Zeev Maoz

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine two explanatory models for the relative lack of conflict between democracies: the normative model suggests that democracies do not fight each other because norms of compromise and cooperation prevent their conflicts of interest from escalating into violent clashes, and the structural model asserts that complex political mobilization processes impose institutional constraints on the leaders of two democracies confronting each other to make violent conflict impossible.

TL;DR: In this article, an empirical description and discussion of interstate conflict behavior is presented. The basis is a recently completed data set consisting of all recorded instances of threats, displays, and displays.

TL;DR: This article examined the relationship between regime type and conflict involvement of states and found that there is no relationship between the regime characteristics of a dyad and the probability of conflict involvement in that dyad: Democracies rarely clash with one another and never fight one another in war.

TL;DR: The classical liberals believed that democracy and free trade would reduce the incidence of war, and they conducted new tests of the ''democratic peace'' incorporating into the analyses of Maoz & Russe as discussed by the authors.