Persuasion Case Study

Persuasion Persuasion, also referred to as liberalism or ideationalism, is a broad collection of theories, rather than one unified theory like that of coercion. The overarching theory of persuasion encompasses two primary sub-theories. One sub-theory is based on social influence and the inculcation of norms and the other is based on rational, self-interest. The social influence sub-theory is based on the idea that states can be socialized and pressured by the international community or other states. [Duke, 635] The rational, self-interest sub-theory is based on the idea that states are persuaded to participate in international law because of potential incentives or externalities. [Guzman, 3]

One immediate difference between persuasion and coercion is the legality; while coercion is illegal under the United Nations Charter, the use of persuasion in drafting and soliciting membership for treaties is legal. However, like coercion, persuasion can be based on the benefits of either action or inaction, depending on the desires of the persuading nation. [Duke, 665] States can be persuaded to join a

In Guzman’s theory, states are in a prisoners’ dilemma of whether to comply or not comply with legal obligations. [Guzman, 20] His model is particular to the competition between states and their dilemma’s with regards to bilateral investment treaties. While this particular situation is limited in scope, the overall theory can be expanded to support the narrative of the persuasion theory. Under Guzman’s theory, states would look at international law in terms of opportunity cost. States would weigh the benefits of engaging in international law and compliance against the externalities of either not engaging or not complying and select the most beneficial option for