Are Leaders Rational?

My critique of Mearsheimer and Rosato questions the use of theory by policymakers, contending that they are more likely to turn to so-called historical lessons for guidance.It then engages their concept of credible theory, which they apply an arbitrary manner.To buttress their claim for most uses of force being rational, they offer five short case studies of "grand strategic decision-making" and another five of ciris management.Their interpretations depart significantly from the convention wisdom, ignore contrary evidence and recent and respected historical scholarship.Least defensible of all are their characterizations of Hitler's invasion of Russia and Putin's of Ukraine as rational and motivated by defensive concerns.The most important takeaway from this book is the extent to which international relations theories can be used for purposes of analysis or justification because most theories arewoefully underspecified.They do not include scope conditions or markers to carefully define and narrow their application.