In Tuchman’s book, The Guns of August, she highlights Bismarck’s fateful prediction that “Some damned foolish thing in the Balkans” would be the requisite spark igniting the powder keg of tension between the major powers in Europe and Russia—a spark ultimately leading to an explosion we refer to today as “World War I.” This prescient forecast manifested itself as Gavrilo Princip’s trigger-pull on June 28, 1914, and the successful assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand fulfilled the requirement for ignition; however, it was only one event of many that led to the outbreak of hostilities. Allison and Zelikow highlight a deceptively simple analysis by Hans Morganthau, “The First World War had its origins ‘exclusively in the fear of a disturbance
…show more content…
Regardless of whether a decision has been proven intelligent, insightful, or erroneous, we must understand that persons and organizations make decisions they believe will support an overarching interest. What complicates this situation is that decision makers are often forced to make decisions with incomplete or flawed information. With this assumption in mind, Kahneman illustrates the concept of rationality in persons extremely well by stating, “Rationality is logical coherence—reasonable or not.” Combining this limited information set with natural aberrations of judgment leads to what Allison and Zelikow define as “bounded rationality.” The core lesson to glean from examining the strategic factor of “bounded rationality” with respect to the outbreak of WWI is the actors all had perceptions of the world around them; based upon this information, they made decisions they believed served their interests in the best possible way. Regardless of whether those interests were self-serving, state-serving, altruistic, or otherwise, the actors’ decisions were based in reality—or at least their perception of …show more content…
An island nation, England had unique struggles to overcome to deploy their six divisions to the continental mainland. First, an effective force would have to utilize the navy for transport and then require assistance from either France or Belgium for follow on staging. More importantly, due to Belgian neutrality, King Albert of Belgium was unwilling to permit any combat force to land in advance of open hostility to preserve the integrity of the country’s neutral status. Finally, a severe organizational blunder, the majority of the war plans were generated without conferring with the parliamentary body in England, which led to significant problems in execution. English diplomats, constrained by bounded reality, were concerned with domestic safety and the fear of committing to a war that may not necessitate English inclusion. Ultimately, the organizational culture of England made it difficult to follow through with the policies they were attempting to implement with respect to mobilization. As one minor example, when the call to mobilize actually came, the order read, “mobilize” as opposed to “mobilize and
Regardless of whether a decision has been proven intelligent, insightful, or erroneous, we must understand that persons and organizations make decisions they believe will support an overarching interest. What complicates this situation is that decision makers are often forced to make decisions with incomplete or flawed information. With this assumption in mind, Kahneman illustrates the concept of rationality in persons extremely well by stating, “Rationality is logical coherence—reasonable or not.” Combining this limited information set with natural aberrations of judgment leads to what Allison and Zelikow define as “bounded rationality.” The core lesson to glean from examining the strategic factor of “bounded rationality” with respect to the outbreak of WWI is the actors all had perceptions of the world around them; based upon this information, they made decisions they believed served their interests in the best possible way. Regardless of whether those interests were self-serving, state-serving, altruistic, or otherwise, the actors’ decisions were based in reality—or at least their perception of …show more content…
An island nation, England had unique struggles to overcome to deploy their six divisions to the continental mainland. First, an effective force would have to utilize the navy for transport and then require assistance from either France or Belgium for follow on staging. More importantly, due to Belgian neutrality, King Albert of Belgium was unwilling to permit any combat force to land in advance of open hostility to preserve the integrity of the country’s neutral status. Finally, a severe organizational blunder, the majority of the war plans were generated without conferring with the parliamentary body in England, which led to significant problems in execution. English diplomats, constrained by bounded reality, were concerned with domestic safety and the fear of committing to a war that may not necessitate English inclusion. Ultimately, the organizational culture of England made it difficult to follow through with the policies they were attempting to implement with respect to mobilization. As one minor example, when the call to mobilize actually came, the order read, “mobilize” as opposed to “mobilize and