Structural Equivalence and International Conflict, 1816-2000: A Social Networks Analysis of Affinities and Conflict

The concept of international affinity—albeit under different names—captures a central place in international relations research. This study examines how different types of affin-ity affect the likelihood of conflict between states. We discuss notions of affinities derived from the realist, liberal, and culturlalist paradigm and derive hypotheses regarding the impact of different types of affinity on the probability of dyadic conflict. We point out some of the weaknesses in existing measures of structural affinity. We offer a social networks conception of structural affinity—the concept of structural equivalence—which reflects the similarity of international ties across a set of different networks. A test of the hypotheses derived from these paradigms using both existing measures of affinity and our own structural equivalence measures suggests several findings: (1) strategic affinity has a consistent dampening effect on the probability of dyadic conflict; (2) trade-related affinity does not have a significant impact on the probability of dyadic conflict; (3) IGO-related affinity has a negative impact on conflict, mostly in the 20th century. (4) Cultural (linguistic and religious) affinity also does not appear to have a significant or consistent effect on the probability of dyadic conflict. We discuss the implications of our findings for theories of international politics. Structural Equivalence and International Conflict, 1816-2000 2 1