Risk-Taking in International Relations Sample Clauses

Risk-Taking in International Relations. Each day leaders make decisions that shape the policies of their state. Foreign policy decisions are especially important because, compared to most issues of domestic policy, their consequences are faster to manifest, often more grave, and potentially irreversible (Wildavsky 1969, 451). Few domestic policies irretrievably commit future generations to the extent that decisions to engage in war do. Leaders must consider the risks associated with each available option when making foreign policy decisions. Consider, for instance, the case of the Cuban Missile Crisis. President Xxxx X. Xxxxxxx was approached with the following policy alternatives for dealing with the placement of missiles in Cuba: do nothing, use diplomatic pressure to resolve the crisis, approach Cuban leader Xxxxx Xxxxxx with a deal, invade Cuba, use surgical strikes to destroy the missiles, or blockade the island (Xxxxxxx 1969). In comparison, some of these strategies were riskier than others. The anticipated outcomes, the likelihood of each outcome, and the potential for unforeseen outcomes to occur had to be taken into consideration before Xxxxxxx could choose a strategy. For the purpose of this dissertation, the term risk refers to the relative variance in outcomes associated with each alternative strategy available to a leader during an international crisis. Risk-taking involves a decision maker choosing a high-variance strategy relative to other alternatives (XxXxxxxxx [1998] 2004). The decision to choose a high variance option over a low variance option can be demonstrated by a simple example. For instance, imagine the scenario where a decision maker is given the choice between a certain win of $100 or a 50/50 xxxxxx for $200 or nothing. Although the utility of each choice is the same (that is, $100), the risk-acceptant actor would choose the xxxxxx, while the risk-averse actor would choose the certain win.