Democratic Norms Remain Stronger than Ethnic Ties: Defending “Foreign Interventions and Secessionist Movements”

This article is a response to Stephen Saideman's criticism of our research findings on third state intervention in secessionist crises, which was published in this journal in 2005. Here we defend our methodology and the validity of our results. We also explain why, in our view, Saideman's...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Canadian journal of political science 2007-09, Vol.40 (3), p.749-757
Main Authors: Bélanger, Louis, Duchesne, Érick, Paquin, Jonathan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Conflicts
Datasets
DEBATE/DISCUSSION
Democracy
Discourse
Dyadic relations
Dyadics
Ethnic conflict
Ethnic groups
Ethnicity
Foreign intervention
Freedom
International relations
Methodology
Military Intervention
Minority & ethnic violence
Norms
Regression analysis
Research design
Secession
Secession movement
Secessionism
Separatism
Social Movements
Social norms
Theory
Third-party intervention
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article is a response to Stephen Saideman's criticism of our research findings on third state intervention in secessionist crises, which was published in this journal in 2005. Here we defend our methodology and the validity of our results. We also explain why, in our view, Saideman's criticisms and the alternative research design that he offers are seriously questionable. More specifically, our reply focuses on his problematic case selection and on his measurement of ethnic ties, which is methodologically inconsistent and biased. Résumé. Cet article constitue une réponse à la critique de Stephen Saideman concernant nos résultats de recherche, paru dans cette revue en 2005, sur les interventions des États tiers dans les crises sécessionnistes. Nous défendons ici notre méthode et la validité de nos résultats. Nous expliquons aussi pourquoi, selon nous, il est possible de remettre en question les critiques et le devis de recherche de Saideman. Plus précisément, notre réponse se concentre sur sa sélection de cas douteuse et sa mesure des liens ethniques, puisque nous jugeons celle-ci méthodologiquement incorrecte et biaisée.
ISSN:0008-4239
1744-9324
DOI:10.1017/S0008423907070849