A model of bargaining embedded within a random-walk model of warfare is developed. The conflict model contains aspects of both lottery-based and war-of-attrition models of conflict. Results show that future disputes are less likely to lead to armed conflict following long rather than short wars. Furthermore, should a subsequent dispute lead to armed conflict, the higher the cost and the longer the previous war, the shorter the conflict is likely to last.
Albert, James H., and Siddhartha Chib. 1993. Bayesian analysis of binary and polychotomous response data. Journal of the American Statistical Association88 (422): 669-679.
2.
Allison, Graham. 1999. Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston: Little, Brown.
3.
Aumann, Robert J.1976. Agreeing to disagree. The Annals of Statistics4:1236-1239.
4.
Bennett, D. Scott, and Allan C. Stam III. 1996. The duration of interstate wars, 1816-1985. American Political Science Review90:239-257.
5.
Bennett, D. Scott, and Allan C. Stam III. 2004. The behavioral origins of war. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
6.
Bernheim, Douglas. 1986. Axiomatic characterizations of rational choice in strategic environments. Scandinavian Journal of Economics88:473-488.
7.
Blainey, Geoffrey. 1973. The causes of war. New York: Free Press.
8.
Boge, W., and T. Eisele. 1979. On the solution of Bayesian games. International Journal of Game Theory8:193-215.
9.
Box-Steffensmeier, Janet, Dan Reiter, and Christopher J. W. Zorn. 2003. Non-proportional hazards and event history analysis in international relations. Journal of Conflict Resolution47:33-53.
10.
Brandenburger, A., and E. Dekel. 1993. Hierarchies of beliefs and common knowledge. Journal of Economic Theory59:189-198.
11.
Fearon, James D.1995. Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization49:379-414.
12.
Filson, Darren, and Suzanne Werner. 2002. A bargaining model of war and peace. American Journal of Political Science46:819-838.
13.
Filson, Darren, and Suzanne Werner. 2004. Bargaining and fighting: The impact of regime type on war onset, duration, and outcomes. American Journal of Political Science48 (2): 296-313.
14.
Fortna, Virginia Page. 1998. A peace that lasts: Agreements and the durability of peace. Ph.D. diss., Harvard University.
15.
Fortna, Virginia Page. 2004a. Peace time: Cease-fire agreements and the durability of peace. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
Fortna, Virginia Page. 2004b. Does peacekeeping keep peace? International intervention and the duration of peace after civil war. International Studies Quarterly48 (2): 269-292.
17.
Gartner, Scott S.1997. Strategic assessment in war. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
18.
Gartner, Scott Sigmund, and Gary Segura. 1998. War, casualties and public opinion. Journal of Conflict Resolution42:278-300.
19.
Goemans, H. E.2000. War and punishment: The causes of war termination and the First World War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
20.
Goertz, Gary, and Patrick M. Regan. 1997. Conflict management in enduring rivalries. International Interactions22 (4): 321-340.
21.
Gul, Faruk. 1998. A comment on Aumann’s Bayesian view. Econometrica66 (4): 923-928.
22.
Harsanyi, John C.1967-1968. Games with incomplete information played by Bayesian players. Management Science14:159-182, 320-334, 486-502.
23.
Harsanyi, John C.1995. Games with incomplete information. American Economic Review85 (3): 291-303.
24.
Holbrooke, Richard. 1998. To end a war. New York: Random House.
25.
Kier, Elizabeth. 1997. Imagining war. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
26.
Lewis, Jeffrey B., and Kenneth A. Schultz. 2003. Revealing preferences: Empirical estimation of a crisis bargaining game with incomplete information. Political Analysis11:345-367.
27.
Luvaas, Jay.1959. The military legacy of the Civil War. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press.
28.
Mertens, J. F., and S. Zamir. 1985. Formulation of Bayesian analysis for games with incomplete information. International Journal of Game Theory14:1-29.
29.
Morris, Stephen. 1995. The common prior assumption in economic theory. Economics and Philosophy11:227-253.
30.
Morrow, James D. 1997. Strategy, indeterminacy, and the politics of war. Paper presented at Opening the Black Box of War Conference, June, University of California, Davis.
31.
Nyarko, Y.1990. Bayesian rationality and learning without common priors. Working Paper 90-45, C. V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
32.
Nyarko, Y.1991. Most games violate the Harsanyi doctrine. Working Paper 91-39, C. V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
33.
Nyarko, Y.1997. Convergence in economic models with Bayesian hierarchies of beliefs. Journal of Economic Theory74 (2): 266-296.
34.
Poirier, Dale J.1995. Intermediate statistics and econometrics: A comparative approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35.
Posen, Barry. 1984. The sources of military doctrine: France, Britain and Germany between the World Wars. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
36.
Powell, Robert. 2004a. Bargaining and learning while fighting. American Journal of Political Science48(2): 344-361.
37.
Powell, Robert. 2004b. The inefficient use of power: Costly conflict with complete information. American Political Science Review98 (2): 231-241.
38.
Regan, Patrick, and Allan C. Stam. 2000. In the nick of time: Conflict management, mediation timing and the duration of interstate disputes. International Studies Quarterly44:239-260.
39.
Schultz, Kenneth. 2001. Democracy and coercive diplomacy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Singer, J. David, Stuart Bremer, and John Stuckey. 1972. Capability distribution, uncertainty, and war, 1820-1965. In Peace, war and numbers, edited by Bruce Russett.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
41.
Slantchev, Branislav. 2002. The power to hurt: Costly conflict with completely informed states. American Political Science Review47:1-11.
42.
Slantchev, Branislav. 2003. The principle of convergence in wartime negotiations. American Political Science Review47:621-632.
43.
Slantchev, Branislav. Forthcoming. How initiators end their wars. American Journal of Political Science48 (4).
44.
Smith, Alastair. 1997. The nature of warfare: Power, bargaining, super weapons, elections and the democratic peace. Paper presented at the Western Regional Meeting of the International Studies Association, October, Davis, CA.
Smith, Alastair, and Allan C. Stam. 2003. Mediation and peacekeeping in a random walk model of war. International Studies Perspectives5 (4): 115-136.
47.
Smith, Alastair, and Allan C. Stam. Forthcoming. When likely losers go to war. In New direction for international relations, edited by Alex Mintz and Bruce Russett.New York: Lexington Books.
48.
Snyder, Jack L.1984. The ideology of the offensive: Military decision making and the disasters of 1914. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
49.
Stam, Allan C.1996. Win, lose, or draw: Domestic politics and the crucible of war. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
50.
Summers, Harry G.1992. A critical analysis of the Gulf War. New York: Dell.
51.
Varian, Hal R.1989. Differences of opinion in financial markets. In Financial risk: Theory, evidence, and implications, edited by C. Stone.New York: Kluwer.
52.
von Clausewitz, Carl. 1976. On war. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, eds. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
53.
Wagner, R. Harrison. 2000. Bargaining and war. American Journal of Political Science44:469-484.
54.
Wawro, Geoffrey. 1997. The Austro-Prussian War: Austria’s war with Prussia and Italy in 1866. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
55.
Werner, Suzanne. 1998. Negotiating the terms of settlement: War aims and bargaining leverage. Journal of Conflict Resolution42:321-343.
56.
Werner, Suzanne. 1999. The precarious nature of peace: Resolving the issues, enforcing the settlement, and renegotiating the terms. American Journal of Political Science43 (3): 912-934.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
