Bribes v. Bombs: A Study in Coasean Warfare
University of Pennsylvania Law School; Bar Ilan University - Faculty of Law
University of Connecticut - School of Law
September 8, 2007
U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 07-21
U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 07-37
Bar Ilan Univ. Pub Law Working Paper No. 07-05
The use of bribes to co-opt an enemy's forces can be a more effective way to wage war than the conventional use of force: Relative to bombs, bribes can save lives and resources, and preserve civic institutions. This essay evaluates the efficacy and normative desirability of selectively substituting bribes for bombs as a means of warfare. We show how inter-country disparities in wealth, differences in military strength, the organization of the bribing and recipient forces, uncertainty about the outcome of the conflict, and communications technology can contribute to the efficacy of bribes. We discuss methods for enforcing bargains struck between opposing forces, a key problem in structuring bribes. We also examine the legal status of bribe agreements, under both international and U.S. law. While the former apparently views bribery as legitimate means of warfare, the latter poses a potentially significant obstacle by refusing on public policy grounds to enforce secret contracts made with foreign agents.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 34
Keywords: contracts, law of war, bargaining, bribery
JEL Classification: K13,K31,H57working papers series
Date posted: September 19, 2007
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.422 seconds