Affiliation:
1. University of Connecticut
Abstract
Why was the United States, despite its overwhelming superiority in power, unable to prevent North Korea from developing nuclear weapons? Why did North Korea persist in its nuclear pursuit in the face of U.S. opposition? In this article, we represent nuclear proliferation and counter-proliferation as situations of subjective strategic interaction between states. We measure preferences over strategies and outcomes using operational codes of the leaders of each country, derived via linguistic analysis. Our results indicate that neither the U.S. nor North Korea accurately understood the other side’s preference ordering, and that their operational codes interacted in such a way as to produce an outcome favorable to North Korea – the weaker party - and unfavorable to the U.S. – the stronger. The wider contribution is to show that (mis)perceptions of the goals and resolve of the opponent play a crucial role in the success or failure of strong states to compel weak states and vice versa.
Publisher
Uluslararasi Iliskiler Dergisi
Subject
Political Science and International Relations
Reference74 articles.
1. Aydın, Mustafa (2004). Turkish Foreign Policy: Framework and Analysis. Ankara, Center for Strategic
Research.
2. Alagöz, Emine A. (2019). “North Korea’s Nuclear Program through the Lens of Strategic Culture”,
Uluslararası İlişkiler, Vol. 16, No. 61, p. 111-126.
3. Bayar, Murat (2016). “The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and the Future of Iran’s Nuclear
Program”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, Vol. 13, No. 51, p. 81-97.
4. Brams, Steven J., and Donald Wittman (1981). “Nonmyopic Equilibria in 2×2 Games”, Conflict
Management and Peace Science, Vol. 6, No. 1, p. 39-62.
5. Brams, Steven J. (1985). Superpower Games: Applying Game Theory to Superpower Conflict. New
Haven, Yale University Press.