Brinkmanship or Bluff? Unpacking the Madman Theory in International Relations

The Madman Theory is often associated with U.S. President Richard Nixon, who reportedly wanted to make adversaries believe he was capable of extreme actions to protect national interests. The idea was that by appearing unpredictable and capable of irrational decisions, opponents would tread carefully to avoid provoking a severe response.

Historical Use Cases

• Richard Nixon: Nixon’s administration attempted to use this strategy during the Vietnam War, hoping to pressure North Vietnam into peace negotiations.
• Donald Trump: Trump’s foreign policy towards North Korea has been compared to the Madman Theory, particularly with his “fire and fury” rhetoric and unpredictable actions.

Scholarly Criticism

• Scott Sagan and Jeremi Suri: They argue that the theory is dangerous and ineffective, citing misunderstandings between Nixon and Soviet leader Brezhnev and the risk of accidental conflict.
• Stephen Walt: Walt suggests that there are few, if any, successful historical cases of the Madman Theory, indicating its ineffectiveness as a strategy.
• Roseanne W. McManus: McManus differentiates between forms of perceived madness, suggesting that some can be beneficial in bargaining, while others are counterproductive.
• Joshua A. Schwartz: Schwartz acknowledges that while perceived madness might offer some advantages in foreign relations, it also brings significant domestic costs that can undermine its effectiveness.

Analysis by Seitz and Talmadge

Political scientists Samuel Seitz and Caitlin Talmadge provide a comprehensive critique of the Madman Theory. They argue that it typically fails to enhance deterrence or create bargaining leverage for three main reasons:

1. Message Reception: Target states often fail to receive the intended message from the “madman.”
2. Credibility: The behavior of the “madman” is not seen as credible by target states.
3. Assurances: Even if target states believe the rhetoric, they may not concede to the “madman” due to a lack of credible assurances about future behavior.

Conclusion

The Madman Theory remains a controversial and widely debated topic in international relations. While it has been employed by leaders like Nixon and Trump, the effectiveness of this approach is questioned by many scholars. The risks associated with such a strategy, including miscommunication and the potential for accidental conflict, suggest that its use as a foreign policy tool should be carefully considered. The scholarly consensus leans towards the theory being more harmful than beneficial, both in terms of international stability and domestic costs.