A wave of recent research challenges the role of regime type in international relations. One
striking takeaway is that democratic and autocratic leaders can often achieve similar levels …

The article reviews the literature on the relationship between democracy and armed conflict,
internal as well as interstate. The review points to several similarities between how …

How effective is terrorism? This question has generated lively scholarly debate and is of
obvious importance to policy-makers. However, most existing studies of terrorism are not …

Is killing or capturing insurgent leaders an effective tactic? Previous research on interstate
war and counterterrorism has suggested that targeting enemy leaders does not work. Most …

Why do some leaders and segments of the public display remarkable persistence in
confrontations in international politics, while others cut and run? The answer given by …

Terrorists attack civilians to coerce their governments into making political concessions.
Does this strategy work? To empirically assess the effectiveness of terrorism, the author …

Certain types of militant groups—those suffering from leadership deficits—are more likely to
attack civilians. Their leadership deficits exacerbate the principal-agent problem between …

Do democracies make more effective coercive threats? An influential literature in
international relations argues that democratic institutions allow leaders to credibly signal …

Debates over how governments can defeat insurgencies ebb and flow with international
events, becoming particularly contentious when the United States encounters problems in its …

Ending civil conflict is difficult, particularly through political settlements. Conflicts now often
occur in states with elections, and voters have sometimes been directly involved in the …