NOTES
1 Our thanks to the editors, Peter Wallensteen, and the participants in the Sage "Confllict Resolution” Conference held in Laxenburg, Austria, June 30—July 2, 2007 for their comments and suggestions.
2 See Dzurek (2005) for a useful effort to create a taxonomy that evaluates the symbolic and tangible values of territory.
3 We use the distinction common in the conflict resolution literature between settlement, which refers to a termination of the issue regardless of the means employed (i.e. including imposition of an agreement, as in Second World War) and resolution, which refers to a mutual satisfaction with the agreement and one that meets some if not all of the underlying needs related to the conflict.
4 This finding is correlational in nature, while we think that territorial disputes lead to rivalry, there are some cases, like Algeria-Morocco, where the rivalry leads to territorial disputes.
5 Territorial issues also play an important role in civil wars, see Toft (2003), Walter (2003).
6 A key area for future research is what domestic factors make territorial disputes recur.
7 Note this proposition does not mean that it is impossible for wars to occur because of other issues, but simply that between neighbors the probability of war in the absence of territorial disputes is greatly reduced. The pacifying effect of accepting borders between neighbors is much greater than among non-neighbors. Indeed, one possible nonterritorial source of wars between neighbors is from contagion effects. This can be seen in the First World War and the Second World War where Germany attacks Belgium in the absence of a territorial dispute between them.
8 Diez (2004) treats the borders in Nordic areas, including the highly autonomous Aland Islands (within Finland), as the paradigmatic case of how territorial conflicts that threaten war at one point can become peaceful and stable at another, and quite porous.
9 For Deutsch (Deutsch, Burrell et al., 1957) a security community is one where the states do not believe that war between them is possible.
10 Such a test implies that the absence or low frequency of territorial disputes is almost a necessary condition for peace. While the territorial explanation of war says that war can arise out of other issues, territorial issues are seen as having a high probability of escalating to war. Because of this, removing them as a source of conflict and war should result in a visible effect in periods of peace, even though it is not going to be a universal effect. Treating the absence of territorial disputes as a sufficient condition of peace would involve a different sort of research, one more like that of Vasquez and Henehan (2001) already reported on above.
11 We take this phrase from J. David Singer, who has used in conversations in meetings.
12 One way of doing this is to get individuals (outside of government) to meet and come up with possible solutions. This is sometimes done at higher levels in Track Two diplomacy (Montville, 1987). Kelman (1982) has pioneered a more than twenty-year effort to hold unofficial problem-solving workshops between Arabs and Israelis. Such workshops help individuals and groups reframe the issue.
13 Thus, old “blue laws” in the US did not permit most businesses to be open or liquor to be sold on Sunday, a day of worship under the dominant Christian identity.