 |
Is War Rational? The Extent of Miscalculation and Misperception as Causes of War
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
Dan Lindley and Ryan Schildkraut
1
“Is War Rational?
The Extent of Miscalculation and Misperception
as Causes of War”
Paper prepared for the Panel: Signaling, Reputation and War
SB21 Saturday 10:30 AM - 12:15 PM, David P. Auerswald, Chair
International Studies Association 2006, San Diego
****************
“By every rational standard, North Korea should still be deterred. In practice, however, few wars are the
result of rational calculations, managed crises, and highly intellectual escalation ladders.” (Cordesman,
2002)
“War seems to many to be an irrational act of passion....Yet for all the emotion of the battlefield, the
premeditation of war is a rational process consisting of careful and deliberate calculations.” (Bueno de
Mesquita, 1981, 19)
Who is right?
ABSTRACT
Is war a rational, well-calculated pursuit of states, or is war more often caused by miscalculation
and misperception? Assumptions about the extent of rationality underlie policy debates on subjects ranging from deterrence to missile defense. The rationality assumption also divides theorists and theories on the causes of war into two camps. For example, many realists and expected utility theorists fall into the rationalist camp, while political psychologists and students of bureaucratic politics fall into the miscalculation and misperception camp. Despite this schism, few studies empirically test the overall extent of rationality in decisions for war. Using our “Is War Rational?” database, we find that prior to 1900, war initiators won over seventy percent of the time. Since 1945, only about one-third of initiators win. Assuming that states initiate wars planning to win, the utility of war has declined dramatically, and miscalculation and misperception have come to dominate decisions for war. Deterrence is getting harder. The utility of rationalist approaches to the causes of war is decreasing. Causes of miscalculation and misperception deserve more study.
Introduction1
1
1
Contact information: Dan Lindley, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, 448
Decio Hall, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556. Phone: 574-631-3226; Fax: 574-631-8209; Email:
## email not listed ##
; Webpage:
http://www.nd.edu/~dlindley/
; Ryan Schildkraut, student,
University of Minnesota Law School, Walter F. Mondale Hall, 229 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55455, 612-702-4907,
## email not listed ##
. Contact Dan Lindley for correspondence regarding this article.
Comments welcome. All data and technical appendix available on request or via the dlindley webpage above. Key methodological points are summarized in the text, but for the purpose of journal review, the technical appendix is included. The appendix is not necessary for understanding the article.
Our thanks to David Campbell, Emma Cohen de Lara, Katherine Jeter, Lauren Kimaid, Garrick
Merlo, Adam Shanko, Mariana Sousa, James Thompson, Stephen Van Evera, Paul Vasquez, Jennifer Wiemer as well as to numerous panel discussants and other commenters at conferences. The University of Notre Dame Laboratory for Social Research and the Office of Faculty Research also supported this project.
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dan Lindley and Ryan Schildkraut
“Is War Rational?
The Extent of Miscalculation and Misperception
as Causes of War”
Paper prepared for the Panel: Signaling, Reputation and War
SB21 Saturday 10:30 AM - 12:15 PM, David P. Auerswald, Chair
International Studies Association 2006, San Diego
****************
“By every rational standard, North Korea should still be deterred. In practice, however, few wars are the
result of rational calculations, managed crises, and highly intellectual escalation ladders.” (Cordesman,
2002)
“War seems to many to be an irrational act of passion....Yet for all the emotion of the battlefield, the
premeditation of war is a rational process consisting of careful and deliberate calculations.” (Bueno de
Mesquita, 1981, 19)
Who is right?
ABSTRACT
Is war a rational, well-calculated pursuit of states, or is war more often caused by miscalculation
and misperception? Assumptions about the extent of rationality underlie policy debates on subjects ranging
from deterrence to missile defense. The rationality assumption also divides theorists and theories on the
causes of war into two camps. For example, many realists and expected utility theorists fall into the
rationalist camp, while political psychologists and students of bureaucratic politics fall into the
miscalculation and misperception camp. Despite this schism, few studies empirically test the overall extent
of rationality in decisions for war. Using our “Is War Rational?” database, we find that prior to 1900, war
initiators won over seventy percent of the time. Since 1945, only about one-third of initiators win.
Assuming that states initiate wars planning to win, the utility of war has declined dramatically, and
miscalculation and misperception have come to dominate decisions for war. Deterrence is getting harder.
The utility of rationalist approaches to the causes of war is decreasing. Causes of miscalculation and
misperception deserve more study.
Introduction1
1
1
Contact information: Dan Lindley, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, 448
Decio Hall, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556. Phone: 574-631-3226; Fax: 574-631-
8209; Email:
; Ryan Schildkraut, student,
University of Minnesota Law School, Walter F. Mondale Hall, 229 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN
55455, 612-702-4907,
. Contact Dan Lindley for correspondence regarding this article.
Comments welcome. All data and technical appendix available on request or via the dlindley
webpage above. Key methodological points are summarized in the text, but for the purpose of
journal review, the technical appendix is included. The appendix is not necessary for understanding
the article.
Our thanks to David Campbell, Emma Cohen de Lara, Katherine Jeter, Lauren Kimaid, Garrick
Merlo, Adam Shanko, Mariana Sousa, James Thompson, Stephen Van Evera, Paul Vasquez, Jennifer
Wiemer as well as to numerous panel discussants and other commenters at conferences. The University of
Notre Dame Laboratory for Social Research and the Office of Faculty Research also supported this
project.
|
|
 Convention | | Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 49 
