War and Peace in Qajar Persia: Implications Past and ... - Oguzlar.az

24 Manoutchehr M. Eskandari-Qajarapproach in political science states “[t]he notion of risk involves someprospect of loss; the concern revolves around what might be lost, and howmuch of it. Prospect theory makes several predictions about the choices peopletend to make under conditions of risk.” 12 The theory holds that there aretwo phases affecting decision-making, the phase called framing, where perceptionor presentation of the situation in which decisions must be made affectsthe disposition towards some alternatives over others; and second, the evaluationphase, where the decision-maker assesses gains and losses relative toa reference point rather than in absolute terms. This reference point in turnmay shift depending on the perspective of the decision-maker. In dealing withthis important question of perception on gains and losses by the decisionmakers,prospect theory concludes that,decision makers seem to fear losses more than they covet gains, whichtranslates into a willingness to take greater risks to protect what theyhave and fewer risks to acquire what they want. The status quo – forexample, a state’s current territorial possessions – often becomes areference point, which helps to predict “risk averse” or “risk-seeking”behavior. But the status quo is not always the reference point, and knowinga decision-maker’s actual reference point is important. 13Based on this view, prospect theorists expect that national level decisionmakerswould be willing to “take fewer risks to acquire territory than to preventthe loss of territory.” 14 This last point is an extremely interestingfinding in view of the actions of the early Qajars with regard to the threatof Russia on their northern border and later with regard to Herat ontheir eastern border, as in both cases, from the point of view of the Qajars,territorial loss was being prevented by their actions rather than territorialgains sought.Rational decision-making, the second theory under consideration, is mostemphasized by the realist and neo-realist schools of thought in politicalscience. Both realism and its modern-day successor neo-realism are predicatedon the assumption that all actors on the world stage (countries andtheir decision-makers) pursue their national interests (power and security)in an anarchic international system characterized by the absence of an overarchingpower to regulate their activities. 15 These schools of thought alsoassume that the actors are rational or “purposive” and that they pursue “variousobjectives understood to be consistent with their separate interests.” 16This view regards the basis for the actions of all actors to be the same: theseeking of power or the pursuit of national security. The implication of thisview is, therefore, that one set of actors cannot be divorced from theassumption of rationality while others are included in it. The assumption appliesto all equally and is a matter of empirical verification. Hans Morgenthau,one of the early proponents of this school of thought in the United Statesput it this way: