A country engaged in brinkmanship would

1) refuse to engage an enemy in combat following an attack.

2) maintain a position of strength without having to engage in conflict.

3) use strong threats and then engage its military to carry them out.

4) attempt to make its enemy believe that it was going to surrender.

Its B maintain a position of strength without having to engage in conflict.

Explanation:

just got 100 on the test

The response that best describes a country engaged in brinkmanship is 3: use strong threats and then engage its military to carry them out. The concept of brinkmanship is evident in the word itself: one goes to the brink of committing an act. In foreign policy, this means that one or more countries takes some very drastic decisions meant to intimidate the other (s); war can break out at any given instance and all parties involved are aware of this but continue to make strong decisions.

The clearest example of brinkmanship took place during the Cuban Missile Crisis in the 1960s during the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States of America. Cuba's socialist revolution had just recently taken place and it was already a quite tense situation between the island and the USA as they were only miles apart and Cuba had decided to ally with communist Russia. So when the Soviet leader decided to stockpile missiles on the island, it was very alarming to the USA and for a few days, the world was at risk of nuclear warfare. In this example, Soviet Russia had used brinkmanship as they had decided to try and extend their strategic power over the Western Hemisphere by directly threatening the USA whilst being fully aware that this could provoke retaliation on USA's part and cause global nuclear warfare. It was a means for them to test USA's resolve as nuclear warfare is catastrophic so they wished to see how serious USA would be in protecting its region whilst hoping that they would surrender and not risk near total regional annihilation.