Rivalry Attributes and Foreign Policy Alignment Explaining Rivalry De-Escalation via UNGA Voting Patterns

Abstract

Rivalries are characterized by variable levels of hostility over time but also intermittent bouts of cooperation. Why might that be the case and can we predict which types of rivalry are likely to be more cooperative? Two types of rivalrypositional and principal-are less likely to exhibit cooperation than other types of rivalry. Positional issues are broader than spatial grievances and therefore less likely to permit cooperation. Principal rivalries tend to be more intense and focused than rivals who have to contend with multiple rivals. Principal rivalries, therefore, should also demonstrate less cooperation than non-principal rivalries. Some support for these expectations are found in an examination of UN General Assembly voting alignment patterns. Voting by positional rivals is less likely to align than voting by spatial rivals (although the relationship is not statistically significant). Principal rivals are also less likely to align in their demonstration of preferences in General Assembly voting. In this respect, different types of rivalry appear to evince different types of behavior based on the kinds of rivalries in which the actors are embedded.