"Does Counterterrorism Militarize Foreign Aid? Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa," 2017  (co-authored with Tobias Heinrich and Carla Martinez Machain), Journal of Peace Research. 
Abstract: This article studies whether the pursuit of counterterrorism militarizes foreign aid flows. It focuses on the case of US foreign aid to sub-Saharan African states, which recently have experienced an increase in the presence of al-Qaeda or its affiliate terrorist organizations. This article argues that as terrorist groups carry out attacks inside a state’s territory, aid towards that state will serve such counterterrorism goals. For one, the state’s executive branch will receive increased military aid to immediately fight al-Qaeda or affiliates. For the other, the United States also steps up aid for civil society and development, which could over time undermine al-Qaeda’s mobilization and recruitment efforts. In an empirical analysis that covers 46 African states from 1996 to 2011, our results largely corroborate the hypothesized patterns for attacks that occur on a country territory and in the neighborhood. We note, though, that the overall composition of aid shifts relative to the military when there are direct attacks, something that does not occur when attacks happen in the neighborhood only. Our article concludes that concerns about militarization of aid are warranted, but that actual manifestations are nuanced.
"Great Power and Foreign Policy," 2017 (co-authored with Carla Martinez Machain and Rebecca Kaye), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.

Working Papers

"Trust building while peacekeeping: The role of peacekeepers as unbiased monitors," (co-authored with Sam Whitt and Rick K. Wilson), submitted for review

Abstract: Do perceptions of bias among third-party peacekeepers affect levels of trust between groups in conflict? We argue that unbiased peacekeepers are most effective at promoting trust. We first demonstrate this through survey data on ethnocentric attitudes across Bosnian Serbs and Muslims in the presence of Russian versus NATO peacekeepers in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We find strong correlations between the types of peacekeepers and responses by belligerents.  To further isolate the effect of bias on trust, we use an iterated trust game in a laboratory setting. Taken together, the findings suggest that biased peacekeepers impede trust while unbiased peacekeepers promote greater cooperation post-conflict.

"Understanding American Public Opinion Toward Use of Force: Motivations, Forms, and Mandates," (co-authored with Songying Fang), submitted for review

Abstract: Under what conditions will the American public support U.S. military interventions in foreign humanitarian crises? We argue that the public assesses three key dimensions of an intervention: the motivation for an intervention, the form that an intervention can take, and the tasks that an intervention may be mandated to fulfill. Through a survey experiment, we find, consistent with existing literature, that U.S. security interests are unique in boosting support for unilateral intervention and engaging directly in combat. However, looking across different motivations, we find that the strategies, or the design of an intervention, matter much more for public support. Regardless of the motivation, the American public is generally more supportive of intervening in a crisis through multilateral means than unilaterally and prefers interventions that pursue strategies that primarily focus on the protection of civilians and peaceful conflict resolution.

© 2023 by Name of Site. Proudly created with

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Google+ Social Icon