Editing Regime change (section)

== Impact ==
Studies by Alexander Downes, [[Lindsey O'Rourke]] and Jonathan Monten indicate that foreign-imposed regime change seldom reduces the likelihood of civil war,<ref name=":0" /> violent removal of the newly imposed leader,<ref name=":0" /> and the probability of conflict between the intervening state and its adversaries,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Downes|first1=Alexander B.|last2=O'Rourke|first2=Lindsey A.|date=2016|title=You Can't Always Get What You Want: Why Foreign-Imposed Regime Change Seldom Improves Interstate Relations|url=https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/41/2/43-89/12142|journal=International Security|language=en|volume=41|issue=2|pages=43–89|doi=10.1162/ISEC_a_00256|s2cid=52994000|issn=0162-2889}}</ref><ref name=":0" /> as well as does not increase the likelihood of [[democratization]] (unless regime change comes with pro-democratic institutional changes in countries with favorable conditions for democracy).<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Downes|first1=Alexander B.|last2=Monten|first2=Jonathan|date=2013|title=Forced to Be Free? Why Foreign-Imposed Regime Change Rarely Leads to Democratization|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/24480621|journal=International Security|volume=37|issue=4|pages=90–131|doi=10.1162/ISEC_a_00117|jstor=24480621|s2cid=3640183|issn=0162-2889}}</ref> Downes argues,<ref name=":0" /><blockquote>The strategic impulse to forcibly oust antagonistic or non-compliant regimes overlooks two key facts. First, the act of overthrowing a foreign government sometimes causes its military to disintegrate, sending thousands of armed men into the countryside where they often wage an insurgency against the intervener. Second, externally-imposed leaders face a domestic audience in addition to an external one, and the two typically want different things. These divergent preferences place imposed leaders in a quandary: taking actions that please one invariably alienates the other. Regime change thus drives a wedge between external patrons and their domestic protégés or between protégés and their people. </blockquote>Research by Nigel Lo, Barry Hashimoto, and [[Dan Reiter]] has contrasting findings, as they find that interstate "peace following wars last longer when the war ends in foreign-imposed regime change."<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Lo|first1=Nigel|last2=Hashimoto|first2=Barry|last3=Reiter|first3=Dan|date=2008|title=Ensuring Peace: Foreign-Imposed Regime Change and Postwar Peace Duration, 1914–2001|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/abs/ensuring-peace-foreignimposed-regime-change-and-postwar-peace-duration-19142001/DC9CEE80C77B67351DCB867E77F3843F|journal=International Organization|language=en|volume=62|issue=4|pages=717–736|doi=10.1017/S0020818308080259|s2cid=154513807|issn=1531-5088}}</ref> However, research by Reiter and Goran Peic finds that foreign-imposed regime change can raise the probability of civil war.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Peic|first1=Goran|last2=Reiter|first2=Dan|date=2011|title=Foreign-Imposed Regime Change, State Power and Civil War Onset, 1920–2004|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/abs/foreignimposed-regime-change-state-power-and-civil-war-onset-19202004/1226DBF6E9E9DA97534FD3D91A1702F7|journal=British Journal of Political Science|language=en|volume=41|issue=3|pages=453–475|doi=10.1017/S0007123410000426|s2cid=154222973|issn=1469-2112}}</ref>