Deye Li
@onstatepreferences.bsky.social
Notre Dame PhD student. Theorizing state motives and strategic choices.
I’m quite surprised to see Roger Myerson in the assembly
July 22, 2025 at 12:51 AM
I’m quite surprised to see Roger Myerson in the assembly
Also Achen and Bartel’s Realist Theory of Democracy
July 12, 2025 at 11:11 AM
Also Achen and Bartel’s Realist Theory of Democracy
A lot of these are coming from The Lobby
July 10, 2025 at 8:01 AM
A lot of these are coming from The Lobby
But regime change is Bibi’s goal. And the US entanglement sure would also facilitate it. Plus, you don’t need to get to the Iraq outcome, a Pakistani outcome is gonna be bad enough.
June 22, 2025 at 3:55 PM
But regime change is Bibi’s goal. And the US entanglement sure would also facilitate it. Plus, you don’t need to get to the Iraq outcome, a Pakistani outcome is gonna be bad enough.
But if we turn Iran into Iraq after 2003, all leashes will be gone. A melee between/involving its regional proxies will be “worse than a monolith” for the West in Christensen’s word.
June 22, 2025 at 3:38 PM
But if we turn Iran into Iraq after 2003, all leashes will be gone. A melee between/involving its regional proxies will be “worse than a monolith” for the West in Christensen’s word.
Iran has been trying to destabilize the region even without nukes. It surely will continue to do so with nukes. But Tehran would have a strong interest to have its regional proxies on a leash. It needs to worry about the external feedback on its internal stability as well.
June 22, 2025 at 3:36 PM
Iran has been trying to destabilize the region even without nukes. It surely will continue to do so with nukes. But Tehran would have a strong interest to have its regional proxies on a leash. It needs to worry about the external feedback on its internal stability as well.
The Chinese regime was thought to be implacably revolutionary in the 60s. Once they got the bomb, they did not act more aggressively in international politics than other nuclear powers.
June 22, 2025 at 2:34 PM
The Chinese regime was thought to be implacably revolutionary in the 60s. Once they got the bomb, they did not act more aggressively in international politics than other nuclear powers.
Security dilemma: leaders often don’t use and don’t understand
Commitment problem: leaders often don’t use but understand
Deterrence: leaders often use but don’t understand
Commitment problem: leaders often don’t use but understand
Deterrence: leaders often use but don’t understand
June 22, 2025 at 1:15 AM
Security dilemma: leaders often don’t use and don’t understand
Commitment problem: leaders often don’t use but understand
Deterrence: leaders often use but don’t understand
Commitment problem: leaders often don’t use but understand
Deterrence: leaders often use but don’t understand
It seems that Trump has personally pronounced the death of “liberal delusion” and “blob” explanations of U.S. regime change wars in ME.
June 19, 2025 at 1:03 AM
It seems that Trump has personally pronounced the death of “liberal delusion” and “blob” explanations of U.S. regime change wars in ME.
Gotta write on Breitbart then.
June 14, 2025 at 5:04 PM
Gotta write on Breitbart then.
Tell “stopping water of distance” to historical French rulers trying to invade Britain.
June 14, 2025 at 3:53 PM
Tell “stopping water of distance” to historical French rulers trying to invade Britain.
But here’s the deal, amphibious op is the second most difficult kind of mil op on earth only after nuclear damage limitation. That’s what gives water stopping power.
June 14, 2025 at 3:52 PM
But here’s the deal, amphibious op is the second most difficult kind of mil op on earth only after nuclear damage limitation. That’s what gives water stopping power.
Correction: Projecting (land forces) via water
You can project mere firepower but it’s coercive effectiveness is no match to mil occupation.
You can project mere firepower but it’s coercive effectiveness is no match to mil occupation.
June 14, 2025 at 3:51 PM
Correction: Projecting (land forces) via water
You can project mere firepower but it’s coercive effectiveness is no match to mil occupation.
You can project mere firepower but it’s coercive effectiveness is no match to mil occupation.
Ironically this could work with migrant workers. Alas, the same responders also don’t want them.
May 28, 2025 at 12:30 PM
Ironically this could work with migrant workers. Alas, the same responders also don’t want them.
I think OR would not be applicable to 2014 since Mearsheimer considered that under unipolarity. But OR should certainly be applied to 2022 since Mearsheimer recognized that unipolarity ended in 2017.
May 18, 2025 at 10:40 AM
I think OR would not be applicable to 2014 since Mearsheimer considered that under unipolarity. But OR should certainly be applied to 2022 since Mearsheimer recognized that unipolarity ended in 2017.
I agree with you on the complex system point. That’s good.
May 17, 2025 at 10:04 PM
I agree with you on the complex system point. That’s good.
By your account, for war to become a dominant feature in a country’s life, it needs to take on half of the system at the same time, no? That’s how you increase warring dyad years
May 17, 2025 at 5:28 PM
By your account, for war to become a dominant feature in a country’s life, it needs to take on half of the system at the same time, no? That’s how you increase warring dyad years
Waltz 1988 made this point loud and clear
May 17, 2025 at 5:16 PM
Waltz 1988 made this point loud and clear
Kirshner and katzenstein’s 2022 book
May 10, 2025 at 5:45 PM
Kirshner and katzenstein’s 2022 book
To be fair, “the Old IPE” had very different priorities vs. “the New IPE”
May 10, 2025 at 5:41 PM
To be fair, “the Old IPE” had very different priorities vs. “the New IPE”
Probably also Germany itself, with its anti-Slav policy in a war against the USSR
May 10, 2025 at 2:31 PM
Probably also Germany itself, with its anti-Slav policy in a war against the USSR
However, 3 contradicts how defensive realism defines the military policy of unilateral restraint: reducing its military capability below the level that it believes would otherwise be necessary for adequate deterrence and defense (Glaser, 2010, p. 67).
May 6, 2025 at 3:36 AM
However, 3 contradicts how defensive realism defines the military policy of unilateral restraint: reducing its military capability below the level that it believes would otherwise be necessary for adequate deterrence and defense (Glaser, 2010, p. 67).
@frankfukuyama.bsky.social is this the end of history?
May 1, 2025 at 1:37 AM
@frankfukuyama.bsky.social is this the end of history?