IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v42y1998i2p131-155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The End of the Cold War

Author

Listed:
  • Bruce Bueno de Mesquita

    (Hoover Institution, Stanford University)

Abstract

Gaddis claimed that international relations theory failed to predict the Gulf War, the Soviet Union's collapse, and the cold war's end. Subsequently, he acknowledged that the expected utility model captures the logic behind complex adaptive systems such as the cold war international system. That model correctly predicted two of the events to which Gaddis pointed. Here, that model is used to simulate alternative scenarios to determine whether the cold war's end could have been predicted based only on information available in 1948. The simulations show a 68% to 78% probability that the United States would win the cold war peacefully given the conditions in 1948 and plausible shifts in the attentiveness of each state to security concerns over time. The analysis demonstrates a rigorous method for testing counterfactual histories and shows that the pro-American end to the cold war was an emergent property of the initial post-World War II conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, 1998. "The End of the Cold War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(2), pages 131-155, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:42:y:1998:i:2:p:131-155
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002798042002001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002798042002001
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002798042002001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Russett, Bruce, 1985. "The mysterious case of vanishing hegemony; or, Is Mark Twain really dead?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 207-231, April.
    2. Ray, James Lee & Russett, Bruce, 1996. "The Future as Arbiter of Theoretical Controversies: Predictions, Explanations and the End of the Cold War," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(4), pages 441-470, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Detlef F. Sprinz & Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & Steffen Kallbekken & Frans Stokman & Håkon Sælen & Robert Thomson, 2016. "Predicting Paris: Multi-Method Approaches to Forecast the Outcomes of Global Climate Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 172-187.
    2. Gary Goertz & Paul F. Diehl, 1992. "Toward a Theory of International Norms," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(4), pages 634-664, December.
    3. Zürn, Michael, 1987. "Gerechte internationale Regime: Bedingungen und Restriktionen der Entstehung nicht-hegemonialer internationaler Regime untersucht am Beispiel der Weltkommunikationsordnung," EconStor Books, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, volume 5, number 112658, July.
    4. John Kunkel, 1998. "Realism and Postwar US Trade Policy," Asia Pacific Economic Papers 285, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    5. Luis Alfonso Dau & Elizabeth M Moore & William Newburry, 2020. "The grass is always greener: The impact of home and host country CSR reputation signaling on cross-country investments," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(2), pages 154-182, June.
    6. Gleditsch Kristian Skrede, 2017. "Ornithology and Varieties of Conflict: A Personal Retrospective on Conflict Forecasting," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(4), pages 1-4, December.
    7. Marjolein Achterkamp, 2002. "Challenge Versus Exchange in Collective Decision Making: A Comparison of Two Simulation Models Based on Simulated Data," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 171-196, October.
    8. Margit Bussmann & John R. Oneal, 2007. "Do Hegemons Distribute Private Goods?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(1), pages 88-111, February.
    9. Charles F. Doran, 1989. "Systemic Disequilibrium, Foreign Policy Role, and the Power Cycle," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(3), pages 371-401, September.
    10. Steven C. Poe & Nicolas Rost & Sabine C. Carey, 2006. "Assessing Risk and Opportunity in Conflict Studies," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(4), pages 484-507, August.
    11. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, 2011. "A New Model for Predicting Policy Choices," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(1), pages 65-87, February.
    12. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, 2004. "Decision-Making Models, Rigor and New Puzzles," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 125-138, March.
    13. Michael M. Bechtel & Dirk Leuffen, 2010. "Forecasting European Union politics: Real-time forecasts in political time series analysis," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(2), pages 309-327, June.
    14. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, 2003. "Ruminations on Challenges to Prediction with Rational Choice Models," Rationality and Society, , vol. 15(1), pages 136-147, February.
    15. Ellen Lust-Okar & A.F.K. Organski, 2002. "Coalitions and Conflict: the Case of the Palestinian-Israeli Negotiations Over the West Bank," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 19(2), pages 23-58, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:42:y:1998:i:2:p:131-155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.