Due to its very short history, the approach of the “Antinomies of the Democratic Peace” is thus far limited solely to the identification of possible antinomies in the theory of democratic peace. A study of the various types of democracy and their subtypes which allow antinomies to emerge has not taken place to date. This gap is being narrowed by this study of four democracies (Germany, the UK, France, and the USA). The legitimating discourses of the legislative and executive branches will be studied with regard to the “Revolution in Military Affairs” and the “Strategies of Information Warfare.”
The focus of the study is the question whether the type of democracy has an impact on the use of military technology in order to minimize the state’s own casualties. The answer to this research question will be grounded in the rational calculation of loss-avoidance pursued by democracies. For this, four democracies of different types will be examined by means of a controlled comparison for their susceptibility to a “Revolution in Military Affairs” and “Strategies of Information Warfare,” as both are necessary to make the implementation of a loss-prevention strategy possible in the first place. The technique used in the study is a controlled comparison (according to Mill) of the four types of democracy (coalition-parliamentary, presidential, semi-presidential, Westminster parliamentarian). Alternatively, hypotheses developed from realism, the rationalist alliance theory, and constructivism will be tested as al-ternative explanations of the variance in state behaviour.