Foreign interests and state repression: Theory and evidence from the Armenian genocide
| Author | M Christian Lehmann |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00223433211068304 |
| Published date | 01 March 2023 |
| Date | 01 March 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Regular Articles |
Foreign interests and state repression: Theory
and evidence from the Armenian genocide
M Christian Lehmann
Department of Economics, University of Brasilia
Abstract
Existing work seeks explanations for state repression mainly in domestic factors such as ethnic/religious cleavages,
poverty and inequality, struggle for power, regime type and quality of state institutions, lack of loyalty, demand for
scapegoats, and cultural or psychological traits of perpetrators. How foreign influences shape state repression has been
given less attention. Furthermore, the focus of the empirical literature has been largely cross-country, leaving much
local variation unexplained. In this article, I examine how far foreign interests can explain the local (spatial) variation
of deportations and massacres during the Armenian genocide. Between 1915 and 1917 the Ottoman Empire carried
out a massive campaign of state repression (deportations and massacres) against its Armenian population. There was
meaningful variation across Ottoman provinces in the intensity of this campaign, that is, some provinces experienced
more repression than others. I investigate the determinants of this spatial variation. My empirical analysis is guided by
a rationalist (economic) model where deportation is a tool to stifle Armenian calls for independence, but the benefit
and cost of deportation vary spatially. For example, deportation is costlier (i.e. the risk of foreign intervention is
greater) in locations where foreign economic and military interests are threatened by the departure of Armenians. In
line with the model’s predictions, my empirical analysis indicates that there were fewer deportations in places where
Armenians worked for the German-owned railway.
Keywords
German empire, Ottoman empire, political violence, rationalist theory
Introduction
Existing work seeks explanations for state repression
mainly in domestic factors such as ethnic/religious clea-
vages, poverty and inequality, struggle for power, regime
type and quality of state institutions, lack of loyalty,
demand for scapegoats, and cultural or psychological
traits of perpetrators (e.g. Charny, Rapaport & Wiesel,
1982; Gurr, 1986; Staub, 1989; Davenport, 1995; Hen-
derson, 1999; Fearon & Laitin, 2000; Bauman, 2001;
Valentino, Huth & Balch-Lindsay, 2004; Valentino,
2004; Davenport & Armstrong, 2004; Bueno de
Mesquita et al., 2005; Midlarsky, 2005; Davenport,
2007b; Waller, 2007; Powell & Staton, 2009; Pierskalla,
2010; Besley & Persson, 2011; Voigtlaender & Voth, 2012;
Straus, 2013; Hill & Jones, 2014).
How foreign influences shape state repression has been
given less attention. In his review of the literature,
Davenport (2007a: 2) concludes that ‘important aspects
are largely peripheral to the core research program and
tend to be ignored, such as international influences’
(exceptions include Weiner, 1970; Brubaker, 1996;
Mylonas, 2013; Han & Mylonas, 2014; Jenne, 2014;
Bulutgil, 2017).
Furthermore, the focus of the empirical literature has
been largely cross-country, and ‘[w]hile macro-level
analysis is essential to uncover broad international
trends, its dominance in the field has left much local
variation unexplained’ (Zhukov, 2016: 3). Davenport
(2007a: 17–18) also stresses the shortcomings of the
commonly used ‘country-year’ as a unit of observation,
and calls for more spatial disaggregation.
I examine how far foreign interests can explain the
local (spatial) variation of deportatio ns and massacres
Corresponding author:
clehmann@unb.br
Journal of Peace Research
2023, Vol. 60(2) 307–321
ªThe Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00223433211068304
journals.sagepub.com/home/jpr
To continue reading
Request your trial