INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter fiice, while others may be from any type o f computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 DAVID VERSUS GOLIATH: THE INFLUENCE OF CULTURAL JUDGMENTS ON STRATEGIC PREFERENCE DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Michael P. Fischerkeller ***** The Ohio State University 1997 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Richard Herrmann, Adviser Professor Margaret Hermann Adviser Professor Donald Sylvan Political Science Graduate Program Professor Marilynn Brewer UMI Number: 9731620 UMI Microform 9731620 Copyright 1997, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 ABSTRACT This research is an inquiry into the phenomenon of weaker states attacking stronger powers. Power-determinist and other traditional approaches to the study of war initiation have difficulty accounting for this puzzling behavior because of their singular focus on capability distribution as the explanatory variable. In an attempt to explain this phenomena an additional variable is considered, the perceived cultural sophistication of the adversary, that exerts its influence through the mechanism of a state’s net assessment process. It is contended that in the assessment process appraisals of objective capability combine with evaluations of an adversary’s cultural sophistication in a systematic manner, with the latter either confirming or discounting the objective appraisal of the adversary’s capability. Specifically, when objective capability appraisals are combined with judgments of equal cultural sophistication, the objective measures of the adversary’s strength are confirmed as accurate. Alternatively, when objective appraisals are combined with judgements of inferior cultural sophistication, the objective capability of the adversary is discounted. It is this latter combination that encourages a power-maximizing weaker power to adopt an aggressive, imperialist strategy against what appears, by objective measures, to be a much stronger state. 11 Dedicated to my mother and father III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As each member of my dissertation committee contributed to this product in important ways, each should be acknowledged. First and foremost, I thank Dr. Richard Herrmann who has treated me as a colleague from the day he sat as the outside representative on my undergraduate honors thesis. His frank criticism, intellectual discipline, and faith in my own motivation to complete this and other projects has always been appreciated. I thank Dr. Donald Sylvan for whom the challenges and intricacies of research design seem to be second nature. Dr. Margaret Hermann always provided an alternative viewpoint that pushed me beyond the constraints inherent in my own. Lastly, I thank Dr. Marilynn Brewer. Given that much of my theory is drawn from social psychological insights, having the quintessential social psychologist on my committee was quite a bonus. Her assistance in both designing my experiments and interpreting the results could not have been matched by any other. Numerous others also contributed in important ways to the completion of this thesis. I thank my friend Rossen who tirelessly translated Bulgarian documents for my investigation of the First Balkan War. I thank Dr. Stephen Cohen at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, for both allowing me to present this theory to the Arms Control, Disarmament, and International Security Group and to review iv notes from his many trips to Pakistan. I thank Lt. Genl. Kamal Matinuddin, Maj. Genl. Salim Ummah, and Genl. Aslam Beg for graciously allowing me time to interview them during my trip to Pakistan. I owe a debt of gratitude to the Mershon Center for the Study of Public and International Affairs for partially funding that research trip. I also thank my graduate school colleagues. While it may be human nature to believe that I alone am responsible for most of the ideas offered in this project, I am certain that I have been positively influenced in many ways by discussions and conversations with those I see every day in the department. Finally, the one gentleman to whom I am the most grateful is Dr. Richard Cottam. Dr. Cottam opened the door of the discipline to me and then guided me through it. While his academic qualities and achievements are very impressive, I believe they pale in comparison to his human qualities and achievements. I can only hope to contribute to both the discipline and my students’ lives as he has done throughout his career. VITA March 7, 1961 ............................................................... Bom - Pittsburgh, PA 1 9 9 1.................................................................................. B.A., B. Phil., University of Pittsburgh 1991 - 1997 ..................................................................... Graduate Teaching and Research Assistant, The Ohio State University PUBLICATIONS 1. Richard Herrmann and Michael Fischerkeller, "Beyond the Enemy Image and Spiral Model: Cognitive-Strategic Research After the Cold War," International Organization, 49, 3 (Summer 1995). 2. Richard Herrmann and Michael Fischerkeller, "Counterfactual Reasoning in Motivational Analysis: U.S. Policy Toward Iran," in Phillip E. Tetlock and Aaron Belkin, eds., Counterfactual Thought Experiments in World Politics: Logical. Methodological, and Psychological Perspectives. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996). FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Political Science VI TABLE OF CONTENTS Pâge A bstract ...................................................................................................... ii Dedication ...................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ........................................................................................ iv Vita ................................................................................................................. vi List of Figures .............................................................................................. xi Chapters: 1. David versus Goliath: Cultural Judgments and Strategic Preference 1 Existing Approaches .................................................................. 4 Realism ............................................................................. 5 Domestic Factors ............................................................ 6 Risk Propensity ............................................................... 8 S um m ary.......................................................................... 10 Cultural Judgments in Net Assessment .................................... 12 Research Design and Method .................................................... 17 Case Selection Criteria ................................................. 18 Measurement .................................................................. 21 Format of the Dissertation ......................................................... 26 2. Capability, Culture, and International Relations Theory .............. 27 Net Assessment Theory ............................................................ 30 Net Assessment in Practice ....................................................... 35 Pre-World War I ............................................................ 36 Pre-World War I I ............................................................. 38 Capability, Culture, and Strategic Preference .............. 46 Culture in International R elations .............................................. 48 Discussion .......................................................................... 53 Vll Cultural Judgments and Net Assessment ................................. 55 Puzzles A ddressed ....................................................................... 62 Asymmetric Conflicts .................................................... 62 Culture as a Source of Conflict .................................... 63 Conclusion .................................................................................