國立虎尾科技大學 |

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

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War :/
Reminder of title:	Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine.
Author:	Chincharadze, Ketevan.
Description:	1 online resource (93 pages)
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 85-01.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International85-01.
Subject:	Political science. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
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. - 1 online resource (93 pages)

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

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

Includes bibliographical references

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 results. The paper provides more details about how leaders form their biases in two different systems and reach the same outcome - war.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798379921484Subjects--Topical Terms:

558774
Political science.
Subjects--Index Terms:

DemocracyIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War : = Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine.
LDR:03035ntm a22003977 4500 001 1150800
005 20241029122321.5
006 m o d
007 cr bn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2023 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798379921484
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30523672
035 $a AAI30523672
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Chincharadze, Ketevan. $3 1477391
245 1 0 $a Why Democracies and Autocracies Go to War : $b Comparing the Cases of Iraq and Ukraine.
264 0 $c 2023
300 $a 1 online resource (93 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 85-01.
500 $a Advisor: Epstein, Rachel.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--University of Denver, 2023.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
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 results. The paper provides more details about how leaders form their biases in two different systems and reach the same outcome - war.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Political science. $3 558774
650 4 $a Peace studies. $3 1179889
653 $a Democracy
653 $a War
653 $a Autocratic leaders
653 $a Political strategies
653 $a News reports
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0601
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0563
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a University of Denver. $b Josef Korbel School of International Studies. $3 1473440
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 85-01.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30523672 $z click for full text (PQDT)