Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Nuclear Brinkmanship with Two-Sided Incomplete Information

  • Robert Powell (a1)
Abstract

A brinkmanship crisis with two-sided incomplete information is modeled as a game of sequential bargaining in which each state is uncertain of its adversary's resolve. The sequential crisis equilibria are characterized explicitly and used to analyze the influences of resolve, misperception, and the status quo on escalation and crisis stability. The description of brinkmanship as a contest of resolve is found to be misleading: the state with the greatest resolve may not prevail in the crisis; a state may be less, not more, likely to prevail the greater its resolve; and a states' expected payoff may be less, not more, the greater its resolve. Moreover, reducing misperception may destabilize a crisis. Surprisingly, increasing the stake a potential challenger has in the status quo may not make a challenge less likely. Finally, crises involving severe conflicts of interest are shown to be less likely than crises not entailing a severe conflict of interest.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Brams, Steven J. 1985. Superpower Games. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ellsberg, Daniel. 1959. The Theory and Practice of Blackmail. In Bargaining: Formal Theories of Negotiations, ed. Young, Oran. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Fudenberg, Drew, and Tirole, Jean. 1983. Sequential Bargaining with Incomplete Information. Review of Economic Studies 50:221–47.
Jervis, Robert. 1972. Bargaining and Bargaining Tactics. In Coercion, ed. Pennock, James Roland and Chapman, John W.. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Jervis, Robert. 1978. Cooperation under the Security Dilemma. World Politics 30:167214.
Jervis, Robert. 1979a. Deterrence Theory Revisited. World Politics 31:289324.
Jervis, Robert. 1979b. Why Nuclear Superiority Doesn't Matter. Political Science Quarterly 94: 617–33.
Jervis, Robert. 1984. The Illogic of American Nuclear Strategy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Jervis, Robert. 1986. The Nuclear Revolution and the Common Defense. Political Science Quarterly 101:689703.
Kaplan, Morton A. 1962. Limited Retaliation As a Bargaining Process. In Limited Strategic War, ed. Knorr, Klaus and Read, Thorton. New York: Praeger.
Kreps, David M., and Wilson, Robert. 1982. Sequential Equilibria. Econometrica 50:862–87.
Powell, Robert. 1985. The Theoretical Foundations of Strategic Nuclear Deterrence. Political Science Quarterly 100:7596.
Powell, Robert. 1987. Crisis Bargaining, Escalation, and MAD. American Political Science Review 81:717–35.
Schelling, Thomas C. 1960. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Schelling, Thomas C. 1962. Nuclear Strategy in Europe. World Politics 14:421–32.
Schelling, Thomas C. 1966. Arms and Influence. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Snyder, Glenn H. 1971. “Prisoners Dilemma” and “Chicken” Models in International Politics. International Studies Quarterly 15:66103.
Snyder, Glenn H. 1972. Crisis Bargaining. In International Crises, ed. Hermann, Charles. New York: Free Press.
Snyder, Glenn H., and Diesing, Paul. 1977. Conflict among Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wagner, R. Harrison. 1982. Deterrence and Bargaining. Journal of Conflict Resolution 26:329–58.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed