PRINCE ABUBAKAR AUDU UNIVERSITY, ANYIGBA

COURSE TITLE: THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

COURSE CODE: POS 308
DEPARTMENT: POLITICAL SCIENCE
FACULTY: SOCIAL SCIENCES

GROUP 13
QUESTION:
DISCUSS THE GAME THEORY AND ITS USEFULLNESS IN THE INTERNATIONAL
ARENA

S/N NAMES MATRIC. NO.

1. ABDULLAHI SULEMAN 22PS2001
2. ABUBAKAR UMAR 22PS2002
3. ABUH ABIGAIL UGBO-OJOIDE 22PS2003
4. AGADA REUBEN 22PS2004
5. AMUDA HAMZA JAMES 22PS2005
6. EMMANUEL GIDEON 22PS2006
7. ENEJI OHUNENE MARIAM 22PS2007
8. EZEKIEL VICTOR 22PS2008
9. GABRIEL MERCY PRECIOUS 22PS2009
10. ETUBI IDRIS MOMOH 22PS2011
11. MUHAMMAD ISAH 22PS2012
12. MUSA AMODU 22PS2013
13. OMAYE ODIBA EMMANUEL 22PS2014
14. YUNISA DAVID SAMUEL 22PS2015
15. SANI WILLIAMS 22PS2016
16. SHAIBU BALLAMIN MOMOH 22PS2018
17. ATTA AMINU TALATU 22PS2020
18. AMOBEDA OJONIKO PATIENCE 22PS2021

LECTURES: MR. AGIH MICAH & DR. AGABA M. D.

i
Introduction

The application of game theory to international politics is hardly new, but there has been a recent
increase in the popularity of the approach. This resurgence has been associated with new
applications of game models to international political economy in addition to their now standard
role in military-political strategic analysis. This is a timely antidote to the exclusive usage of
strategic analysis to refer to military affairs. What is fundamental to strategic analysis is not the
specific subject matter of military or economic issues, but a basic conception of how we
understand politics among states. This conception of nation-states as interdependent, goal-
seeking actors lies at the heart of strategic game analysis; it is applicable across different issue
areas.

At the heart of game theory lies the concept of interdependent, goal-seeking actors, which is
fundamentally applicable across different issue areas, making it a versatile and widely adopted
approach. This is particularly relevant in the context of international relations (IR), where nations
interact with one another, taking into account the potential reactions of other states to their
decisions. Game theory offers a framework for studying the strategic behavior of countries,
shedding light on the complexities of conflict resolution, cooperation, and negotiations in the
global arena.

In this context, game theory in IR comprises four main elements: players, strategies, payoffs, and
information. Players represent the decision-making entities involved, while strategies are the
possible choices or actions available to each player. Payoffs reflect the outcomes or utilities
resulting from the combination of strategies chosen by all players, influencing their decisions.
Information is vital in game theory, as it determines the knowledge each player possesses about
the game and the strategies of others.

This interdisciplinary tool has found numerous applications in international relations. From
analyzing deterrence and conflict to studying arms races and negotiation strategies, game theory
has provided valuable insights into decision-making processes between nations. Additionally, it
helps to understand the formation and stability of alliances, international trade negotiations, and
the functioning of international institutions. Crucially, game theory offers a disciplined and
formalized approach to understanding international interactions, providing common concepts and
assumptions to derive robust results.

1
This paper explores the historical process of game theory's integration into international
relations, highlighting its relevance as a paradigm for building theories and explaining the
diverse applications within the field. We will delve into the use of game theory in examining
deterrence, diplomacy, and cooperation, demonstrating its value in addressing complex global
challenges. Ultimately, by understanding the strategic dynamics of states, game theory
contributes to enhancing our comprehension of international relations and provides a
comprehensive framework for the analysis of strategic decision-making and cooperation among
nations.

Theory

A theory is a rational type of abstract thinking about a phenomenon, or the results of such
thinking. The process of contemplative and rational thinking is often associated with such
processes as observational study or research. Theories may be scientific, belong to a non-
scientific discipline, or no discipline at all. Depending on the context, a theory's assertions might,
for example, include generalized explanations of how nature works. The word has its roots
in ancient Greek, but in modern use it has taken on several related meanings.

In modern science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of
explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with the scientific method, and fulfilling
the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that scientific
tests should be able to provide empirical support for it, or empirical contradiction ("falsify") of it.
Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific
knowledge.

The Game Theory

Game theory is a branch of mathematics that studies strategic decision-making among multiple
actors, known as players, who are interdependent in their choices. It provides a framework for
analyzing situations where the outcome of one player's decision depends on the decisions of
others. Game theory has applications in various fields, including economics, political science,
biology, and computer science. It was formalized and extensively developed by mathematicians
John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern in their groundbreaking book "Theory of Games and
Economic Behavior" (1944).

2
In-game theory, a game consists of four main elements: players, strategies, payoffs, and
information.

1. Players: These are the individuals or entities involved in the game, each pursuing their
objectives. Players can be individuals, countries, companies, or any decision-making
agents.

2. Strategies: Strategies are the possible choices or actions available to each player. In a
game, players make decisions based on their strategies, trying to maximize their payoffs.

3. Payoffs: Payoffs represent the outcome or utility that each player receives based on the
combination of strategies chosen by all players. These payoffs can be represented as
numerical values or utility functions, reflecting the preferences of the players.

4. Information: Information is crucial in game theory, as it determines the knowledge each

player has about the game and the strategies chosen by others. Games can be classified
into categories based on the level of information available to players: complete
information (where all players know everything about the game), imperfect information
(where players have limited or uncertain knowledge), and asymmetric information
(where players have different information about the game).

Applications

1. Economics: Game theory is widely used in economics to analyze market behavior,

pricing strategies, and competition. It helps understand oligopoly markets, auctions, and
negotiation strategies.

2. Political Science: Game theory is used to analyze voting behavior, coalition formation,
and international relations. It provides insights into strategic decision-making by
governments and politicians.

3. Biology: Game theory is applied in evolutionary biology to study the behavior of species
in situations of conflict and cooperation. It explains phenomena like altruism and the
evolution of cooperative behavior.

4. Computer Science: Game theory is used in artificial intelligence and algorithm design to
develop optimal strategies for decision-making in competitive environments.

3
The relevance of the theory for international relations (IR) goes undisputed; it is a truism to
assert that states interact by trying to predict other states’ reactions to their decisions. Yet one has
to apply the theory to IR, because the tool of game theory cannot produce by itself insight about
IR.

Game-theory applications to IR take the form of models, that is, the simplification and stylization
of states’ interactions. The three levels of game theory are of help here. The levels are extensive,
strategic, and coalitional forms. In an extensive-form model, the analyst thinks in terms of states
presented as players, actions available to players, sequences of players’ actions, players’
information conditions and preferences, and, finally, outcomes of interactions. In a game at the
strategic level, there are nothing but players, players’ strategies and preferences over outcomes.
The coalitional form is the most abstract level analysis: coalitions of players and the values of
these coalitions. The majority of IR game models are pitched at the first two levels, as the last
level of analysis assumes that cooperation between players is binding. Yet if a state cooperates, it
must do so only because of self-interest; not because of a higher authority above states enforcing
cooperative agreements. At least, there is no supreme authority over sovereign and co-existing
states.

Historical Process of Game Theory in International Relations

The first examples of mathematical modeling examining conflict and cooperation emerged in
Europe in the first quarter of the 20th century. Game Theory evolved as a different field in
international politics and economics. With the book named Theory of Games and Economic
Behavior3 written by John von Neumann and Oscar Morgenstern, Game Theory became a real
research interest. The use of Game Theory in International Relations generally refers to the
Thomas Schelling and his book The Strategy of Conflict written in 1960. Chicken Game and
Prisoners Dilemma, which are still being used in today, starts with Schelling. Conflict and
Defense of Kenneth Boulding and Fights, Games and Debates of Anatol Rapoport enabled
formal analysis to be used in conflict issues through economic models. Another importance of
Game Theory is that Game Theory put decision-making groups in International Relations
analysis. Classical International Relations theories such as Realism accept actors as black box
and acts as a billiards ball. However, Game Theory emphasizes the importance of bureaucracies
and decision-making mechanisms in decision-making process. Main study about this issue is

4
Conceptual Models of Cuban Missile Crisis of Graham Allison in 1969. Allison (1969) states
three policy models in his article. These are Rational Policy Model, Organizational Policy Model
and Bureaucratic Politics Model. First model is the Rational Policy Model. According to
Rational Policy Model, states are the unitary actor and government represents state and chooses
best option for their rational interest as a result of their rational calculation. Second,
Organizational Process that talks about the process that is not only taken by government. Foreign
Policy choices are made by intrastate organizations such as Religious Affairs Administration or
Armed Forces. These are predetermined behaviors and not always have to be rational. Last
model is the Bureaucratic Politics Model. In this model, all leaders in Decision Making process
serve for different types of bureaucratic elites and represent their interest. Foreign Policy choices
are not made for national interest but for bureaucratic interests.

Using Game Theory to Build Theory in International Relations

According to Robert (1999), the major advantage of game models comes through disciplined
stylizations of international interactions. The discipline comes out of precisely defined concepts
of players, strategies, actions, preferences, and deductions formally derived from basic
assumptions and concepts. The term of strategy, for example, does not take different meanings
along derivations of results. All game theorists around the world would agree upon the meaning
of central game-theory concepts and would derive the same results, for example, conditions for
equilibrium existence. For example, if there is a model of Iran-Israel nuclear conflict in extensive
form, then the same solution can be found provided that it exists. As a result, game theory
becomes a paradigm through the existence of commonly agreed upon concepts and assumptions.

Starting in the 1950s, political scientists found game theory quite useful in their analyses. The
1960s, for example, were prolific years in the field of coalitional bargaining, voting, and
coalition formation. Economists discovered how powerful the tool of game theory is much later
in 1980s especially through a program called Nash equilibrium refinement. Nevertheless, while
game theory became a major staple in economic analyses, there has been no parallel move in the
field of international relations. To illustrate, no student who ignores Nash equilibrium can pass a
microeconomics course yet no such condition exists for an IR student, say in a course on IR
theory. The source of the difference is the tolerance for and the use of mathematics in economics.

5
The IR discipline is divided into many islands of theoretical approaches ranging from realism to
liberalism, constructivism, and critical IR works. A majority of IR students would think that
game theory is of use only if one frames an international interaction in realist terms like power,
motives for expansion, and maximization of self-interest. Well, this is completely wrong.
Preferences of players, the driving force of game models, are assessed through players’ ideas,
wishes, and desires. To illustrate, game-theoretic models do not require that all states are cast as
selfish egoists; on the contrary, states can be presented as altruistic players. Moreover, repeated
games contain rigorous reflections of variables such as inter-subjectivity, shared knowledge,
practices, and norms which are of interest for constructivists. Indeed, as long as there is room for
ideas and beliefs in theories of preference formation, dynamic game models can dwell into areas
where social constructions are argued to play a major role.

Game theory has become an essential tool in the study of international relations, providing
insights into strategic decision-making, conflict resolution, and cooperation among states. It
offers a framework for analyzing how countries interact with each other, negotiate, and pursue
their interests in the global arena. By understanding the strategic behavior of states, game theory
contributes to building theories in international relations.

The application of game theory in international relations can be seen in various aspects:

1. Deterrence and Conflict: Game theory has been used to study deterrence strategies and
the dynamics of conflicts between states. For example, the Prisoner's Dilemma can be
applied to situations where countries face a choice between cooperating and achieving
mutual benefits or pursuing their own interests at the risk of conflict. The Nash
equilibrium, a central concept in game theory, helps identify stable outcomes in conflicts
where both parties have reasons not to escalate further.

2. Arms Races: Game theory has been employed to analyze arms races and the strategic
decision-making of countries regarding military build-ups. The concept of a security
dilemma, where one country's defensive measures may be perceived as offensive by
others, is a common scenario studied using game theory models.

3. Negotiations and Diplomacy: International negotiations involve complex interactions,

where states seek to maximize their gains while considering the actions of other parties.

6
 Game theory models, such as the Stag Hunt or Chicken games, help to understand the
strategies of cooperation and defection during diplomatic engagements.

4. Alliances and Coalitions: Game theory is used to analyze the formation and stability of
alliances and coalitions among countries. The concept of a collective action problem
helps explain why countries may fail to cooperate effectively even when it is in their
collective interest to do so.

5. International Trade and Cooperation: Game theory models have been employed to study
international trade negotiations and cooperation, particularly in scenarios such as the
Prisoner's Dilemma. Such models help understand the challenges of achieving mutually
beneficial outcomes in trade agreements.

6. Nuclear Deterrence: The concept of mutual assured destruction in nuclear deterrence is

an application of game theory. It helps in understanding the strategic reasoning of
nuclear-armed states and the potential outcomes of a nuclear conflict.

7. International Institutions: Game theory is also used to study the effectiveness of

international institutions in solving collective action problems. It helps in understanding
why some agreements and treaties are more successful than others in achieving
cooperation and compliance among states.

Conclusion

The application of game theory in international relations has proven to be a valuable and
versatile approach, offering insights into the complexities of strategic decision-making, conflict
resolution, and cooperation among nations. By conceptualizing states as interdependent, goal-
seeking actors, game theory provides a disciplined and formalized framework for understanding
interactions in the global arena. The historical process of integrating game theory into
international relations has been marked by significant contributions from scholars like Thomas
Schelling, Graham Allison, and others who recognized its potential in analyzing conflicts,
negotiations, and decision-making mechanisms. Over time, game theory has evolved as an
essential tool in various fields, including economics, political science, biology, and computer
science.

7
The use of game theory in IR encompasses multiple elements, including deterrence and conflict
analysis, arms races, negotiations, alliances, international trade, nuclear deterrence, and the
functioning of international institutions. These applications have shed light on the strategic
dynamics between countries, allowing policymakers and analysts to better comprehend and
address complex global challenges.

While some may still perceive game theory as limited to realist perspectives, it is crucial to
recognize that the framework accommodates diverse preferences, ideas, and beliefs, making it
applicable to various theoretical approaches in international relations. Whether studying self-
interested behaviors or cooperative norms, game theory offers valuable insights into the
dynamics of international interaction

8
 REFERENCE

Allison, G. T. (1969), Conceptual Models of Cuban Missile Crisis. American Political Science
Review, 63(3), 689-718.
Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. Basic Books.
Barry O’Neill, Honor, Symbols, and War (Ann Arbor, the University of Michigan Press, 2001),
pp. 253-261.
Boulding, K. (1962). Conflict and Defense. Harper and Row.
Fearon, J. D. (1995). Rationalist explanations for war. International organization, 49(3), 379-414.
Martin J. Osborne, An Introduction to Game Theory (Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 27.
Morrow, J. D. (1994). Game theory for political scientists. Princeton University Press.
Rapoport, A. (1965). Fights, Games and Debates. University of Michigan Press.
Robert Powell (1999). In the Shadow of Power: States and Strategies in International Politics.
Princeton University Press, 23-39.
Sartori, A., & Falisse, J. B. (2015). Game theory and international relations: Confrontation or
cooperation?. European Political Science, 14(3), 289-307.
Schelling, T. C. (1960). The Strategy of Conflict. Harvard University Press.
Von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.
Princeton University Press.