In many contexts, patrons wish to simultaneously increase a protégé’s military power while reducing the probability of war between that protégé and its enemy. Are these goals compatible? I show that the answer is yes when states face uncertainty over a class of military allotments. Arms transfers mitigate the information problem by making both strong and weak types behave more similarly. This encourages uninformed states to make safer demands, which decreases the probability of war. As a result, transfers to the informed actor both increase bargaining power and enhance efficiency under these conditions.
ArenaPPechenkinaAO (2016) External subsidies and lasting peace. Journal of Conflict Resolution60(7): 1278–1311.
3.
ArenaPWolfordS (2012) Arms, intelligence, and war. International Studies Quarterly56(2): 351–365.
4.
BanksJS (1990) Equilibrium behavior in crisis bargaining games. American Journal of Political Science34(3): 599–614.
5.
BensonBVMeirowitzARamsayKW (2014) Inducing deterrence through moral hazard in alliance contracts. Journal of Conflict Resolution58(2): 307–335.
6.
BensonBVMeirowitzARamsayKW (2016) Changing capabilities, uncertainty, and the risk of war in crisis bargaining. Research & Politics3(3): 2053168016657687.
7.
BritoDLIntriligatorMD (1985) Conflict, war, and redistribution. American Political Science Review79(4): 943–957.
8.
FearonJD (1995) Rationalist explanations for war. International Organization49(3): 379–414.
FeyM (2016) Private communication, 6 February 2016.
11.
FeyMRamsayKW (2011) Uncertainty and incentives in crisis bargaining: Game-free analysis of international conflict. American Journal of Political Science55(1): 149–169.
12.
GrauerRTierneyD (2017) The arsenal of insurrection: Explaining rising support for rebels. Security Studies27(2): 263–295.
13.
KinsellaD (1994) Conflict in context: Arms transfers and third world rivalries during the Cold War. American Journal of Political Science38(3): 557–581.
14.
KupermanAJ (2008) The moral hazard of humanitarian intervention: Lessons from the Balkans. International Studies Quarterly52(1): 49–80.
15.
KyddAH (2010) Rationalist approaches to conflict prevention and resolution. Annual Review of Political Science13: 101–121.
16.
LeedsBA (2003) Do alliances deter aggression? The influence of military alliances on the initiation of militarized interstate disputes. American Journal of Political Science47(3): 427–439.
17.
MeirowitzASartoriAE (2008) Strategic uncertainty as a cause of war. Quarterly Journal of Political Science3(4): 327–352.
18.
PowellR (1999) In the Shadow of Power: States and Strategies in International Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
19.
PowellR (2004) Bargaining and learning while fighting. American Journal of Political Science48(2): 344–361.
20.
ReedW (2003) Information, power, and war. American Political Science Review97(4): 633–641.
21.
SlantchevBL (2003) The principle of convergence in wartime negotiations. American Political Science Review97(4): 621–632.
22.
SpanielW (2018) Only here to help? Bargaining and the perverse incentives of international institutions. International Studies Quarterly62(1): 14–22.
23.
SpanielWBilsP (2018) Slow to learn: Bargaining, uncertainty, and the calculus of conquest. Journal of Conflict Resolution62(4): 774–796.
24.
SpanielWMaloneI (2019) The uncertainty trade-off: Reexamining opportunity costs and war. International Studies Quarterly63(4): 1025–1034.
25.
WalterBF (1999) Designing transitions from civil war: Demobilization, democratization, and commitments to peace. International Security24(1): 127–155.
26.
WaltzKN (1979) Theory of international politics. New York: McGraw Hill.
