ABSTRACT
In order to narrow the scope of the article, it is assumed that there is little difference between military and diplomatic surprise as far as the difficulty in avoiding a surprise is concerned. Although developed in the study of military surprise, the following theories serve as valid explanations in the diplomatic realm: signal to noise ratio; deception; rigid concepts projected upon the enemy; pathologies in communication and organization; uncertainties and contradictions inherent in intelligence work; and alert fatigue, or the so-called 'cry wolf syndrome'.
