explainations behind India Pakistan rivalry

Author

Listed:
  • Murshed, Mansoob
  • Mamoon, Dawood
Abstract
Conflict between Pakistan and India can be best understood in a multivariate framework where variables such as economic performance, multilateral trade with the rest of the world, bilateral trade, military expenditure, democracy scores and population are simultaneously taken into account. Our empirical investigation based on time series econometrics from 1950-2005, allowing us to truly address causality, suggests that reduced bilateral trade, greater military expenditure, less development expenditure, lower levels of democracy, lower growth rates and less general trade openness are all conflict enhancing, albeit with lags in some cases. Moreover, there is reverse causality between bilateral trade, militarization and conflict; low levels of bilateral trade and high militarization are conflict enhancing, equally conflict also reduces bilateral trade and raises militarization. Economic growth is conflict mitigating, but the reverse is not true. Globalization, or a greater openness to trade with the rest of the world, is the most significant driver of a liberal peace, corroborating a modified form of the capitalist peace, rather than a common democratic political orientation suggested by the pure form of the Kantian liberal peace.

Suggested Citation

  • Murshed, Mansoob & Mamoon, Dawood, 2008. "The consequences of Not Loving thy neigbor as Thyself: Trade, democracy and military explainations behind India Pakistan rivalry," MPRA Paper 10429, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:10429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/10429/1/MPRA_paper_10429.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Martin & Thierry Mayer & Mathias Thoenig, 2008. "Make Trade Not War?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(3), pages 865-900.
    2. Charles H. Anderton & John R. Carter, 2001. "The Impact of War on Trade: An Interrupted Times-Series Study," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 38(4), pages 445-457, July.
    3. Polachek, Solomon W, 1997. "Why Democracies Cooperate More and Fight Less: The Relationship between International Trade and Cooperation," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 295-309, August.
    4. Nils Petter Gleditsch, 1967. "Trends in World Airline Patterns," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 4(4), pages 366-408, December.
    5. Solomon William Polachek, 1980. "Conflict and Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 55-78, March.
    6. Sims, Christopher A, 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-48, January.
    7. John Robst & Solomon Polachek & Yuan-Ching Chang, 2007. "Geographic Proximity, Trade, and International Conflict/Cooperation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 1-24, February.
    8. Elliott, Graham & Rothenberg, Thomas J & Stock, James H, 1996. "Efficient Tests for an Autoregressive Unit Root," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 813-836, July.
    9. Zeev Maoz & Ranan D. Kuperman & Lesley Terris & Ilan Talmud, 2006. "Structural Equivalence and International Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 664-689, October.
    10. Philippe Martin & Thierry Mayer & Mathias Thoenig, 2008. "Make Trade Not War?," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(3), pages 865-900.
    11. Polachek, Solomon W. & Seiglie, Carlos, 2007. "Trade, Peace and Democracy: An Analysis of Dyadic Dispute," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 31, pages 1017-1073, Elsevier.
    12. World Bank, 2006. "World Development Indicators 2006," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 8151.
    13. Patrick J. McDonald, 2004. "Peace through Trade or Free Trade?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(4), pages 547-572, August.
    14. Rafael Reuveny & Heejoon Kang, 1998. "Bilateral Trade and Political Conflict/Cooperation: Do Goods Matter?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 35(5), pages 581-602, September.
    15. John R. Oneal & Bruce Russett, 1999. "Assessing the Liberal Peace with Alternative Specifications: Trade Still Reduces Conflict," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 36(4), pages 423-442, July.
    16. Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2008. "Intergovernmental Organizations and the Kantian Peace," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(2), pages 189-212, April.
    17. Katherine Barbieri & Jack S. Levy, 1999. "Sleeping with the Enemy: The Impact of War on Trade," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 36(4), pages 463-479, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kamal, Asmma, 2016. "Beyond Normalization of Trade Ties - A Pakistan – India Free Trade Agreement (FTA): A Stochastic Frontier Gravity Model (SFGM) Approach," MPRA Paper 87743, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Han Dorussen & Hugh Ward, 2011. "Disaggregated Trade Flows and International Conflict," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 25, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Yang-Ming Chang & Manaf Sellak, 2019. "A game-theoretic analysis of international trade and political conflict over external territories," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 209-228, June.
    3. Parlow, Anton, 2011. "Does trade promote peace? squared: a gravity equation in a rectangular panel world," MPRA Paper 36430, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Fida Karam & Chahir Zaki, 2016. "How did wars dampen trade in the MENA region?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(60), pages 5909-5930, December.
    5. Reuven Glick & Alan M. Taylor, 2010. "Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 102-127, February.
    6. Chang, Yuan-Ching & Polachek, Solomon W. & Robst, John, 2004. "Conflict and trade: the relationship between geographic distance and international interactions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 491-509, September.
    7. Tchouassi Tchouassi, 2013. "Are Trade Liberalization and Democracy Driving Development in Central Africa Region? Empirical Lessons," Journal of Social and Development Sciences, AMH International, vol. 4(3), pages 131-140.
    8. Mamoon, Dawood & S. Mansoob, Murshed, 2008. "On the Conflict Mitigating Effects of Trade: The India-Pakistan Case," MPRA Paper 10431, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Reuven Glick & Alan M. Taylor, 2010. "Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 102-127, February.
    10. (ed.), 0. "Research Handbook on Economic Diplomacy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16053.
    11. Seitz, Michael & Tarasov, Alexander & Zakharenko, Roman, 2015. "Trade costs, conflicts, and defense spending," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 305-318.
    12. Yang‐Ming Chang & Shih‐Jye Wu, 2020. "Insecure Resources, Bilateral Trade, and Endogenous Predation: A Game‐Theoretic Analysis of Conflict and Trade," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(4), pages 1338-1371, April.
    13. Hadjiyiannis, Costas & Heracleous, Maria S. & Tabakis, Chrysostomos, 2016. "Regionalism and conflict: Peace creation and peace diversion," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 141-159.
    14. Daron Acemoglu & Pierre Yared, 2010. "Political Limits to Globalization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 83-88, May.
    15. Barry Eichengreen & Arnaud Mehl & Livia Chițu, 2021. "Mars or Mercury redux: The geopolitics of bilateral trade agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 21-44, January.
    16. John Robst & Solomon Polachek & Yuan-Ching Chang, 2007. "Geographic Proximity, Trade, and International Conflict/Cooperation," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 1-24, February.
    17. Murshed, S.M. & Mamoon, D., 2007. "On the Costs of Not Loving Thy Neighbour as Thyself," ISS Working Papers - General Series 18748, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    18. Ilhom Temurov & Yilmaz Kilicaslan, 2016. "Conflict or Distance: What Determines the International Trade?," World Journal of Applied Economics, WERI-World Economic Research Institute, vol. 2(2), pages 15-31, December.
    19. Reuveny Rafael, 2000. "The Trade and Conflict Debate: A Survey of Theory, Evidence and Future Research," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 23-49, January.
    20. Jong-Wha Lee & Ju Hyun Pyun, 2016. "Does Trade Integration Contribute to Peace?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 327-344, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Inter-State Conflict and Trade; Democracy and COnflict; COnflict and Economic Development;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F59 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - Other
    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:10429. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.