Emotion, Risk, and Nuclear Decision Making: A Political Psychology Analysis of South Asian Crises (2019 - 2026)

Abstract

This study explores the interplay of emotion, risk perception, and nuclear decision-making during major South Asian crises between 2019 and 2026. While conventional deterrence theories assume rational strategic behavior, political psychology suggests that leaders often make critical security decisions under conditions of fear, anger, uncertainty, and cognitive bias. Using a qualitative political psychology framework, the study examines key crises, including the Pulwama-Balakot confrontation, recurring India - Pakistan border tensions, and subsequent military escalations. The analysis argues that emotional responses and subjective risk assessments significantly shape strategic calculations, crisis signaling, and escalation dynamics in a nuclearized environment. Findings indicate that nationalism, threat perceptions, domestic political pressures, and psychological biases frequently influence leaders’ choices beyond purely rational cost-benefit considerations. Consequently, nuclear stability in South Asia remains vulnerable to misperceptions and emotionally driven decisions. The study concludes that integrating psychological factors into nuclear strategy is essential for strengthening crisis management, deterrence stability, and regional security (Pauly & McDermott, 2023).