Ivan Arreguín-Toft
Biographic Data
| ID | 1494040 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Ivan Arreguín-Toft |
| GIVEN NAMES | Ivan |
| FAMILY NAME | Arreguín-Toft |
| SIGNATURE | ARREGUÍN-TOFT I |
| AFFILIATIONS | Boston University |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 6 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 112 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 6 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2001 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2012 |
| H-INDEX | 3 |
The meaning of ‘state failure’
In this essay I advance two arguments. First, while Afghanistan was once a state built on a social contract that demanded a balance of both modernist and traditional goals, a combination of exogenous shocks shattered that equilibrium, resulting in a territory that is no longer governed by a state, and that continues to generate what economists might call ‘negative externalities.’ It is these negative externalities that have drawn in overlapping i…
Contemporary Asymmetric Conflict Theory in Historical Perspective
This article offers an intellectual history of theoretical work devoted to explaining asymmetric conflict outcomes since World War II. Three factors are critical to understanding how the literature has evolved. First, the concept of “asymmetric conflict” encompasses a number of overlapping literatures, including insurgency, terrorism, counterinsurgency, and most recently, civil wars. Second, and interrelated, the field of inquiry has been unprodu…
How the Weak Win Wars
How do the weak win wars? The likelihood of victory and defeat in asymmetric conflicts depends on the interaction of the strategies weak and strong actors use. Using statistical and in-depth historical analyses of conflicts spanning two hundred years, in this 2005 book Ivan Arregúin-Toft shows that, independent of regime type and weapons technology, the interaction of similar strategic approaches favors strong actors, while opposite strategic app…
How Democracies Lose Small Wars
How Democracies Lose Small Wars. By Gil Merom. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 310p. $65.00 cloth, $22.99 paper. The essence of Gil Merom's argument in this book is that democratic strong actors cannot win small wars because these states are constrained by society to avoid the sacrifice—in both sustained and inflicted casualties—necessary to win: “My argument is that democracies fail in small wars because they find it extremely diffic…
Tunnel at the End of the Light
How the Weak Win Wars
International Security - Volume 26, Number 1, Summer 2001
How the Weak Win Wars
International Security - Volume 26, Number 1, Summer 2001
How Democracies Lose Small Wars
How Democracies Lose Small Wars. By Gil Merom. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 310p. $65.00 cloth, $22.99 paper. The essence of Gil Merom's argument in this book is that democratic strong actors cannot win small wars because these states are constrained by society to avoid the sacrifice—in both sustained and inflicted casualties—necessary to win: “My argument is that democracies fail in small wars because they find it extremely diffic…
Contemporary Asymmetric Conflict Theory in Historical Perspective
This article offers an intellectual history of theoretical work devoted to explaining asymmetric conflict outcomes since World War II. Three factors are critical to understanding how the literature has evolved. First, the concept of “asymmetric conflict” encompasses a number of overlapping literatures, including insurgency, terrorism, counterinsurgency, and most recently, civil wars. Second, and interrelated, the field of inquiry has been unprodu…
Tunnel at the End of the Light
How the Weak Win Wars
International Security - Volume 26, Number 1, Summer 2001
Tunnel at the End of the Light
How the Weak Win Wars
How do the weak win wars? The likelihood of victory and defeat in asymmetric conflicts depends on the interaction of the strategies weak and strong actors use. Using statistical and in-depth historical analyses of conflicts spanning two hundred years, in this 2005 book Ivan Arregúin-Toft shows that, independent of regime type and weapons technology, the interaction of similar strategic approaches favors strong actors, while opposite strategic app…
How Democracies Lose Small Wars
How Democracies Lose Small Wars. By Gil Merom. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 310p. $65.00 cloth, $22.99 paper. The essence of Gil Merom's argument in this book is that democratic strong actors cannot win small wars because these states are constrained by society to avoid the sacrifice—in both sustained and inflicted casualties—necessary to win: “My argument is that democracies fail in small wars because they find it extremely diffic…
The meaning of ‘state failure’
In this essay I advance two arguments. First, while Afghanistan was once a state built on a social contract that demanded a balance of both modernist and traditional goals, a combination of exogenous shocks shattered that equilibrium, resulting in a territory that is no longer governed by a state, and that continues to generate what economists might call ‘negative externalities.’ It is these negative externalities that have drawn in overlapping i…
Contemporary Asymmetric Conflict Theory in Historical Perspective
This article offers an intellectual history of theoretical work devoted to explaining asymmetric conflict outcomes since World War II. Three factors are critical to understanding how the literature has evolved. First, the concept of “asymmetric conflict” encompasses a number of overlapping literatures, including insurgency, terrorism, counterinsurgency, and most recently, civil wars. Second, and interrelated, the field of inquiry has been unprodu…
Law (6 works) · Political science (6 works) · Law (4 works) · Political economy (4 works) · Politics (4 works) · Sociology (4 works) · Economics (3 works) · International Relations and Foreign Policy (3 works) · Law and economics (3 works) · Terrorism (3 works)