Determinants of Third Parties' Intervention and Alignment Choices in Ongoing Conflicts, 1946–2001

The decision to intervene in ongoing conflicts is one of the most difficult foreign policy choices states often face. Yet, studies of third parties' joining behavior have been rare and limited in several respects. First, they have explored only a subset of all interventions—military interventions. Second, they have concentrated on security-based determinants of intervention—power and alliance considerations—while underplaying other possible motivations behind the decision to intervene. Third, they have explored intervention and alignment choices as separate issues. This paper proposes a model of joining behavior that includes both security considerations and homophilous network ties as determinants of third parties' intervention and alignment choices. The model is tested on military and nonmilitary interventions data from Corbetta and Dixon (2005) for the 1946–2001 period. The results from a boolean logit estimation indicate that (1) the intervention decision is the result of both security-driven, pragmatic considerations and homophily between joiners and disputants; and (2) opposition to a party in a conflict is as important as a third party's social proximity to the side being supported.     

从他的帐篷的门口:田野工作者与审讯者

埃文思-普理查德的《努尔人》是最重要的科学的民族志代表作之一。埃马纽埃尔·勒华拉杜里在《蒙塔尤》中借用民族志文体,把14世纪的一个法国社区的宗教裁判所对农民的审讯记录转换成对那个时期法国南部乡村生活的纪录片式的叙述。通过对《蒙塔尤》和《努尔人》这两部民族志著作的细读和比照,可以发现其中包含着同样的权威与表述的关系模式,从而揭示出一直习以为常的人类学话语实践所隐含的权力和修辞问题。区分撰写著作的个人、行文中的叙述者的角色、行文中田野调查者的角色,对于探索权力与知识的相互影响颇有益处。