Counterfactual analysis is most useful when it stays close to known decision points and avoids long chains of untestable reactions. The method combines historical evidence with international-relations modelling: establish the stated aims, design a plausible agreement or ship that meets them, then compare it with the real result. Large differences can reveal unstated requirements, lobbying, or strategic assumptions that contemporary officials never wrote down. Applied to warship requirements, a comparison design can expose capabilities added beyond the public brief.
Chapter · 1:40:41-1:46:30
A disciplined counterfactual method for treaties and ships
An equitable model provides a controlled comparison for discovering unstated political aims, lobbying, and design compromises.