UCLA

In this dissertation, I ask: when and why do leaders invoke histories of international rivalry and collective memory centering national suffering inflicted by foreign adversaries to emphasize foreign threats and disrupt bilateral relations? A large literature in international relations has debated the veracity of diversionary war theory wherein leaders attempt to distract from acute domestic crises by inciting conflict abroad. In so doing, they exploit the psychology of out-group threat to unite the public in opposition to a foreign adversary, sparking a patriotic “rally-round-the-flag” effect which provides a much needed boost in support for government. Yet, an extensive body of research in psychology on prejudice and racism demonstrates strong out-group aversion also when threats are much less overt, involving conflict over values, beliefs, or abstract feelings of power and control. With a substantive focus on East Asia, my dissertation therefore extends inquiry on diversionary behavior beyond the narrow purview of outright conflict, examining a number of historical disputes which rile strong domestic reactions but fall far short of escalation into militarized confrontation. Concisely stated, I argue that, in these disputes, vulnerable leaders instrumentally leverage historical memory centering collective national suffering at the hands of an international rival to amplify perceptions of external threat and distract from internal problems. Due to their deep symbolic importance in national narratives of collective trauma and foreign antagonism, these historical disputes draw widespread domestic attention and generate strong nationalistic sentiment, even while remaining non-militarized. I offer support for this argument through an analysis the relations between South Korea and Japan where historical grievances remain highly salient in the public domain but enter state-to-state dialogues inconsistently. Specifically, I examine periods of high and low domestic political insecurity, tracking where and how leaders draw attention to historical disputes, raising the salience of external threats and long-standing legacies of conflict to stir strong anti-foreign, nationalist sentiment and disrupt bilateral relations.