Table of Contents: :: Library Catalog

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	FRANCOIS, MAILLOT
Format:	Recurso digital
Language:
Published:	Zenodo 2026
Subjects:	strategic inference, inferential escalation, intentional inflation, international relations, crisis escalation, Bayesian inference, misperception, security dilemma, preventive war, interpretive stability, narrative amplification inférence stratégique, escalade inférentielle, inflation intentionnelle, relations internationales, escalade de crise, inférence bayésienne, mésinterprétation, dilemme de sécurité, guerre préventive, stabilité interprétative, amplification narrative
Online Access:	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18941114
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Table of Contents:

Why do some international crises escalate into war while others remain stable despite similar levels of tension? This article proposes a formal explanation based on the stability of the interpretive environment in which strategic actors evaluate ambiguous signals. Building on previous work on intentional inflation and strategic inference under uncertainty, the paper introduces a dimensionless escalation index ($R$): <div> <div>$$R = \frac{\alpha L q}{1-q}$$</div> </div> Where: <ul> <li> $q$ represents prior hostility assumptions. </li> <li> $\alpha$ represents narrative amplification. </li> <li> $L$ represents the interpretive leverage assigned to observed signals. </li> </ul> The model identifies a critical threshold separating two regimes of strategic interpretation. When $R < 1$, ambiguity remains proportionally interpreted and the inferential environment remains stable. When $R > 1$, ambiguous signals are increasingly processed as evidence of concealed hostile intent, producing a self-reinforcing escalation dynamic. The framework bridges insights from misperception theory, signaling theory, and Bayesian inference. Its logic is illustrated through a comparative analysis of three major crises: <ol> <li> The July Crisis of 1914 ($R > 1$: systemic instability). </li> <li> The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 ($R < 1$: managed discipline). </li> <li> The Iraq War of 2003 ($R > 1$: narrative-driven escalation). </li> </ol> The central implication is that strategic stability depends not only on material capabilities, but also on inferential discipline—the ability to resist transforming uncertainty into premature certainty. This preprint is part of a broader research program on strategic inference under uncertainty and accompanies related theoretical, methodological, and replication materials.

Similar Items