A common approach in modeling negotiations is to apply game theory to singl
e issues. Recent work has suggested that the complexity of international ne
gotiations can be better modeled by linking independent games. Successful l
inking is possible when the linked issues have compensating asymmetry of si
milar magnitude. An important result of linked games is that such games pro
duce a greater feasible set of choices relative to the aggregated isolated
games. In this paper, we demonstrate that achieving strict dominance of the
linked game is not trivial and that results and implications depend on the
structures of the isolated games. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All right
s reserved.