Content deleted Content added
Swatjester (talk | contribs) my understanding is that this is a more accurate disambiguation. |
conflict escalation |
||
Line 31:
*Evolution of asymmetric rivals' attitudes towards time.<ref>{{cite book |last= Resnick|first=Uri |date=2013 |title=Dynamics of Asymmetric Territorial Conflict: the evolution of patience |url= http://www.palgrave.com/uk/book/9781137303981|location=Basingstoke, UK |publisher= Palgrave-Macmillan|page=287 |isbn=978-1-137-30398-1}}</ref>
Asymmetric conflicts include interstate and [[civil war]]s, and over the past two hundred years, have generally been won by strong actors. Since 1950, however, weak actors have won the majority of asymmetric conflicts.<ref>{{cite web|last=Arreguín-Toft|first=Ivan|title=How the weak win wars: A theory of asymmetric conflict|url=https://web.stanford.edu/class/polisci211z/2.2/Arreguin-Toft%20IS%202001.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140823020311/http://web.stanford.edu/class/polisci211z/2.2/Arreguin-Toft%20IS%202001.pdf |archive-date=2014-08-23 |url-status=live|access-date=2012-09-17}}</ref> In asymmetric conflicts [[conflict escalation]] can be rational for one side.<ref>[https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2005.00375.x Jean-Pierre P. Langlois, Catherine C. Langlois, Fully Informed and on the Road to Ruin: The Perfect Failure of Asymmetric Deterrence, International Studies Quarterly, Volume 49, Issue 3, September 2005, Pages 503–527, ]</ref>
==Strategic basis==
| |||