Skip to main content
Log in

Between Appeasement and Belligerent Moralism: The Evolution of Moral Conduct in International Politics

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

What are the conditions for ``moral'' conduct in internationalpolitics to be viable? This question is explored by modelingregional conflicts as a two-stage game in which imitation of othercountries' strategies and public opinion formation processes areassumed to have an impact on a country's strategic choice. Theresults derived by using the notion of an evolutionary stablestrategy point to some very special conditions for moral conduct toemerge and survive, a fact that may explain the historical findingthat there have been rather rare periods during which peaceableness did indeedprevail in international politics, at least at a regional level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernholz, P. (1985). The international game of power. Berlin: Mouton Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernholz, P. (1995). Efficiency, political-economic organization and competition between states. In G. Radnitzky and H. Bouillon (Eds.), Values and social order, Vol. 2, 157-198. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S. (1985). Superpower games: Applying game theory to superpower conflict. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bueno de Mesquita, B. and Lalman, D. (1992). War and reason: Domestic and international imperatives. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeNardo, J. (1995). The amateur strategist: Intuitive deterrence theories and the politics of the nuclear arms race. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaddis, J. (1992/93). International relations theory and the end of the Cold War. International Security 17: 5-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauthier, D. (1985). Morals by agreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshleifer, J. (1999). There are many evolutionary pathways to cooperation. Journal of Bioeconomics 1: 73-93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith, J. (1982). Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClennen, E. (1989). Rationality and dynamic choice: Foundational explorations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niou, E., Ordeshook, P. and Rose, G. (1989). The balance of power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T.C. (1960). The strategy of conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1987). On ethics and economics. New York: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snidal, D. (1985). The game theory of international politics. Journal of World Politics 38: 25-57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt, U. (1992). Evolutionary concepts in economics. Eastern Economic Journal 18: 405-419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfson, M., Farell, J., Gill, A. and Shabahang, H. (1992). Essays on the Cold War. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Witt, U. Between Appeasement and Belligerent Moralism: The Evolution of Moral Conduct in International Politics. Public Choice 106, 365–388 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005154920068

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005154920068

Keywords

Navigation