(A) study of the drivers and identities of security strategy and interstate conflict: a focus on causal layered analysis (CLA)

Abstract

This study aims to examine the driving forces that influence the formation of national security strategy and the direction of inter-state conflict. In detail, centering on identity factors at implicit cognitive layers, it explores the driving forces not only influence the formation and changes in nuclear strategy but also cause intractable conflict and deadlock in negotiations during inter-state conflicts. This study derives the cognitive variables of identity and uses the CLA (Causal Layered Analysis) to illustrate the influencing mechanism among cognitive layers. The CLA provides insights into how cognitive mechanisms shape the concepts that identity factors give meaning to and demonstrates their links to national security and behavior. The underlying assumption of this study is that nuclear strategy and intractable inter-state conflict arise from interactions among the key frame variables at cognitive layers: “ingroup definition,” “outgroup definition,” and “conflict narrative.” It examines two cases: the US nuclear strategy formation and the U.S.–North Korea denuclearization negotiation. The theoretical framework enables the study to comprehend how their interactions have influenced forming security concepts, how they have been reflected in the nuclear strategy discourse, and how the variables have influenced conflict and negotiation. Regarding national security strategy formation, this study derives propositions that the ingroup definition of identity frames affects nuclear strategy as a driving force. Interpreting the explicit layers’ realities by the implicit frames centered on identity concepts affects forming of security concepts and the direction of nuclear strategy. Moreover, with respect to inter-state negotiation, the research draws theoretical propositions that “ingroup definition” exerts a major influence on the conflict, and the differences in interpreting agendas between conflicting countries, which are understood to be centered on the ingroup concept, lead to deadlocked negotiation. Furthermore, the research finds that the influence of conflict narratives shared between the countries can make progress in the negotiation.