English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The purpose of this note is to present a surprising result regarding crisis initiation and termination. The decision problem treated here is distilled from an extension of the two-sided incomplete information version of the traditional deterrence game. We employ a two-stage analysis of the decision problem faced by the Challenger that formally links the onset of a crisis to the decision over whether to escalate the crisis should the Challenger face resistance from the Defender.  The two-part result is as follows.  A crisis is more likely to be initiated by a Challenger who will ultimately back down if Defender chooses to resist than by a Challenger of the same type who will choose to escalate if Defender chooses to resist. Contrariwise, a crisis is less likely to be initiated by a Challenger who will ultimately escalate if Defender chooses to resist than by a Challenger of the same type who will choose to back down if Defender chooses to resist.

A Surprising Result Encountered in Various Extensions of the Traditional Deterrence Game