Bargaining and Coercion Explanations of World War I

The war involved major countries of the world which are considered to be very powerful up to this day. The war was majorly between the allies and the central powers. Both groups were very powerful and are still powerful to this day. However, the allies came in in support of other smaller blocks which were in on way or another being looked down upon. The United States of America, for example did not want to take part in the war because it wanted to remain neutral. Bargaining Explanation of World War One The bargaining view of world war one or any war for that matter takes a very different form from others. World war I was as a result of an assassination hence an attempt to have a revenge.

This is the real cause of the war. What this means is that there were no economic gains that would come from the wat at any time. With this, world war I can be explained in that it was caused as a result of a political reason rather than an economic reason. This is because any failure from a country would mean that the whole population would have failed (Lecture notes 13). A country like Germany would not let this happen and this is why they were so much into the war spending millions of dollars to sustain the war. This was the same case especially for Austria-Hungary which had suffered the loss of their leader. For them, they wanted to ensure that revenge was well served hence they had to fight for their population at all costs.

This is an aspect of bargaining used in world war I by the players. This is not negotiable and it was the case with the world war I. States had to lose and the ones with more such as Germany in one way or the other lost more. They lost so much money over the period because they could afford it at first. This is the reason as to why at some point later, they were forced to pay a lot of money in terms of reparations for the damages they caused. This made it very difficult for them to rise again. As a result, they had no choice but to protect them in one way or another (Fromkin & David, 89). This was after they realized that things would not go right if they did not protect the smaller countries.

This was the same period when colonization was coming in. the war also involved this in one way or another and countries had to protect their interests and that of their populations. Offering security was necessary because they were honoring their duties as investors. Forceful persuasion advocates for application of a limited amount of force. This was however not the case with the world war I because the amount of force that was applied by both parties may be described as too much. It is mainly used to achieve a political objective and nothing more. Unlike the bargaining which may involve another issue, forceful persuasion advocates for an opponent to step down for another. The party that steps down is often the relatively weaker one to the other.

This is the main reason as to why world war I was a problem. Both parties were coercers and none of them was leading the forceful negotiations since they had all the resources and reasons to keep on fighting. Italy and France were at no point ready for any talks. The United States of America helped in the fight but they advocated for diplomacy, whether forceful or not. Germany on the other end was just ready to continue fighting until the allies gave up. This however only made things worse. Coercion, in this case, was that when Germany reached out and the US refused to accept their terms, the US only because stronger and were now willing to resist even more (Fromkin & David, 54).