Why Do Wars Occur?
Why Do Wars Occur?
Why Do Wars Occur?
This essay will discuss the views of different political ideologies on why wars occur. In
particular, the essay focuses on the political theories of realism and liberalism, as well as the
critical theory. After highlighting these leading political theories of war the essay then
Finally, it will be argued that it is important to distinguish different types of wars or conflicts.
wars occur.
2
Before starting the discussion it is useful to clearly define “war”. According to the
Encyclopaedia Britannica, war is defined as a “state of conflict, generally armed, between two
The political theory of realism or rationalism argues that wars occur because it is human
nature to act in one’s own self-interest. While this explanation was originally applied to
individuals, neo-realism later focused more on states as actors who pursue their nation’s
interest.
James D. Fearon (1995), for instance argues that conflict or war typically happens because of
anarchy. An example can be given at the international level, where there is no single leader or
central authority which would suppress the political or military ambitions of individual states.
In this connection, the security dilemma concept must be mentioned. It can be described as a
conflict in which two or more states are involved. The arms race during the “cold war” is a
good example. This competition can easily result in war, since each nation state tries to
maintain its security. This can result in an upward spiral of ever increasing military
expenditures, since each state feels the need to match the other’s power to ensure its survival.
This, however, implies that one state’s security always results in another state’s insecurity
(Schelling, 1960).
A further political ideology which tries to define the causes of war is liberalism. According to
the liberal thinker Doyle (2004), “peace and democracy are just two sides of the same coin”.
Consequently, liberals argue that wars occur due to the lack of democracy and freedom. A
good example of such a war is the Vietnam War, in which the US has underestimated the will
of the North-Vietnamese to “liberate” their country at all costs from foreign intervention.
3
Schumpeter (1919) described the interaction between democracy and capitalism as the basis
for liberal pacifist thinking. He argued that only a small group of people benefit from war, and
the majority.
Similarly, Hoffmann (1980) describes liberalism as “the protection of individual freedom, the
reduction of state power, and the conviction that power is legitimate only if it is based on
All of these definitions indicate that liberalism is built on a pacifist foundation in which there
In contrast to realism and liberalism, critical theory argues that the occurrence of wars can be
explained by the ongoing conflict between the “elite” and the “rest”. These conflicts can be
over political power, economic well-being, and resource sharing. An example where a country
has tried to economically benefit from going to war is the first Opium War (1839-1842), in
which England attacked China to open up a market for its highly profitable opium trade.
Critical theory has an ambivalent position concerning war. On one hand, the critical theory
justifies war, as long as it is fought by suppressed people against their suppressors. Most
representatives of the critical theory see conflict as something positive, because it helps to
break up old political structures. Examples of such “liberation wars” are the independence
wars of former colonies or the “revolutionary war” of the proletariat against the capitalist
system. On the other hand, the critical theory argues that violent dominance of elites or ruling
classes is fundamentally bad. Their fight for dominance is criticised and described as
exploitation.
4
Having reflected on the different causes of conflicts and wars as interpreted by the various
political ideologies, it is important to categorize the reasons of war. This can be achieved by
At the international system level wars are often fought because of a vacuum of power. The
cause of war on this level is usually due to the lack of an authoritarian leader or a dominant
state. This international anarchical condition leaves states no choice but to act in their self
interest in order to survive. One must note here that anarchy in this context describes the
absence of a ruling authority in the international system and does not mean the frequently
Secondly, Brown (1987) argues that wars fought in early history between primitive tribes
were often about claiming additional territory. The larger the territory and the more diverse
the ecosystem in that territory was, the more incentives the ancient tribes had to secure them
for themselves. This would give the winning tribe larger hunting grounds as well as the
possibility to collect more fruits, and just in general have a more secure supply of resources.
But the concept of fighting war over a territory can even be found in the 20th century. For
example in World War II, the Nazi-ideology of “Lebensraum” promoted the idea that a
German nation could become the dominant world power if it could expand its territory to the
Brown identifies a third reason why many wars are fought: to make an economic profit.
Although many economist would argue that wars actually damage economic growth, because
a country’s expenditure goes to warfare instead of expanding the domestic economy. On the
other hand, wars can be an enormous incentive to economic growth. A war requires
production of weapons and other supply for the military, which boosts the economy. Some
countries have heavily invested in infrastructure to prepare for a war, for example in Nazi
Germany, where many highways and railways were built to supply the troops. This led to a
pre-war economic boom in Germany. It can be argued that a further example for a war fought
5
for reasons of profitability is the Iraq war. Many political scientists argue that the US has been
fighting the war against Iraq to gain economic influence, open up new markets and secure
energy resources, which is why the Iraq war is often referred to as a “War for Oil”.
Fourthly, some of the most vicious and long lasting wars have been fought over religious
beliefs; examples are the crusades of Catholics to the “Holy Land”, the Muslim “Jihad”
against non-believers or the war between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland. Every
religion, at some point in time, has tried to expand its sphere of influence by fighting a war
against people with other beliefs. Usually both parties who engage in a religious war believe
In addition to Browns explanations there are a number of possible factors that can trigger
wars. For example wars are fought for reasons of prestige, for individual fame and national
honour and to set a patriotic statement. A typical example of such an incident is the Falkland
War in 1982, the United Kingdom defended a few small islands off the coast of Argentina
against an occupation by the Argentine military. The war was not about territory, since the
Falklands are tiny islands, nor about economic interests, but about power and patriotic
sentiments. Especially men often see war as an opportunity to demonstrate their strength and
virtue. During some historical periods there was a real “culture of war”, such as before the
First World War, when large sections of the European population where in a state of
almost curious example is the so-called Football War between El Salvador and Honduras in
1969. It was triggered by an undecided world cup qualification game, but the real reasons of
course were much deeper and concerned issues of land reform and immigration. Another
good example of a clear misjudgement was Hitler’s “two front” war against France and
Russia. The Nazis made the mistake to open two fronts, which overstressed their resources.
6
Finally, wars can be caused by racial conflicts or the fight for independence. This occurs
when wars are fought by suppressed people against their rulers or against foreign occupations.
In the 1950s and 1960s, many former colonies of the British and French empires fought
against the colonial powers, such as in the Algerian War of Independence against France.
Sometimes a social conflict within a society can be characterized as a class war or a racial
war. The war of the black majority against the system of Apartheid in South Africa is an
example of a racial conflict. The French Revolution is another example, where the middle and
Usually, there is a mixture of motives and reasons for every war. To comprehend the reasons
behind why wars occur, one needs to differentiate between the individual and collective
motives.
A behavioural scientist who has reflected on the individual motives for aggression which can
lead to war was Konrad Lorenz (1966). He argues in his book “On Aggression” that
individuals are violent in nature. Human aggression can be triggered by many stimuli but the
most frequent are situations of perceived threat or rivalry. Konrad Lorenz’s theory of the
innate aggression could give a plausible explanation of why people have been fighting wars
throughout all recorded history. If this theory is correct than the causes of war are in our
biological nature.
psychological concepts, such as Narcissism. This is related to the desire of many men to
achieve glory and individual honour by fighting a war. These psychological theories of war
argue that men can increase their social status by fighting in a war and coming back as “war
heroes”.
Finally, the aggression hypothesis is a possible step to understanding why individuals engage
in violent behaviour and wars. This hypothesis perceives frustration to be a major factor in
7
aggression. It can be observed that frustrated individuals are often very aggressive. They
These psychological explanations of war and aggression are all based on the emotions of
However, one needs also to look at the more complex system of collective behaviour. The
knowledge of individuals’ actions, which are based on decision making, reasoning and
collective actions one needs to convince and /or possibly force many individuals who might
Collective behaviour resulting in war can have many possible explanations, for example when
many people loose their common sense and moral beliefs and blindly follow political
propaganda. One might argue that wars are only possible, because soldiers do not behave as
individuals, but as a collective. Many soldiers would never commit the brutalities of war if
they would be fighting alone against a single opponent (Fromm1992). However, as a group,
they often completely loose their moral standards and critical judgement. Military leaders
often use this phenomenon. They try to strengthen the collective character of their units by
suppressing any kind of individual behaviour among their soldiers. Having outlined the
individual and collective motives for engaging in war, it must be noted again that there is
unusually not one single factor that triggers war but mostly a combination of complex acts.
8
This essay has discussed possible reasons for wars as seen from the three political ideologies,
namely realism, liberalism and critical theory. Different causes of wars have been analyzed
and each of the categories has been supported with specific examples. Further the essay
looked at explanations for wars from the perspective of states as well as individuals. To
conclude this essay demonstrates that there exists numerous hypothesises and explanations
about the occurrence of war. It is necessary to look at all these aspects to gain a full
References
Doyle, Michael W. (22 June 2004) Liberal Internationalism: Peace, War and
Democracy, www.nobelprize.org
http://www.britannica.com/