Restraint or Propellant? Democracy and Civilian Fatalities in Interstate Wars

• Published in: The Journal of conflict resolution Vol. 51; no. 6; pp. 872 - 904
• Main Author: Downes, Alexander B.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA Sage Publications 01.12.2007; SAGE Publications; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
• Subjects: Accountability; Attrition (Research Studies); Attrition warfare; Autocracy; Casualties; Civilians; Conflict resolution; Conflict theory; Corporate culture; Data analysis; Datasets; Death; Democracy; Fatalities; Government; International conflicts; Killing; Mass murder; Mortality Rates; Numbers; Political Ideologies; Political leadership; Political regimes; Public Opinion; Regression analysis; Relocation; State Power; Studies; Victimization; Victims of Crime; Violence; Violence against civilians; War; War casualties; Warfare; World wars; mass killing; civilian casualties; civilian victimization; democracy
• ISSN: 0022-0027; 1552-8766
• DOI: 10.1177/0022002707308079

This article investigates the effect of regime type on the number of civilian fatalities that states inflicted in interstate wars between 1900 and 2003. As opposed to several previous studies, the author finds little support for normative arguments positing that democracies kill fewer civilians in war. In fact, the author finds that democracies are significantly more likely than nondemocracies to kill more than fifty thousand noncombatants. Democracies also kill more civilians when they are involved in wars of attrition and kill about as many (and perhaps more) noncombatants than autocracies in such wars. These findings provide qualified support for institutional arguments about democratic accountability. Other implications of the institutional view, however, are not upheld, such as the argument that democracies select easy wars that should result in few civilian casualties because they are won quickly and decisively. Finally, democracies do not appear to kill fewer civilians in more recent wars.