Neotrusteeship and the problem of weak states
Abstract
April 01 2004 Neotrusteeship and the Problem of Weak States James D. Fearon, James D. Fearon Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar David D. Laitin David D. Laitin Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Author and Article Information James D. Fearon Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. David D. Laitin Professor of Political Science at Stanford University. Online Issn: 1531-4804 Print Issn: 0162-2889 © 2004 President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology2004 International Security (2004) 28 (4): 5–43. https://doi.org/10.1162/0162288041588296 Cite Icon Cite Permissions Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Search Site Citation James D. Fearon, David D. Laitin; Neotrusteeship and the Problem of Weak States. International Security 2004; 28 (4): 5–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/0162288041588296 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll JournalsInternational Security Search Advanced Search This content is only available as a PDF. © 2004 President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology2004 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Because there is no definite international security policy to address weak or post-conflict nations, stronger nations sometimes face mission-creep when aiding weaker nations.
“Because there is no definite international security policy to address weak or post-conflict nations, stronger nations sometimes face “mission-creep,” a shift from supplying and aiding nations to an escalation of mission goals, when aiding weaker nations (Fearon&Laitin, 2004).”
From Outer space weaponisation: International security and Nigeria in the outer space (2023) · cites this paper as Fearon&Laitin, 2004
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 437
- Authors
- Fearon, J. D., & Laitin, D. D.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- ORCID
- Laitin, David D.
- Venue
- International Security
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2004-04
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 5-43
- ISSN
- 0162-2889 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-4804
- OpenAlex
- W2079341723
- Cited by
- 437
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 101.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Security (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Global Peace and Security Dynamics
- Keywords
- weak states, state capacity, international relations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
