Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory: Assessing Rationalist Explanations of the Iraq War

  title={Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory: Assessing Rationalist Explanations of the Iraq War},
  author={David A. Lake},
  journal={International Security},
  • David A. Lake
  • Published 2010
  • Political Science
  • International Security
The Iraq War has received little sustained analysis from scholars of international relations. I assess the rationalist approach to waror, simply, bargaining theoryas one possible explanation of the conflict. Bargaining theory correctly directs attention to the inherently strategic nature of all wars. It also highlights problems of credible commitment and asymmetric information that lead conflicts of interest, ubiquitous in international relations, to turn violent. These strategic interactions… Expand
Bargaining Theory and Rationalist Explanations for the Iraq War
In “Two Cheers for Bargaining Theory: Assessing Rationalist Explanations for the Iraq War,” David Lake makes several important contributions to international relations scholarship.1 He providesExpand
The bargaining model has emerged as a progressive, analytic, and persuasive explanation of war; yet, it has some limitations and weaknesses that need improvement. In this study, the potentialExpand
War as an Internal Indivisibility Problem
War is commonly conceived of as the result of a bargaining process between states. However, war also has redistributive consequences within a state: certain groups face disproportionate costs (e.g.Expand
Negotiating Peace with Your Enemy: The Problem of Costly Concessions
Why do some parties fail to settle conflict, even after long periods of fighting? Bargaining theory explains this through imperfect information, commitment problems, war entrepreneurs, andExpand
War and diplomacy on the world stage: Crisis bargaining before third parties
I analyze a three-actor model of crisis bargaining with two key features. First, diplomatic opposition raises the costs of war, but an informed state can avoid it by conveying restraint to aExpand
The Behavioral Revolution and International Relations
What explains the strategically costly and ill-planned American invasion and occupation of Iraq? What accounts for Saddam Hussein’s failure to take actions that might have deflected it? TheseExpand
Cheater's Dilemma: Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Path to War
Between the 1991 Gulf War and the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, the Iraqi regime faced a cheater's dilemma: how much should it reveal of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capabilities when eachExpand
The Credibility Paradox: Violence as a Double-Edged Sword in International Politics?
Implicit in the rationalist literature on bargaining over the last half-century is the political utility of violence. Given our anarchical international system populated with egoistic actors,Expand
Information, Commitment, and the Russo‐Japanese War of 1904–1905
We apply a modified version of the bargaining model of war to the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905. We conceptualize the informational path to war as a two-step process, the firstExpand
War as a Redistributive Problem
War is commonly conceived of as the result of a bargaining process between states. However, war also has redistributive consequences within a state: certain groups face disproportionate costs (e.g.Expand


War as a Commitment Problem
  • R. Powell
  • Sociology, Economics
  • International Organization
  • 2006
Although formal work on war generally sees war as a kind of bargaining breakdown resulting from asymmetric information, bargaining indivisibilities, or commitment problems, most analyses have focusedExpand
Exploring the Bargaining Model of War
  • D. Reiter
  • Economics
  • Perspectives on Politics
  • 2003
The bargaining model of war envisions the initiation, prosecution, termination, and consequences of war as part of a single bargaining process. This article focuses on the most recent works on thisExpand
In the Shadow of Power: States and Strategies in International Politics
Robert Powell argues persuasively and elegantly for the usefulness of formal models in studying international conflict and for the necessity of greater dialogue between modeling and empiricalExpand
The Principle of Convergence in Wartime Negotiations
If war results from disagreement about relative strength, then it ends when opponents learn enough about each other. Learning occurs when information is revealed by strategically manipulableExpand
International Relations Theory and Internal Conflict: Insights from the Interstices
The presumption that international relations theory can help explain internal conflict is widely shared and accounts for the hubris of many who came late to the topic of domestic violence and civilExpand
Threat Inflation and the Failure of the Marketplace of Ideas: The Selling of the Iraq War
such as the United States are generally believed to be better at making foreign policy than other regime types. Especially, the strong civic institutions and robust marketplaces of ideas in matureExpand
The Road to Baghdad: Ideas and Intellectuals in Explanations of the Iraq War
Why did the Bush administration take the United States to war with Iraq in the aftermath of September 11, 2001? The constructivist approach used in this article to answer this question argues thatExpand
Integrating Theory and Policy: Global Implications of the War in Iraq
War is too important to be left to the generals or to the politicians. In a dynamic world increasing in complexity at a geometric rate, it is no longer prudent to assume that any one professionalExpand
Military Coercion in Interstate Crises
Military mobilization simultaneously sinks costs, because it must be paid for regardless of the outcome, and ties hands, because it increases the probability of winning should war occur. ExistingExpand
Anatomy of Failure: Bush’s Decision‐Making Process and the Iraq War
The Bush administration’s decision-making process leading to the invasion of Iraq in 2003 has been singled out for its many shortcomings: failure of intelligence; lack of debate concerning options;Expand