東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Why Democracies and Autocracies Go t...

Chincharadze, Ketevan.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War: Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War: Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine./
Author:	Chincharadze, Ketevan.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2023,
Description:	93 p.
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 85-01.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International85-01.
Subject:	Political science. -
Online resource:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30523672
ISBN:	9798379921484

Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War: Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine.
Chincharadze, Ketevan.

Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War: Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2023 - 93 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 85-01.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Denver, 2023.

History shows that both democratic and nondemocratic countries wage wars to advance their strategic interests. This study has comparatively analyzed two conflicts - the 2003-2011 U.S. invasion of Iraq and Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine - to identify the trends that motivate both democratic and autocratic leaders to behave similarly by launching an invasion. The interpretive research of various memoirs, books, interviews, academic articles, news reports, and speeches, has uncovered that personal biases, particularly confirmation biases, play a significant role in motivating leaders to start a war. Leaders' confirmation biases are often shaped by three prominent factors - historical memory, their ambitions and political vision, and unwaveringly supportive staff. In the pre-war period, both democratic and autocratic leaders first turn to history to identify their enemies and determine the prospects of their success in war. They form their opinions based on historical memory without further confirming past observations with evidence. History also sets a leadership standard and inspires presidents to pursue ambitious political strategies, which sometimes turn into 'obsessions' and motivate leaders to 'fish' for data that confirm their strategic beliefs. Such confirming information often comes from the administration staff, who share presidents' beliefs or unwaveringly support their decisions. The lack of reliance on tangible evidence in this process biases leaders in favor of perpetrating a war that does not necessarily produce anticipated{A0}results. The paper provides more details about how leaders form their biases in two different systems and reach the same outcome - war.

ISBN: 9798379921484Subjects--Topical Terms:

528916
Political science.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Democracy

Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War: Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine.
LDR:02834nmm a2200397 4500 001 2402546
005 20241029122321.5
006 m o d
007 cr#unu||||||||
008 251215s2023 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798379921484
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30523672
035 $a AAI30523672
035 $a 2402546
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Chincharadze, Ketevan. $3 3772781
245 1 0 $a Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War: Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2023
300 $a 93 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 85-01.
500 $a Advisor: Epstein, Rachel.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--University of Denver, 2023.
520 $a History shows that both democratic and nondemocratic countries wage wars to advance their strategic interests. This study has comparatively analyzed two conflicts - the 2003-2011 U.S. invasion of Iraq and Russia's ongoing war in Ukraine - to identify the trends that motivate both democratic and autocratic leaders to behave similarly by launching an invasion. The interpretive research of various memoirs, books, interviews, academic articles, news reports, and speeches, has uncovered that personal biases, particularly confirmation biases, play a significant role in motivating leaders to start a war. Leaders' confirmation biases are often shaped by three prominent factors - historical memory, their ambitions and political vision, and unwaveringly supportive staff. In the pre-war period, both democratic and autocratic leaders first turn to history to identify their enemies and determine the prospects of their success in war. They form their opinions based on historical memory without further confirming past observations with evidence. History also sets a leadership standard and inspires presidents to pursue ambitious political strategies, which sometimes turn into 'obsessions' and motivate leaders to 'fish' for data that confirm their strategic beliefs. Such confirming information often comes from the administration staff, who share presidents' beliefs or unwaveringly support their decisions. The lack of reliance on tangible evidence in this process biases leaders in favor of perpetrating a war that does not necessarily produce anticipated{A0}results. The paper provides more details about how leaders form their biases in two different systems and reach the same outcome - war.
590 $a School code: 0061.
650 4 $a Political science. $3 528916
650 4 $a Peace studies. $3 3172392
653 $a Democracy
653 $a War
653 $a Autocratic leaders
653 $a Political strategies
653 $a News reports
690 $a 0601
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0563
710 2 $a University of Denver. $b Josef Korbel School of International Studies. $3 1020508
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 85-01.
790 $a 0061
791 $a M.A.
792 $a 2023
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30523672