Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T09:17:27.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Cost of Empty Threats: A Penny, Not a Pound

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2011

JACK SNYDER  and
ERICA D. BORGHARD
JACK SNYDER*
Affiliation:
Columbia University
ERICA D. BORGHARD*
Affiliation:
Columbia University
*
Jack Snyder is Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Relations, Political Science Department, Columbia University, 420 W. 118 Street, New York, NY 10027 (jls6@columbia.edu).
Erica D. Borghard is a Ph.D. candidate, Political Science Department, Columbia University, 420 W. 118 Street, New York, NY 10027 (edb2002@columbia.edu).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A large literature in political science takes for granted that democratic leaders would pay substantial domestic political costs for failing to carry out the public threats they make in international crises, and consequently that making threats substantially enhances their leverage in crisis bargaining. And yet proponents of this audience costs theory have presented very little evidence that this causal mechanism actually operates in real—as opposed to simulated—crises. We look for such evidence in post-1945 crises and find hardly any. Audience cost mechanisms are rare because (1) leaders see unambiguously committing threats as imprudent, (2) domestic audiences care more about policy substance than about consistency between the leader's words and deeds, (3) domestic audiences care about their country's reputation for resolve and national honor independent of whether the leader has issued an explicit threat, and (4) authoritarian targets of democratic threats do not perceive audience costs dynamics in the same way that audience costs theorists do. We found domestic audience costs as secondary mechanisms in a few cases where the public already had hawkish preferences before any threats were made.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 105 , Issue 3 , August 2011 , pp. 437 - 456
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barabas, Jason, and Jerit, Jennifer. 2010. “Are Survey Experiments Externally Valid?” American Political Science Review 104 (2): 226–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beloff, Lord. 1989. “The Crisis and Its Consequences for the British Conservative Party.” In Suez 1956: The Crisis and its Consequences, eds. Roger Louis, W. M. and Roger Owen, Oxford: Clarendon, 319–34.Google Scholar
Brecher, Michael, and Wilkenfeld, Jonathan. 2000. A Study of Crisis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Carlton, David. 1988. Britain and the Suez Crisis. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Chang, Gordon H. 1988. “To the Nuclear Brink: Eisenhower, Dulles, and the Quemoy–Matsu Crisis.” International Security 12: 96–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, Thomas J. 2006. “Windows and War: Trend Analysis and Beijing's Use of Force.” In New Directions in the Study of China's Foreign Policy, eds. Ross, Robert and Johnston, Alastair I.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 50–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clare, Joe. 2007. “Domestic Audiences and Strategic Interests.” Journal of Politics 69: 732–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coles, Michael H. 2006. “Suez, 1956: A Successful Naval Operation Compromised by Inept Political Leadership.” Naval War College Review 59: 100–18.Google Scholar
Downes, Alexander B., and Sechser, Todd S.. 2010. “The Illusion of Democratic Credibility.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Epstein, Leon D. 1960. “Partisan Foreign Policy: Britain in the Suez Crisis.” World Politics 12: 201–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, Leon D. 1964. British Politics in the Suez Crisis. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Eyerman, Joe, and Hart, Robert A. Jr. 1996. “An Empirical Test of the Audience Cost Proposition.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 40: 597–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1994. “Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes.” American Political Science Review 88: 577–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, James D. 1997. “Signaling Foreign Policy Interests: Tying Hands versus Sinking Costs.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 41: 68–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedman, Lawrence. 2000. Kennedy's Wars. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fry, Geoffrey K. 2005. The Politics of Decline. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fursenko, Aleksandr, and Naftali, Timothy. 1997. “One Hell of a Gamble”: Khrushchev, Castro, and Kennedy, 1958–1964. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Fursenko, Aleksandr, and Naftali, Timothy. 2006. Khrushchev's Cold War. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Gaddis, John Lewis. 1982. Strategies of Containment. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gallup, George H., ed. 1976a. The Gallup International Public Opinion Polls: Great Britain 1937–1975, Vol. I. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Gallup, George H., ed. 1976b. The Gallup International Public Opinion Polls, France 1939, 1944–1975, New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Gelpi, Christopher F., and Griesdorf, Michael. 2001. “Winners or Losers? Democracies in International Crisis, 1918–1994.” American Political Science Review 95: 633–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelpi, Christopher, and Grieco, Joseph. 2000. “Democracy, Crisis Escalation, and the Survival of Political Leaders 1918–1992.” Duke University. Typescript.Google Scholar
George, Alexander L., and Smoke, Richard. 1974. Deterrence in American Foreign Policy. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
George, Alice L. 2003. Awaiting Armageddon: How Americans Faced the Cuban Missile Crisis. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Ghosn, Faten, Palmer, Glenn, and Bremer, Stuart. 2004. “The MID3 Data Set, 1993–2001: Procedures, Coding Rules, and Description.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 21: 133–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guisinger, Alexandra, and Smith, Alastair. 2002. “Honest Threats: The Interaction of Reputation and Political Institutions in International Crises.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 46: 175–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guruswamy, Mohan, and Singh, Zorawar Daulet. 2009. India China Relations: The Border Issue and Beyond. New Delhi, India: Viva Books.Google Scholar
Heikal, Mohammed. 1986. Cutting the Lion's Tail: Suez through Egyptian Eyes. London: Andre Deutsch.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Steven A. 1990. India and the China Crisis. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 1979. “Deterrence Theory Revisited.” World Politics 31: 289–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, Robert. 2002. “Signaling and Perception: Drawing Inferences and Projecting Images.” In Political Psychology, ed. Monroe, Kristen R.. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 293–312.Google Scholar
Jian, Chen. 2006. “The Tibetan Rebellion of 1959 and China's Changing Relations with India and the Soviet Union.” Journal of Cold War Studies 8: 54–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunz, Diane B. 1991. The Economic Diplomacy of the Suez Crisis. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Lebow, Richard Ned. 1981. Between Peace and War: The Nature of International Crisis. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levendusky, Matthew S., and Horowitz, Michael C.. 2009. “The (Non-) Partisan Logic of Audience Costs.” University of Pennsylvania. Typescript.Google Scholar
Lipson, Charles. 2003. Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Neville. 1970. India's China War. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
May, Ernest R., and Zelikow, Philip D., eds. 1997. The Kennedy Tapes: Inside the White House during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.Google Scholar
Neustadt, Richard E. 1970. Alliance Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Partell, Peter J., and Palmer, Glenn. 1999. “Audience Costs and Interstate Crises: An Empirical Assessment of Fearon's Model of Dispute Outcomes.” International Studies Quarterly 43: 389–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, Jonathan. 2003. Sir Anthony Eden and the Suez Crisis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, Victor. 1992. Anthony Eden. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Sanderson, G. N. 1965. England, Europe, and the Upper Nile. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Sartori, Anne E. 2005. Deterrence by Diplomacy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Saunders, Harold H. 1985. “The Crisis Begins” and “Diplomacy and Pressure, November 1979–May 1980.” In American Hostages in Iran, ed. Christopher, Warren; editorial director, Kreisberg, Paul H.. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 35–143.Google Scholar
Schelling, Thomas C. 1960. The Strategy of Conflict. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schelling, Thomas C. 1966. Arms and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Schultz, Kenneth A. 1999. “Do Democratic Institutions Constrain or Inform? Contrasting Two Institutional Perspectives on Democracy and War,” International Organization 53: 233–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, Kenneth A. 2001a. Democracy and Coercive Diplomacy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, Kenneth A. 2001b. “Looking for Audience Costs.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 45: 32–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sick, Gary. 1985. “Military Options and Constraints.” In American Hostages in Iran, ed. Christopher, Warren; editorial director, Kreisberg, Paul H.. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 144–72.Google Scholar
Sick, Gary. 1991. October Surprise. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Smith, Alastair. 1998. “International Crises and Domestic Politics.” American Political Science Review 92: 623–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slantchev, Branislav L. 2006. “Politicians, the Media, and Domestic Audience Costs.” International Studies Quarterly 50: 445–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, Glenn H., and Diesing, Paul. 1977. Conflict among Nations: Bargaining, Decision Making, and System Structure in International Crises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Stern, Sheldon M. 2003. Averting “The Final Failure”: John F. Kennedy and the Secret Cuban Missile Crisis Meetings. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taubman, William. 2003. Khrushchev: The Man and His Era. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Taylor, Jay. 2009. The Generalissimo: Chiang Kai-shek and the Struggle for Modern China. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.Google Scholar
Thorpe, D. R. 2003. Eden. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
Tomz, Michael. 2007. “Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach,” International Organization 61: 821–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaisse, Maurice. 1989. “Post-Suez France.” Suez 1956, The Crisis and its Consequences, eds. Roger Louis, W. M. and Owen, Roger. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 335–40.Google Scholar
Vertzberger, Yaacov Y. I. 1984. Misperceptions in Foreign Policymaking. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Walt, Stephen M. 1999. “Rigor or Rigor Mortis? Rational Choice and Security Studies.” International Security 23: 5–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeks, Jessica L. 2008. “Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve.” International Organization. 62: 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisbrod, Robert. 2001. Maximum Danger: Kennedy, the Missiles, and the Crisis of American Confidence. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee.Google Scholar
Weiss, Jessica Chen. 2006. “Rethinking Audience Costs: Anti-foreign Protests as Costly Signals.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Snyder Supplementary Appendix

Snyder Supplementary Appendix

Download Snyder Supplementary Appendix(PDF)
PDF 409.2 KB