What useful insight does this line of analysis provide into the practical problems of tacit bargaining that usually confront us, particularly the problems of strategic maneuver and limited war? It certainly suggests that it is possible to find limits to war—real war, jurisdictional war, or whatever—without overt negotiation. But it gives us no new strong sense of probability. War was limited in Korea, and gas was not used in World War II; on the possibility of limited war these two facts are more persuasive than all the suggestions contained in the foregoing discussion. If the analysis provides anything, then, it is not a judgment of the probability of successfully reaching tacit agreement but a better understanding of where to look for the terms of agreement.

XREF: Connects to Schelling's broader work on tacit coordination and focal points, as well as game theory's coordination problems.

Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, loc. 189