Two fundamentalar guments are presented to answer whether dyadic balances or preponderances of military capability are more peaceful. First, the impact of the dyadic balance of military capabilities on interstate conflict, conditional on the level of dyadic interest similarity, is assessed. Many theoreticalworks in the field argue that the degree of interest similarity gives meaning to the balance of military forces, yet few empirical studies investigate the conditionality of these two variables. The second argument is that interstate conflict is a heterogeneous outcome. Aselection model that seeks to explain the severity of interstate disputes is used to address this concern. Using data from all interstate dyads between 1886 and 1992, results show that dyads with similar interests have less severe disputes, and under the condition of interest dissimilarity, balances rather than preponderances of military capability are associated with less severe disputes.

The Severity of Interstate Disputes Are Dyadic Capability Preponderances Really More Pacific

This thesis examines Japanese postwar foreign policy, specifically regional policy, based on two hypotheses that are closely related: 

(1) There has been a growing interest among Japanese policymakers in Japan taking greater initiative independent of US policy, not only economically but increasingly in the political and even the security area. 

(2) Japan has been quietly pursuing definite strategies for enhancing its national interests, and this style of Japanese foreign policy has been effective for achieving its goals, given domestic, regional and international constraints imposed on it. 

The thesis offers detailed analyses, within the framework of IR and 1PE, on what has changed in Japanese policy, what has caused the changes, what Japan has achieved throughout the postwar period and how and why Japan's policy exhibits such a style. 

These themes arc examined by looking at Japan's regional policy in the postwar period in the historical context, as well as by studying three case studies, namely: (1) the ideological differences between the Japanese approach and the Washington and Post-Washington Consensus on economic development and systemic transition. (2) Japanese policy towards the East Asian financial crisis in 1997 and 1998 and (3) Japanese policy towards East Asian regionalism. Extensive interviews with Japanese policymakers, such as MOF and MOFA officials, and Japanese intellectuals arc used for investigating these case studies. 

The thesis makes the following original contributions to knowledge. Firstly, it advances the discussions about the nature of Japanese foreign policy, which has been the subject of academic controversy over the last few' decades, by shedding light on two related questions, namely (1) whether Japanese foreign policy can be characterised as reactive or strategic, (2) whether Japan's US priority' in foreign policy has meant that its East Asia policy is decided according to US relations, or whether East Asia has occupied an important position in Japanese foreign policy. Secondly, the thesis also advances the discussions about the style of Japanese foreign policy. This is still an underdeveloped subject theoretically and empirically, but could potentially lead to more extensive arguments including the nature of leadership. Thirdly , detailed narrative analyses of Japan's policies towards important events in the 1990s, which have not yet been subject to sufficient scholarly debate, despite their great potential to offer insight into Japanese foreign policy, make a significant empirical contribution to the study of Japanese foreign policy. Furthermore, these empirical discussions, which arc concerned with significant regional development in East Asia, contribute to the study of regionalism as well, given Japan's great economic influence on the region.

I An Inkster

Papers

Japan and Northeast Asia