LAUSR

The Kantian peace theory emphasises the mutually enforcing pacifying effects of democracy and economic interdependence. Nevertheless, the last decade, which has seen record levels of interdependence and democratisation, provides anecdotal evidence that challenges the simplicity of the democracy–interdependence–peace argument. In this paper, I contrast Kant’s approach to this conundrum with that of Rousseau’s. While Kant’s well-known argument suggests a mutually reinforcing relation between democracy, interdependence and peace, Rousseau postulates that the pacifying effects of democracy are not sustainable under conditions of heightened interdependence. Rousseau’s analysis adds complexity to the familiar Kantian argument by qualifying the conditions under which we can expect democracy and/or democratisation to reduce the probability of conflict, and by adding an important social and ideational component to the largely material approach of the Kantian peace theory.