SURRENDERING THE HIGHER GROUND: THE ABUSE OF COMBATANTS DURING WAR A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Geoffrey Paul Raymond Wallace February 2010 © 2010 Geoffrey Paul Raymond Wallace SURRENDERING THE HIGHER GROUND: THE ABUSE OF COMBATANTS DURING WAR Geoffrey Paul Raymond Wallace, Ph. D. Cornell University 2010 What explains the differences in the ways captor states choose to treat enemy prisoners during war? Why are the rights of some prisoners rigorously upheld, while in other cases they are viewed as expendable? I argue the abuse of captured combatants largely flows from the nature of the belligerents and bloodshed during war. According to the nature of the belligerents, I argue that democracies are less likely on average to abuse prisoners than their autocratic counterparts. However, I propose the reasons for this democratic distinctiveness are less a function of domestic norms of individual rights or nonviolence, but more due to the greater sensitivity of democracies to fears over retaliation as well as to the strategic benefits possible through good conduct. On the other hand, the bloodshed wrought by the aims states seek to attain through war, along with the severity of the fighting, strongly increase the chances that states will abuse their prisoners. In order to assess these arguments, I construct a new data set on the treatment of captured combatants during all interstate wars from 1898 to 2003. I then provide further support for the findings from the quantitative analysis using a series of in-depth case studies of several episodes of both the abuse and humane treatment of enemy prisoners. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Geoffrey Wallace was born and raised in Toronto, Canada. He pursued his undergraduate studies in the same city at the University of Toronto, Victoria College, where he majored in Economics and International Relations. After completing his Honour’s B.A. in 2001, he then entered the university’s Collaborative M.A. program in International Relations and Political Science at the Munk Centre for International Studies. Geoffrey then left academia for a year to pursue a Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) internship at the Atlantic Council of the United States in Washington, D.C. While on the DFAIT internship, he decided to apply to Ph.D. programs and began at Cornell University’s Government Department in the fall of 2003. Geoff’s major field is International Relations with a minor in Comparative Politics. His dissertation investigates differences in the treatment of prisoners during interstate wars. Geoff expects to defend his dissertation during the summer of 2009. His broader research interests include international security, international institutions, and public opinion toward foreign policy. iii For Sophia iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Researching, writing, and most importantly completing a dissertation is a long and uncertain journey. Although I may have made some detours at times, I am thankful to many people for keeping me on track and helping me in many respects along the way. My committee provided a critical but encouraging resource at all stages of the dissertation. With two co-chairs I felt like I benefited doubly. Peter Katzenstein was always willing to read numerous drafts of every chapter, irrespective of their quality at the time. He constantly challenged my preconceptions on key points pushed me to consider the broader implications of my argument. Christopher Way instilled the need to be my own hardest critic and evaluate findings from as many different angles as possible. I may not have always achieved this goal, but his advice on research gives me something to aspire to for some time to come. My other committee members provided valuable suggestions that strengthened my argument even though errors certainly remain. I was able to draw on Matthew Evangelista’s own extensive research on international humanitarian law, which played such a large role in informing my central concept of combatant abuse. When I ventured somewhat cautiously into the world of Soviet history, I could benefit from his knowledge of Russia to make sure I kept my deviations to a minimum. Jonathan Kirshner time and again was able to pinpoint things I took for granted and reveal differences in important concepts or events which I had previously taken to be indistinguishable. I also received important feedback at various stages by presenting parts of this project at the 2008 annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association and the 2008 and 2009 meetings of the American Political Science Association. Jessica Weeks was gracious enough to read the entire manuscript and offered valuable v suggestions that enriched the current manuscript, but which I will also think about for some time to come. Several sources provided funding which greatly facilitated the research and writing of the dissertation. The Social Science and Humanities Council of Canada (SSHRC) provided a fellowship that was immensely helpful. The Peace Studies Program run through the Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies at Cornell University awarded me two research fellowships that coincided with crucial times of the dissertation. The first was in the spring of 2005 and allowed me to concentrate on developing my initial dissertation proposal. The second fellowship was in the fall of 2008, which allowed me to devote greater time and energy to writing the manuscript. I also benefited from the amazing intellectual community of the Peace Studies Program, which brought together a wide range of scholars who greatly improved my understanding of various aspects of the dynamics of war and peace. Finally, I will be forever indebted to my wife, Sophia, who lived through this dissertation just as much as I did. She offered unending support and encouragement. I am thankful that I was fortunate enough to live through this experience with her, and I look to many future experiences to come. My children, Dahlia and Liam, importantly allowed me to keep my sanity by reminding me there is a world beyond the dissertation and for this I am most thankful. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Biographical Sketch ....................................................................................................... iii Dedication …………………………………………………………………………….iv Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................... v List of Figures .............................................................................................................. viii List of Tables ................................................................................................................. ix Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. The Causes of Combatant Abuse: A Conceptual and Theoretical Framework .................................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 3. Measuring and Identifying Trends in Combatant Abuse ............................ 62 Chapter 4. A Quantitative Analysis of the Causes of Combatant Abuse ..................... 86 Chapter 5. A Closer Look at the Nature of the Belligerents: Democratic Norms, Institutions, and Combatant Abuse ............................................................................. 145 Chapter 6. A Closer Look at the Nature of the Bloodshed: Territorial Annexation, Combatant Abuse, and the Katyn Massacre ............................................................... 228 Chapter 7. Conclusion ................................................................................................ 278 Appendix .................................................................................................................... 303 References .................................................................................................................. 305 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Continuum of brutality in combatant abuse .................................................. 26 Figure 2: Relative frequency of levels of combatant abuse, 1898-2003 ...................... 83 Figure 3: Relationship between democracy and combatant abuse ............................. 102 Figure 4: Relationship between war of attrition and combatant abuse ...................... 103 Figure 5: Relationship between expansive war aims and combatant abuse ............... 104 Figure 6: Relationship between territorial annexation and combatant abuse ............. 105 Figure 7: Relationship between cultural difference and combatant abuse ................. 106 Figure 8: Relationship between democracy and first violator .................................... 151 Figure 9: Relationship between democracy and retaliation ....................................... 153 Figure 10: Relationship between democracy and retaliation against high levels of combatant abuse ......................................................................................................... 155 Figure 11: Relationship between democracy and escalation ...................................... 158 Figure 12: Relationship between democracy and escalatory retaliation .................... 159 Figure 13: Number of German prisoners by quarter, 1943-1945 ............................... 184 Figure 14: Annual number of Japanese prisoners taken by the United States, 1942-