Strategic interaction between Russia and US in Syria: a game theoretic analysis from 2014-2022

Authors

  • Zohaib Gillani Area Study Centre for Africa, North and South America, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan. https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5627-6856
  • Saira Aquil Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9510-4712
  • Huda Rehman Marxe School of Public and International Affairs, Baruch College, City University of New York (CUNY), United States.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/7.1.13

Keywords:

Middle East, Syrian conflict, Nash equilibrium, game theory, zero-sum game, regime change, strategic preferences, strategic interest, regional dominance

Abstract

The strategic interests of Russia and the US clash in the Syrian conflict. Moscow’s policy in Syria aims for the Assad government to remain in power, whereas the US policy seeks to bring a regime change in Syria by toppling the Assad government. The competition and cooperation between Russia and the US in the Middle Eastern region are quite complex and reflect a tussle for regional dominance. A game theoretic analysis is conducted for the interaction between two great powers to examine the strategies opted by both players in the case of the Syrian civil war. This paper analyses the role of Russian and American regional policy objectives in Syria from 2014 to 2022. This study considers the cause-and-effect relationship in the regional supremacy of Russia and the US and studies them as independent variables. The conflict in policy goals of both powers in the Syrian conflict is taken as the dependent variable. The methodology applied in this paper is game theory because it explains cause-and-effect phenomena in a systematic and detailed manner. The game between Russia and the US is to achieve maximum foreign policy objectives in Syria, which is concluded as a zero-sum game from 2014-2022.

References

Allison, R. (2013). Russia and Syria: explaining alignment with a regime in crisis. International Affairs, 89(4), 795-823. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23479395 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12046

Bhardwaj, R. (2023). Can religious conflicts impact religious consumption choices? a game-theoretic approach. Routledge. https://doi.org/9781003288558 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003288558-8

Bhuiyan, B. A. (2018). An overview of game theory and some applications. Philosophy and Progress, 59(1-2), 111-128. https://doi.org/10.3329/pp.v59i1-2.36683 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3329/pp.v59i1-2.36683

Borozna, A. (2022). The sources of Russian foreign policy assertiveness. Palgrave Macmillan Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83590-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83590-3

Bowen, W. (2020). The Obama administration and Syrian chemical weapons: deterrence, compellence, and the limits of the “resolve plus bombs” formula. Security Studies, 29(5), 797-831. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2020.1859130 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2020.1859130

Brooks, S. G. (1997). Dueling realisms. International Organization, 51(3), 445-477. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081897550429 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081897550429

Caporaso, J. A. (1992). International relations theory and multilateralism: the search for foundations. International organization, 46(3), 599-632. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027843 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027843

Dunne, T. (2021). International relations theories: discipline and diversity. Oxford University. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198814443.001.0001

Folker, S. (2015). Making sense of international relations theory. Lynne Rienner.

Foot, R. (2020). China, the UN, and human protection: beliefs, power, image. Oxford University. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843733.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843733.001.0001

Grieco, J. M. (1988). Anarchy and the limits of cooperation: a realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism. International Organization, 42(3), 485-507. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027715 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027715

Guner, S. (2003). Game theory and international politics. METU Studies in Development, 30(2), 163-180.

Hamilton, R. A. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, New Series, 211(4489), 1390-1396. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7466396 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7466396

Hussain, M., Khan, T., & Hashmi, S. M. (2022). To (or not to) intervene: social constructivist approach to US humanitarian intervention in Libya and non-intervention in Syria. Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ), 6(1), 201–219. https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/6.1.13 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/6.1.13

Jensen, C. E. (2014). The realism reader. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315858579 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315858579

Jervis, R. (1976). Perceptions and Misperceptions in International Politics. Princeton University.

Jervis, R. (1988). Realism, game theory, and cooperation. World Politics, 40(3), 317-349. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010216 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2010216

Kaplan, M. A. (2005). System and process in international politics. ECPR Press.

Kaye, D. D. (2022). America's Role in a Post-American Middle East. The Washington Quarterly, 45(1), 45(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2022.2058185 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2022.2058185

Khoury, N. (2015, December 16). New Cold War comes to Syria. The Cairo Review of Global Affairs. https://www.thecairoreview.com/contributors/nabeel-khoury/

King, G. (1995). The qualitative-quantitative disputation: Gary King, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba’s designing social inquiry: scientific inference in qualitative research. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 454-480. https://www.jstor.org/stable/i336279

Kissinger, H. (2011). Years of upheaval. Simon and Schuster.

Lavrov, S. (2011, May 17). On Syria and Libya. MR Online. https://mronline.org/2011/05/17/on-syria-and-libya/

Lavrov, S. (2011). Sergey Lavrov's remarks and answers to media questions at joint press conference with UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah AL Nahyan. MID Russia.

Lichbach, M. I. (2003). Is rational choice theory all of social science? The University of Michigan. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11998 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11998

Martin, B. (1978). The selective usefulness of game theory. Social Studies of Science, 8(1), 85-110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/030631277800800103

Mehmood, S., Sulaiman, S., & Jabbar, A. (2022). Discourse analysis of the US War on Terror policy in Afghanistan. Journal of Humanities, Social and Management Sciences (JHSMS), 3(1), 487–500. https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.jhsms/3.1.34 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.jhsms/3.1.34

Mesquita, B. B. (1985). Forecasting political events: the future of Hong Kong. Yale University.

Mirza, M. N., Abbas, H., & Qaisrani, I. H. (2021). Anatomising Syrian crisis: Enumerating actors, motivations, and their strategies (2011-2019). Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ), 5(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/5.1.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/5.1.4

Morrow, J. D. (1994). Game theory for political scientists. Princeton University. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691213200

Nicholas, M. (2019, 12 20). Russia, China veto U.N. approval of aid deliveries to Syria from Turkey. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security-un-idUSKBN1YO23V

Nistor, M. A. (2020, April 25). Zero-sum and other statistical games: game theory offers insights into the strategies and decisions of human contestants engaged in competitive situations. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340923078_Zero-Sum_and_Other_Statistical_Games_Game_theory_offers_insights_into_the_strategies_and_decisions_of_human_contestants_engaged_in_competitive_situations

Pappalardo, M. (2008). Multiobjective optimization: a brief overview. Pareto optimality, game theory and equilibria. Springer. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77247-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-77247-9_19

Pollak, N. (2022, December 28). Deepening Russia-Iran relationship should worry Israel. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy: https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/deepening-russia-iran-relationship-should-worry-israel

Powell, R. (1999). In the shadow of power: states and strategies in international politics. Princeton University. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv10crg4t DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691213989

Powell, R. (1999). The modeling enterprise and security studies. International Security, 24(2), 97-106. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2539252 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/016228899560176

Robinovich, I. (2016, May 4). The Russian-U.S. relationship in the Middle East: a five-year projection. Carenegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/2016/04/05/russian-u.s.-relationship-in-middle-east-five-year-projection-pub-63243

Robinson, K. (2022, July 20). Council on foreign relations. Council of Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-iran-nuclear-deal

Ryan, L. W. (2014, June 1). U.S. insists Assad must go, but expects he will stay. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-syria/u-s-insists-assad-must-go-but-expects-he-will-stay-idUKKBN0EC1F420140601

Sadek, L. (2016). Russia's resurgence in Syria: a new cold war. The American University in Cairo, Master's thesis.

Schmidt, B. C. (2002). Handbook of International Relations. Sage. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608290 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608290

Stien, A. A. (1999). The limits of strategic choice: constrained rationality and incomplete explanation. In Strategic Choices and International Relations (pp. 197-228). Princeston University. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691213095-008

Tayyab, M., Afridi, S. A., & Hamid, M. (2020). Sectarian Divide as a Cause of Protracted Conflict: A Case of Syria (2011-18). Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ), 4(2), 294–305. https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/4.2.23 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/4.2.23

Turacy, T. L. (2001, October 8). Game Theory. http://www.cdam.lse.ac.uk/Reports/Files/cdam-2001-09.pdf

Waltz, K. N. (2014). Realist thought and neorealist theory. Routledge.

Wesser, B. (2019, November). The limits of Russian strategy in the middle East. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE340.html

Wight, B. C. (2023). Rationalism and the “rational actor assumption” in realist international relations theory. Journal of International Political Theory, 19(2), 158-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/17550882221144643 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17550882221144643

Published

2023-06-30

How to Cite

Gillani, Z., Aquil, S., & Rehman, H. (2023). Strategic interaction between Russia and US in Syria: a game theoretic analysis from 2014-2022. Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ), 7(1), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/7.1.13

Issue

Section

Research Articles | Original Research