Skip to comments.Crimea Through a Game-Theory Lens
Posted on 03/19/2014 6:55:44 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
A Russian occupation of Crimea raises the specter of the Cold War, in which the nuclear stalemate between the United States and the Soviet Union devolved into regional disputes around the world.
While military and political frictions made the biggest headlines, the Cold War couldnt be well understood without using economic theory specifically, game theory, which analyzes the strategic logic of threats, credibility and conflict.
Its worth viewing the crisis in Ukraine through the prism of game theory, too, as applied on several fronts:
CREDIBILITY AND CONSEQUENCES How much credibility will the United States lose if it doesnt respond forcefully to Russian action? This, too, is a problem of game theory.
A commitment by a sovereign state is credible only when that states self-interest dictates honoring it. Previous American pledges to help or protect Ukraine were not all that credible to begin with, given the greater power and historical influence of Russia in the region. Failing to protect Crimea therefore doesnt automatically lead to a big shift in the worlds perception of American willingness to honor commitments where the nations loyalties and interests are more certain. Daryl G. Press, a professor of government at Dartmouth, articulates a general version of that argument in his book Calculating Credibility.
Still, there may be a net loss of credibility, perhaps a serious one, when the world is uncertain where American self-interest lies. For instance, how dedicated is the United States to protecting various disputed small Asian islands from Chinese domination or conquest? How much does America care about the de facto independence of Taiwan these days, or about limiting Chinas influence in the South China Sea? The answers may not be obvious, especially in a diverse democracy like ours.
But for strategists in China and elsewhere....
(Excerpt) Read more at mobile.nytimes.com ...
Stopped reading right there.
And besides, we don't like neo nazis. No we don't.
Crimea is very far from the United States. Putin’s greatest crime is that he committed a nationalist act.This is contrary to the vision and goals of one world globalists like Obama and Kerry. Obama and Kerry are not American nationalists. They have apologized to Muslims and others for what they perceive to be America’s transgressions. They are astonished that other peoples still feel passionately about their cultures and countries. They also confuse their whining pouting rhetoric as leadership.Sadly as the United States enters its “progressive, multicultural” period, it is a weaker power and has far less influence than it once had. It cannot effect world events at will, nor does it have the influence to forge a consensus.
To Globalists, there's no bigger sin.
Might as well have stopped at NYT
Does anyone remember Cyprus? that has a northern portion occupied by turkey with a puppet goverment. That has been going since 1974 and the US and British have ZERO credibility on that front.
Colin Powel botched that one ala john kerry.
Who’s “we?” Are you speaking for Americans, or Russians today?
What would we do if Cuba threatened to take over Guantanamo Bay?
FYI, Tyler Cowen is a professor of Economics at George Mason who leans right/libertarian, so your knee-jerk reaction was unnecessary.
All of these “analysts” need to stop with the “U.S. credibility” crap and begin stating the fact that it is Odumbass “credibility” (or lack thereof) that is encouraging the encroachment by bad actors all over the world.
Enough about Vladi Putin, what do you really think?
Or, as Fred Thompson said in Hunt for Red October:
‘The Russians don’t take a dump without a plan son.’
Public schools have done their job.
So say the Russians . . . .
We don’t have to worry about this affecting America’s credibility. Thanks to Obama, I am certain that American credibility will not change from the current level (zero) for three more years.