Part 1
Most, if not all, international wars have been influenced by rivalries between states. The contentions are sustained by state leaders, who serve their political interests. Conflicts have varied effects on competitions. The articles analyzed present models that explain the influence of wars on rivalries. They further explain that wars end some, but not all rivalries. However, one article suggests that wars serve as catalysts towards rivalry termination. Therefore, wars end some, but not all rivalries.
Wars are believed to be a catalyst for rivalry termination (DiCicco, 2006). An example is a US-Japan conflict which ended after Japan was defeated during the Second World War (DiCicco, 2006). After the defeat, the rivalry between the two countries seemed to dissipate and positive relations established years after the rivalry termination. Additionally, the end of the rivalry depended on the ties that Japan had on the US, especially economic and security relationship. It was also promoted by a change in the leadership and regime, hence the sustained rivalry termination.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Despite being catalysts for rivalry termination, wars are unreliable at the same time, as they lead to rapprochement-a temporary solution to a conflict (DiCicco, 2006). Therefore, there needs to be conditions to facilitate the sustenance of rivalry termination. These include a written agreement between the warring states that show consent by both countries and issues bargained. The other is that leaders are required to overcome obstacles to sustain the new found peace.
On the other hand, the war ends some, but not all rivalries. For instance, the US-Iraq war did not end the rivalry between the two states which instead developed into a stalemate (Goertz, Jones & Diehl, 2005). The deadlock sustained the contention, thus increasing the hostility between the two states. The impasse also resulted in a militarized dispute where rivals wanted to decimate each other, hence further influencing war.
Part 2
War will only end a rivalry after large shocks that force leaders to resort to conflict management (Goertz, Jones & Diehl, 2005). Large shocks are conflicts that serve as an eye-opener for the nations to end their rivalries. Furthermore, war will only end a contention if the state leaders make a political decision to finish it (Goertz, Jones & Diehl, 2005). In most cases, these decisions are based on the personal interests of each state leader, thus further aggravating the rivalry into shocks. After these shocks, leaders work to enhance cooperation between the warring states, thus resulting in rivalry termination.
In my analysis of the cases, I came to agree with the Evolutionary Model presented, which advocates for conflict management as a way to end the rivalry between states (Morey, 2006). Existing rivalry is often influenced by the past behavior of the rival states, thereby depending mainly on the actions of state leaders. As such, conflict management involves a mediator who leads the state leaders into talks that result in rivalry termination. Changing the efforts of state leaders often results in rivalry termination, hence validating the Evolutionary Model.
In conclusion, wars influence rivalries. Rivalry termination is dependent on wars, but only to a limited extent, as wars do not eliminate all rivalries. Some conditions determine the end of rivalries after the war, including the collaboration of state leaders and a written agreement. In other cases, great conflicts are required for state leaders to make political decisions that result in rivalry termination. The Evolutionary Model implies the necessity of conflict management in rivalry termination, which is dependent on the actions of state leaders. Conflict management highlights the past behavior of warring states that developed into existing rivalries, thus influencing countries to resort to ways of conflict resolution that end the rivalries.
References
DiCicco, J. (2006). Shock and Thaw? Wars as Catalysts of Peace in International Rivalries . Presentation, Buffalo, NY.
Goertz, G., Jones, B., & Diehl, P. (2005). Maintenance Processes in International Rivalries. Journal Of Conflict Resolution , 49 (5), 742-769. doi: 10.1177/0022002705279375
Morey, D. (2006). Politics and War in International Rivalry . University of Iowa.
