Previous chapters treated war as a game-ending decision. In practice, negotiations may continue even if the first round of bargaining fails. This chapter covers three different versions of the problem. First, we see that states can learn directly from who wins or loses on the battlefield. Second, states can implicitly learn based on the differential costs of war two types pay. Finally, against multiple bargaining opponents, accepting small proposals can signal weakness for future negotiations. Rather than always lead to more war, it is possible that this instead causes the first proposers to be more generous. Overall, we see that these models are substantially more difficult to work with because of the manipulation of beliefs throughout the rounds of negotiations.
Review the options below to login to check your access.
Log in with your Cambridge Higher Education account to check access.
If you believe you should have access to this content, please contact your institutional librarian or consult our FAQ page for further information about accessing our content.