Bruce Russett and John Oneal: Investigating the Liberal Legacy

The idea that constitutional liberal democracies (republics, in the words of Immanuel Kant) share a special brand that defines their foreign policies from those of other polities had been elaborated first in the liberal tradition in the 18th century. Since the 1980s the relationship between liberal-democracies and actual or potential violent conflict has then taken centre stage in IR debates thanks to Michael Doyle’s seminal recovery of Kant’s On Perpetual Peace [Doyle 1983a; 1983b]. In 2001, the two-part essay by Doyle has received major empirical support and insightful theoretical refinements by Bruce Russett and John Oneal’s Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence and International Organi¬zations. Grounded in these peculiar readings of Kant’s Perpetual Peace, the idea that liberal-democracies engage in violent conflict with each other less than any other type of partners do, has spurred one among the most fruitful research programs in the IR discipline [Maliniak et al. 2007, 29]. Unpacking the theoretical roots of the three ways to Kantian peace and of their derivative triangulations, through an informed reconstruction of Doyle’s two articles and Russett and Oneal seminal book, the chapter engages with key debates on the relevance of alternative explanations of both dyadic and systemic peace since the end of the Cold war. In light of the reversal in democratization trends, civilizational clashes and enhanced economic globalization, the chapter discusses the significance of contract intensity, interest similarity and ideational arguments to the explanation of bilateral and systemic conflict. Based on the evidence provided in recent contributions from the neo-Kantian and realist camps, the chapter argues in favour of an enduring relevance of the liberal variety of democratic polities to enhance the chances for international peace.