Journal of Conflict Resolution

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by de Mesquita, E. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 49, No. 2, 237-258 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0022002704272193
© 2005 SAGE Publications

The Terrorist Endgame

A Model with Moral Hazard and Learning

Ethan Bueno de Mesquita

Department of Political Science, Washington University

The author models the relationship between a government and former terrorists as a game with both moral hazard and learning. The government is uncertain about both the former terrorists’ ability and skill at providing counterterrorism aid. The government has the option—after observing the success or failure of counterterrorism—of replacing the former terrorist leadership with a new negotiating partner. This study demonstrates that the threat of replacement, in addition to promised concessions, provides incentives for former terrorists to exert counterterrorism effort, particularly when the potential replacements are of moderate ability. Furthermore, the author identifies conditions under which governments are likely to replace the former-terrorist leadership with which it has been negotiating. The model also has implications for the effect of counterterrorism successes on future concessions and the impact of the government’s ability to consider replacing the former terrorists on concessions and counterterrorism.

Key Words: terrorism • counterterrorism • moral hazard • learning • concessions • negotiation


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
D. Jacobson and E. H. Kaplan
Suicide Bombings and Targeted Killings in (Counter-) Terror Games
Journal of Conflict Resolution, October 1, 2007; 51(5): 772 - 792.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
B. P. Rosendorff and T. Sandler
The Political Economy of Transnational Terrorism
Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2005; 49(2): 171 - 182.
[PDF]


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
K. Siqueira
Political and Militant Wings within Dissident Movements and Organizations
Journal of Conflict Resolution, April 1, 2005; 49(2): 218 - 236.
[Abstract] [PDF]