The merits of democracy as a system of government are obvious to democrats. Even if its shortcomings seem more obvious to non-democrats, objective and fair minded democrats would readily acknowledge them. But the relationship between democracy and interstate relations, especially on questions of war and peace, is more controversial even among democrats.

In academic circles, there are two broad intellectual traditions on the subject. The realist tradition argues that it is calculations of stark national interest that determine war and peace between states: systems of government are irrelevant. The liberal school on the other hand believes that systems of government do matter, and proponents of the liberal peace theory argue that liberal democracies do not go to war with each other. They cite empirical evidence in support of this claim, based on the study of international relations of liberal democracies in the past. There are eminent scholars in each camp.

Is there any merit in the claim that democracies do not go to war with each other? (Note the emphasis, because liberal democratic states do invade non-democratic states and tend to show strong distrust of powerful non-democratic countries.) Is there any basis for the claims of western leaders that making the world democratic would eliminate the scourge of war?

Stated baldly, without any qualifications, the claim that democracies do not go to war with each other is obviously simplistic. It is easy to see how democratically elected populist politicians in both India and Pakistan may exploit the mutually hostile sentiments of the two populations for political gain and in the process lead the two countries into war.

But does this really disprove the liberal peace theory?

Here the definition of democracy becomes pertinent. After fifty years of clan and military regimes Pakistan has suddenly become a democratic polity since last year's elections. Also, while India is a democracy, it is a weak one. Mere elections do not a democracy make. Both Pakistan and India have serious deficiencies in the rule of law, which some would regard as one of the necessary conditions before a country can be considered a democracy.