Conference explores historical trends in international warfare

Is the likelihood of major interstate war declining? Some recent scholarship suggests that several profound historical changes in the 20th century have made wars between great powers a relic of the past, even as domestic armed conflicts and civil wars continue unabated. Other scholars argue that the decline in major-power war is only a temporary phenomenon and does not indicate a trend.

To critically assess these questions, the Kroc Institute organized a conference on April 6-8 which took a comprehensive look at the future potential for interstate wars. The conference was co-sponsored by the Nanovic Institute for European Studies and the Henkels Visiting Scholars Series.

Martin van Creveld, author of The Rise and Decline of the State (1999) among many other seminal works, presented the keynote address, contending that major wars between great powers are waning. In his view, this was largely due to the strengthening of international law and the development of nuclear weapons, which have made it impossible for the victors to survive a major confrontation. However, other forms of war, such as terrorism, guerrilla wars, and intra-state conflicts, are replacing interstate war, and are in fact more destructive.

The decline of interstate war, and its complement, the growth of durable peace, appears to be part of a larger historical trend stretching back to 1500, asserted Paul Schroeder, professor emeritus of history at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Focusing on the long peace from 1763- 1914, Schroeder noted how several wars which could have happened did not, but that the peace ended when the great powers ceased to see their own fate as bound up with others.

Turning to the 20th Century, John Mueller contended that several kinds of war are in marked decline, or even obsolete, including major war between developed countries, conventional civil war, colonial war, and ideological civil war. Unlike van Creveld, however, Mueller traced the decline in warfare to a profound change in public attitudes about warfare and violence in general, rather than to technological developments. He concluded that the wars which remain, such as that in Yugoslavia, are best understood as residual wars, and that many of these, particularly in Africa, have a character more like crime than war.

Kalevi Holsti agreed with Mueller’s emphasis on the role of ideas and norms — particularly norms relating to territory, borders, and conquest — in explaining the declining incidence of major war. However, he argued that some versions of balance of power theory raise questions about Mueller’s thesis. For example, the conflicts between great powers take a long time to develop and thus a half-century of great power peace is insufficiently long to establish a trend. Hosti also questioned whether the trend noted by Mueller is really toward obsolescence, since it is possible for human advances made in the 20th century to be forgotten or reversed.

Like other forms of war, the probability of the outbreak of an advertent or pre-meditated nuclear war among the major powers has declined in the short and medium terms, contended T.V. Paul. However, the danger of an inadvertent nuclear war still exists, and war-generating situations are likely to emerge both at the regional and global levels as the international system evolves from semi-unipolarity to multipolarity.

One factor associated with the decline of major war is the establishment of multilateral institutions. Patrick Morgan argued that multilateral institutions are more effective at preventing serious problems from arising or provoking conflict between powerful states than at containing ongoing conflicts or active movements toward war by great powers. He also observed that, while the West tends to see multilateral institutions as a prerequisite for peace, Southeast Asia has experienced a similar reduction in major war over the last 30 years without the development of multilateral institutions.

Other significant factors to consider are the global extension of juridical sovereignty and economic liberalism, according to Hendrik Spruyt, who submitted a paper which was presented and discussed at the conference. The increased respect for the norm of state sovereignty has played a role in decreasing the prevalence of territorial wars or imperialistic expansion. Economic liberalization, a norm which is more contested than sovereignty, also decreases the risk of confrontation.

William Thompson linked the discussion of the waning of war with current theory about democratization and its role in creating more peaceful international relations. Many have argued that democratization tends to make countries less prone to international war. However, democratization occurs within states, while the transformations underlying the waning of war occur at the level of international relations. Thompson concluded that democratization could play a major role in reducing war, but only if the social transformations take place in the institutions and political cultures of all of the major powers, which seems unlikely.

In addition to preparing a background paper for the conference, Raimo Väyrynen reflected on the role of war in different historical phases ranging from feudalism and absolutism to modern forms of capitalism. He discussed several theorists who have argued that capitalism is essentially peaceful and wars are caused primarily by the legacies of absolutism and great-power rivalries. Väyrynen noted that these views are difficult to substantiate as capitalism and the state have historically developed in tandem. However, he cautiously supported the view that the globalization of capitalism may reduce the likelihood of major inter-state wars, though not other types of violence.

Väyrynen will edit papers from the conference for publication as a book.

Conference Presentations

Keynote Address: The Future of Major War
Martin van Creveld, Hebrew University

Life and Death of a Long Peace, 1763-1914
Paul W. Schroeder, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Discussant: John Vasquez, Vanderbilt University

Does War Still Exist?
John Mueller, Ohio State University
Discussant: Randall Forsberg, Institute for Defense and Disarmament Studies, Boston

The Changing International System and the Decline of Major War
Kalevi Holsti, University of British Columbia
Discussant: Peter Wallensteen, Uppsala University

Does the Risk of Nuclear War Belong to History?
T.V. Paul, McGill University
Discussant: Alan Dowty, University of Notre Dame

Multilateral Institutions as Restraints on Major War
Patrick M. Morgan, University of California at Irvine
Discussant: Daniel Lindley, University of Notre Dame

Normative Transformations in International Relations and the Waning of Major War
Hendrik Spruyt, Arizona State University
Discussant: Dale Copeland, University of Virginia

Capitalism, Peace and War
Raimo Väyrynen, University of Notre Dame
Discussant: John Mueller, Ohio State University

The Democratic Peace and Civil Society as Constraints on Major Power Warfare
William Thompson, Indiana University
Discussant: Spencer R. Weart, American Institute of Physics

Top of Page

Home > Publications > Peace Colloquy > Issue 1 (Spring 2002)