Abstract
The mainstream literature on revolutions points to the conclusion that
following the onset of a revolution the probability that a given country will
be involved in a military interstate dispute rises dramatically. However, there
are no clear conclusions regarding the probability of becoming an instigator
or a target of a conflict. The article examines the types of military actions
that the post-revolutionary state becomes involved in. The geopolitical and
military factors, which shape a given state’s influence within its immediate
international surrounding, play a pivotal role. The hegemonic revolutions
of regional powers are rare and lead to powerful conflicts during which
the hegemon spreads the new ideology and institutions in the international
surrounding. The peripheral revolutions of weaker states, on the other hand,
typically lead to post-revolutionary military targeting by local hegemons
that see any changes to the status quo as a threat to their influences and
fear revolutionary contagion. All revolutions seem to make the leadership
more risk-acceptant. The article is a part of a larger research project that
will include a quantitative analysis of peripheral revolutions. However, at
this point it examines three case studies: one hegemonic revolution (France
after 1789) and two cases of peripheral revolutions and ensuing wars (the
recent Russian activities in Ukraine and the Caucasus and the U.S. Bay
of Pigs invasion in 1961). The research uses M ill’s comparative method of
agreement seeking to present cases from very different historical contexts, it
also strives to avoid ideological bias when defining key terms and events. The
general conclusions suggest that all revolutionary states are in an extremely
precarious situation in spite of different, specific dangers that they may face.