Strategic surrender is a strategy of attrition. What the loser avoids by offering to surrender is a last, chaotic round of fighting that would have the characteristics of a rout. The victor can obtain his objective without paying the costs of a last battle.[1]
In 1958, US Senator Stuart Symington accused the RAND Corporation of defeatism for studying how the United States might surrender to an enemy power.[1] This led to the US Congress passing a prohibition on the spending of tax dollars on the study of defeat or surrender of any kind. However, the senator had apparently misunderstood, as the report was a survey of past cases in which the US had demanded unconditional surrender of its enemies, asking whether or not this had been a more favorable outcome to US interests than an earlier, negotiated surrender might have been.[2]
See also[]
References[]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Kecskemeti, Paul (1958). "Strategic Surrender: The Politics of Victory and Defeat". RAND Corporation. http://www.rand.org/pubs/reports/R308.html. Retrieved December 27, 2010
- ↑ Poundstone, W. (1992). Prisoner's Dilemma. Doubleday.
The original article can be found at Strategic surrender and the edit history here.