Over at IntrotoIR, J raises some excellent questions about the work I discussed in my previous post, many of which have to do with the relationship between polarity and war onset. I was going to respond to him in the comments on his blog, but I realized that I had a lot to say in response to his excellent questions, and readers of this blog might be interested in those comments.
A better question might be "What's not wrong with Huntington's Clash of Civilizations?", but I'll try not to be too pedantic. In light of recent events, interest in Huntington's thesis has been growing. Even the NYTimes is using language that is clearly influenced by Huntington's work, though they don't specifically mention it. So let's review the merits (such as they are) and demerits of this argument.
In a previous post, I introduced a new index of military capabilities, based on data that is already widely in use (see also this Duck of Minerva post). Based on the great feedback I've received, I decided it was time to revise the measure, and to see how well it does in accounting for war outcomes and the likelihood of conflict.
I am a political scientist who studies international relations. My interests include international conflict, domestic politics, bargaining theory, formal theory, and the empirical implications of theoretical models.