| The primary explanations for the democratic peace theory rely on the untested assumption that democratic leaders and citizens correctly identify the regime type of potential co-belligerents. Based on this identification, democracies pursue different crisis decision-making process, which makes war between democracies unlikely, even though democracies are no less warlike than other regime types. The main purpose of this dissertation is to test this assumption and examine whether the identification of regime type does affect the decision-making process in democracies. A secondary purpose is to test a political psychological explanation, based on social identity theory, for the democratic peace. In order to test these theories, this study traces the decision making process in the potential co-belligerents in six dyads.; Overall, the results do not support the conclusion that democratic leaders and citizens correctly identify the regime type of potential co-belligerents. Furthermore, democratic regimes followed the same decision-making process regardless of the potential co-belligerent's regime type. The decision-making process in democracies does conform to the expectations of the institutional explanation of the democratic peace theory, but it is the same regardless of regime type. Social identity theory does offer a partial explanation for the results, but neither social identity theory nor the democratic peace theory offer a better explanation than the null hypothesis (i.e. realist theory). |
