Words Matter: The Effect of Moral Language on International Bargaining

Summary

States that use moral language to frame a dispute make peaceful resolution less likely. One state’s moralizing leads the opponent to follow suit. Willingness to concede then frustrates both opponents and elicits accusations of hypocrisy from domestic audiences in both states. Moralizing the issue reduces opportunities for compromise and narrows the bargaining range. The case of the Falkland Islands/Islas Malvinas dispute explores the theory.