Tipping Points: Challenges in Analyzing International Crisis Escalation
Abstract
Why do some near crises tip over into full-blown crisis and others do not? This paper considers existing scholarship and identifies four key barriers to using quantitative analysis for tipping-point analyses: strategic indeterminacy; the incentives for conflict parties to avoid inefficiencies; the paucity of cases; and the availability of quality data. Due to these challenges, many do not perform well as immediate causes for crisis escalation. We also argue and demonstrate through two quantitative models of crisis escalation that some variables, particularly related to domestic politics, can do well in explaining why some disputes tip into crisis and others do not. As we illustrate with reference to the 1995–1996 Third Taiwan Straits Crisis, qualitative approaches that analyze the processes by which leaders and foreign policy institutions make decisions add needed explanatory power to purely quantitative models of the potential for near crises to tip into crisis.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Pub Defense Publication
- Publication Date
- Jul 21, 2022
- Source ID
- 10.1093/isr/viac024
Entities
People
- Anne Van Wijk
- Chong Chen
- Edward Gonzalez
- Jordan Roberts
- Kyle Beardsley
- Nakissa Jahanbani
- Norrin M Ripsman
- Patrick James
- Scott Silverstone
- Shikshya Adhikari
- Steven E Lobell
- Victor Asal
Organizations
- Coastal Carolina University
- Duke University
- Lehigh University
- Office of Naval Research
- State University of New York at Albany
- Tsinghua University
- United States Department of Defense
- University of Southern California
- University of Utah