Gartzke ’07 [Erick; 2007; Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies (cPASS) at the University of California, San Diego; The Capitalist Peace; “Economic Development,” p. 172] SPark
While development decreases incentives for territo-rial aggrandizement, it greatly enhances the technological ability of states to project power. Nations with ships and aircraft can engage in distant disputes inconceivable for poor countries. Development may also lead to increased willingness to pursue policy conflicts. If development is clustered and neighbors no longer covet territory, capabil-ities can be devoted to pursuing the nation's secondary or tertiary interests. Distributed production networks and greater economic, social, or political integration natu-rally also create incentives to seek to influence the for-eign policies of other countries, sometimes through force. In contrast to the blanket assertion of classical politi-cal economists, I expect that development actually leads countries to be more likely to engage in conflicts far from home.35 Iraq invaded and occupied Kuwait in August 1990, intent on securing its "nineteenth province" and wresting Kuwaiti oil wealth from local leaders. The United States and its Coalition allies also invaded Kuwait, not to conquer and keep, but to return the Emirate to its previous lead-ers. While Coalition objectives were couched in moralistic rhetoric, the United States was clearly concerned about who governed Kuwait, while preferring not to govern the country itself. Similarly,European colonial powers have repeatedly intervened in Africa, Asia, and elsewhere to prop up or dethrone regimes, impose settlements, or oth-erwise meddle in the affairs of developing countries.
