Credibility, Resolve, and International Threats: An Experimental Analysis

• In Event: Beyond Realism: Power Politics across International Relations

Abstract

How do leaders communicate their resolve through their statements and threats during international crises? What types of statements are most credible in these situations? In answering these questions, this paper addresses several key debates across international security and foreign policy, including whether statements of resolve are “cheap talk” and which types of threats most effectively convey resolve under distinct conditions. I employ a conjoint design survey experiment to identify the influence of three factors on the efficacy of statements and threats in international security: (i) the specificity of a threat, (ii) the severity of a threat, and (iii) the justification for the threat. In doing so, this paper helps scholars and policymakers better understand how world leaders can most effectively convey their resolve and credibility of commitments during international negotiations and crises.

Author

• Danielle Lupton, Colgate University