Appeasement DA 2 - Michigan7 2013

Appeasement DA 2 Michigan7 2013

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: , in sum, held that undesirable behavior elicits dispositional explanations (that is, reputation will form) and desirable behavior elicits situational explanations (that is, reputation may not form). According to Mercer, allies who stand firm (a desirable move from a state's point of view) will not get a reputation for being resolute, whereas allies who do not stand firm (an undesirable move) may get a reputation for being irresolute. By the same token, adversaries who stand firm (an undesirable move) may get a reputation for being resolute, whereas adversaries who do not stand firm (a desirable move) will not get a reputation for being irresolute . In essence, while disagreeing with the typical rational deterrence theory argument that reputation will always form, Mercer believes that reputation is nonetheless likely to form under certain circumstances (when adversaries stand firm and when allies back down). More evidence – credibility’s not a thing – states have externals incentive to presume resolve Tang ‘5 Shiping Tang, associate research fellow and deputy director of the Center for Regional Security Stud...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 10/27/2013 for the course DEBATE 101 taught by Professor None during the Summer '12 term at University of California, Berkeley.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online