English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper examines third-party trade and its implications for conflicts between hostile countries not engaging in trade. We present a conflict-theoretic model to analyze two adversaries’ endogenous arming decisions when they separately establish a free trade agreement (FTA) with a neutral third-party state. We contrast this multiple FTAs regime with a single FTA regime between one adversary and the third-party state, which excludes the other adversary as a non-member. In our analysis, the benchmark case is a protectionist regime when the bilateral trade between the third-party state and each of the adversaries is a tariff war. Among the three trade regimes, we show that the two adversaries’ aggregate arming is the  lowest  under multiple FTAs but is the highest under a single FTA. These results suggest that, despite no trade between two adversary countries, multiple FTAs through third-party trade have the pacifying or appeasing effect of lowering overall military buildups in interstate conflicts.

Endogenous Security, Third-Party Trade, and Interstate Disputes: A Conflict-Theoretic Analysis