Deterrence and Restraint: Do Joint Military Exercises Escalate Conflict?

2021 ◽  
pp. 002200272110231
Author(s):  
Raymond Kuo ◽  
Brian Dylan Blankenship

Multinational military exercises are among the most notable demonstrations of military cooperation and intent. On average, one is initiated every 8.9 days. But it has often been argued that joint military exercises (JMEs) increase the risk of war. Using a relational contracting approach, we claim that formal military alliances mediate the effect of JMEs. Exercises and alliances serve complementary functions: The former allows targeted responses to military provocations by adversaries, while the latter provides institutional constraints on partners and establishes a partnership’s overall strategic limitations. In combination, alliances dampen the conflict escalation effects of exercises, deterring adversaries while simultaneously restraining partners. We test this theory using a two-stage model on directed dyadic data of JMEs from 1973 through 2003. We find that JMEs in general do not escalate conflict, and that JMEs conducted with allies in particular reduce the probability of conflict escalation.

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saul Sternberg ◽  
Teresa Pantzer
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaroslava E. Poroshyna ◽  
Aleksander I. Lopato ◽  
Pavel S. Utkin

Abstract The paper contributes to the clarification of the mechanism of one-dimensional pulsating detonation wave propagation for the transition regime with two-scale pulsations. For this purpose, a novel numerical algorithm has been developed for the numerical investigation of the gaseous pulsating detonation wave using the two-stage model of kinetics of chemical reactions in the shock-attached frame. The influence of grid resolution, approximation order and the type of rear boundary conditions on the solution has been studied for four main regimes of detonation wave propagation for this model. Comparison of dynamics of pulsations with results of other authors has been carried out.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dalton J. Hance ◽  
Katie M. Moriarty ◽  
Bruce A. Hollen ◽  
Russell W. Perry

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.


2019 ◽  
Vol 675 ◽  
pp. 658-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Wang ◽  
Feiyue Mao ◽  
Bin Zou ◽  
Jianping Guo ◽  
Lixin Wu ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 407-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Azim F. Shariff ◽  
Jessica L. Tracy

We appreciate Barrett’s (2011, this issue) comments and her discussion of how our two-stage model is and is not consistent with Darwin’s views on the evolution of emotion expressions. Like many pioneering books, Darwin’s The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals represents a flurry of novel and revolutionary, yet often inconsistent, ideas, which lend themselves to different readings. However, while the historical perspective Barrett provides is useful, the scientific conversation on emotion expressions has evolved since Darwin. Here, we briefly discuss why the two alternative explanations Barrett offers for the origins of emotion expressions—expressions as cultural symbols and/or as evolutionary byproducts—are both untenable in light of existing research. We also note that although evidence for our two-stage model is currently incomplete, our goal was not to tell a complete story. Instead, we sought to offer the best emerging explanation for the existing research and provide a path for future empirical work that can test it.


2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (6) ◽  
pp. 1204-1220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ipek Guler ◽  
Christel Faes ◽  
Carmen Cadarso-Suárez ◽  
Laetitia Teixeira ◽  
Anabela Rodrigues ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document