The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The War Ledger
Abstract
"The War Ledger" provides fresh, sophisticated answers to fundamental questions about major modern wars: Why do major wars begin? What accounts for victory or defeat in war? How do victory and defeat influence the recovery of the combatants? Are the rules governing conflict behavior between nations the same since the advent of the nuclear era? The authors find such well-known theories as the balance of power and collective security systems inadequate to explain how conflict erupts in the international system. Their rigorous empirical analysis proves that the power-transition theory, hinging on economic, social, and political growth, is more accurate; it is the differential rate of growth of the two most powerful nations in the system-the dominant nation and the challenger-that destabilizes all members and precipitates world wars. Predictions of who will win or lose a war, the authors find, depend not only on the power potential of a nation but on the capability of its political systems to mobilize its resources-the "political capacity indicator." After examining the aftermath of major conflicts, the authors identify national growth as the determining factor in a nation's recovery. With victory, national capabilities may increase or decrease; with defeat, losses can be enormous. Unexpectedly, however, in less than two decades, losers make up for their losses and "all" combatants find themselves where they would have been had no war occurred. Finally, the authors address the question of nuclear arsenals. They find that these arsenals do not make the difference that is usually assumed. Nuclear weapons have not changed the structure of power on which international politics rests. Nor does the behavior of participants in nuclear confrontation meet the expectations set out in deterrence theory.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Trade Blocs, Trade Flows, and International Conflict
Mansfield, E. D., & Pevehouse, J. C. (2000) · International Organization · doi:10.1162/002081800551361 · Cited by 384
Reputation and Status as Motives for War
Dafoe, A., Renshon, J., & Huth, P. (2014) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-071112-213421 · Cited by 322
Bones of Contention: Comparing Territorial, Maritime, and River Issues
Hensel, P. R., McLaughlin Mitchell, S., Sowers, T. E., & Thyne, C. L. (2008) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/0022002707310425 · Cited by 317
Li, Q., & Wen, M. (2005) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343305054092 · Cited by 142
Chen, S., Loayza, N. V., & Reynal-Querol, M. (2008) · The World Bank Economic Review · doi:10.1093/wber/lhn001 · Cited by 97
Metadata
- Authors
- Organski, A. F. K., & Kugler, J.
- Venue
- University of Chicago Press eBooks
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1980
- OpenAlex
- W4244085334
- Cited by
- 954
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.24
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The War Ledger. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7208/chicago/9780226351841.001.0001
- The paper
- Organski, A. F. K., & Kugler, J. (1980). The War Ledger. University of Chicago Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226351841.001.0001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.