Process / pipelineInternational RelationsObservational quantitative IRPipeline

Enduring Rivalry Analysis

Also known as: Interstate Rivalry Analysis, Rivalry Approach to Conflict, Strategic Rivalry Analysis, Enduring Rivalries

OriginatorPaul Diehl & Gary Goertz (and the rivalry research program)Year2000Sources1Related methods4

Enduring rivalry analysis studies the long-running, recurring antagonisms between particular pairs of states — India and Pakistan, the United States and the Soviet Union, Israel and its neighbors — as a distinct unit of analysis. Pioneered by Diehl and Goertz in War and Peace in International Rivalry (2000), it identifies rivalries from patterns of repeated militarized disputes, classifies their intensity, and analyzes their origins, dynamics, and termination. The approach argues that conflict is concentrated in a small number of rivalries and that understanding these histories explains much of interstate war.

Key highlights

  • Treats recurring conflict as a coherent relationship rather than disconnected events.
  • Concentrates explanatory attention on the few pairs responsible for most interstate war.
  • The punctuated-equilibrium model captures both the stability and the abrupt change of rivalries.
  • Connects naturally to duration analysis of rivalry persistence and termination.

Intuition

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

How it works

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

When to use it

Use enduring rivalry analysis when conflict between two states is recurrent and you want to treat the relationship, not the isolated dispute, as the unit of explanation — to study why rivalries form, persist, and end, and where war is concentrated. It complements MID and dyadic analysis by adding temporal structure. It is less suited to one-off confrontations, to pairs with no history of repeated conflict, or to questions where the dispute or dyad-year is genuinely the right unit and rivalry framing adds nothing.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Treats recurring conflict as a coherent relationship rather than disconnected events.
  • Concentrates explanatory attention on the few pairs responsible for most interstate war.
  • The punctuated-equilibrium model captures both the stability and the abrupt change of rivalries.
  • Connects naturally to duration analysis of rivalry persistence and termination.
Limitations
  • Identifying rivalries depends on dispute-count thresholds that are somewhat arbitrary.
  • Different operational definitions (dispute-density vs. strategic-rivalry) can yield different rivalry sets.
  • The approach is descriptive of patterns; causal mechanisms of rivalry formation remain debated.
  • Focusing on militarized disputes may miss rivalries expressed in non-militarized ways.

Common pitfalls

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

Applications

This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro

Frequently asked

What distinguishes an enduring rivalry from a one-off dispute?

Persistence and recurrence. An enduring rivalry is a pair of states locked into repeated militarized confrontations over an extended period, whereas isolated disputes are single or sporadic. Diehl and Goertz operationalize the distinction with thresholds on the number and temporal spacing of disputes, separating enduring rivalries from proto-rivalries and isolated conflicts. The point is that enduring rivalries are coherent relationships with their own histories.

What is the punctuated-equilibrium model of rivalry?

Borrowed from evolutionary biology, it holds that rivalries lock in quickly at a basic level of hostility, then persist with little change for long stretches, shifting abruptly only when major political shocks (such as world wars, regime changes, or decisive settlements) disturb the equilibrium. This contrasts with views of rivalry as gradually evolving, and it implies that rivalry termination usually follows shocks rather than slow drift.

How does rivalry analysis differ from dyadic conflict analysis?

Dyadic conflict analysis typically uses the dyad-year and models the probability of a dispute in each year. Rivalry analysis aggregates recurring disputes between the same pair into a single relationship and explains the rivalry's onset, dynamics, and end. They share data (MIDs, dyads) but differ in unit and temporal framing: rivalry analysis adds the recognition that disputes within a rivalry are connected episodes of one ongoing antagonism.

Sources

  1. 1.
    Diehl, P. F., & Goertz, G. (2000). War and Peace in International Rivalry. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

You have read it. What now?

Cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 22). Enduring Rivalry Analysis. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/international-relations/enduring-rivalry-analysis