POLI 354 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Confirmation Bias
13 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
POLI 360 Wed, Jan 31, 2018
1
Lecture 8: Rationalist Explanations for War
Rational Choice Models of Conflict
• Assumes that decision-makers "accurately perceive external threats and opportunities"
(levy, p.76)
• Holds that they "select policies on a cost-benefit calculus in order to advance the national
interest"
The Rationalist Puzzle
• Fearon: "Even rational leaders who consider the risks and costs of war may end up
fighting nonetheless" - why?
• Rational choice - derived from the field of economics
• States have incentives to reach negotiated settlements or other outcomes to avoid the
potentially enormous costs of war
• Fearon: War is a net loss for everyone
o Worst possible argument in most cases
o Usually gain more from negotiated settlements
• Why do states fail to locate an alternative outcome to war?
• According to Fearon, there is no such thing as a deadlock "wherein no agreements exist
that both sides would prefer to a war" (p.382)
Mechanism 1: private information and incentives to misrepresent
• "Leaders know things about their military capabilities and willingness to fight that other
states do not know"
• In bargaining situations, they can have incentives to misrepresent such private
information in order to gain a better deal
• As opposed to explanations based on poor or incomplete information, this explanation is
based on asymmetric information and incentives to dissemble (i.e., lie)
Mechanism 2: Commitment problems
• Mutually preferable bargains are unattainable b/c one or more states would have an
incentive to renege on the terms
• States cannot commit to a compromise because the potential payoff of war is greater for
one side than would be the payoff of acquiescing to a compromise
• A declining state thus attacks "not because it fears being attacked in the future but
because it fears the peace it will have to accept after its rival grows stronger" (Fearon,
p.406)
Russo-Japanese War, 1904-5
• Russia believed its military could almost certainly defeat Japan
