An expected utility theory of necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for the initiation and escalation of serious international conflicts, including war, is proposed. The theory leads to the seemingly obvious generalization that actors do not initiate wars—or serious disputes—if they do not expect to gain from doing so. Underlying that generalization are a number of counterintuitive deductions. For instance, I show that though a weak nonaligned state cannot rationally attack a stronger nonaligned nation, it might be able to attack a stronger adversary that, in addition to its own strength, expects to derive support from allies. I also show that serious conflict is more likely between very close allies than between enemies. Systematic tests, using data on serious international threats, military interventions, and interstate wars, as well as 17 cases of known attempts at deterrence, show very substantial support for the expected utility propositions deduced from the theory.

A new forecasting model, solved for Bayesian Perfect Equilibria, is introduced. It, along with several alternative models, is tested on data from the European Union. The new model, which allows for contingent forecasts and for generating confidence intervals around predictions, outperforms competing models in most tests despite the absence of variance on a critical variable in all but nine cases. The more proximate the political setting of the issues is to the new model’s underlying theory of competitive and potentially coercive politics, the better the new model does relative to other models tested in the European Union context.

A model for forecasting political choices and for explaining the perceptual conditions that lead to those choices is delineated. The model, based on the median voter theorem and on the axioms of expected utility maximization, is applied to the prospects for a multilateral peace conference in the Middle East. The analysis helps provide insights into the motivations behind recent actions by leaders in the Soviet Union, the United States, Jordan, the Palestine Liberation Organization, and Israel.By viewing multilateral negotiations in a rational choice context, it is possible to elucidate the contents of calculations that reflect decision makers' considerations if they are trying to do what they believe is in their best interest. By modeling the decision process and then using comparative statics simulations, it is also possible to discern when perceptions and reality are likely to deviate from each other and to gauge the hypothesized responses of all the actors to changed circumstances. In this way, the likely impact of Soviet moderation, Israeli intransigence, Jordanian vacillation, or U.S. intervention can be identified.

In this article, we have developed a game theory based prediction tool, named Preana, based on a promising model developed by Professor Bruce Beuno de Mesquita. The first part of this work is dedicated to exploration of the specifics of Mesquita’s algorithm and reproduction of the factors and features that have not been revealed in literature. In addition, we have developed a learning mechanism to model the players’ reasoning ability when it comes to taking risks. Preana can predict the outcome of any issue with multiple steak-holders who have conflicting interests in economic, business, and political sciences. We have utilized game theory, expected utility theory, Median voter theory, probability distribution and reinforcement learning. We were able to reproduce Mesquita’s reported results and have included two case studies from his publications and compared his results to that of Preana. We have also applied Preana on Irans 2013 presidential election to verify the accuracy of the prediction made by Preana.

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita (; born November 24, 1946) is a political scientist, professor at New York University, and senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita (; born November 24, 1946) is a political scientist, professor at New York University, and senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution.