“Recent events in world politics have heightened public attention to the concept of risk in social life. In a world where danger and violence have become media commodities, it seems that risks to health and well-being have never been greater. However, because attitudes toward risk are learned cultural behaviour, ‘perception of risk’ has become more essential as a predictor of political and social behaviour than actual tangible risk. In this paper, I discuss contrasts between notions of personal and public risk from the standpoint of the societies of the United States, the Islamic Middle East and the Buddhist Far East. Though broad generalizations may be dangerous, the cultural styles in each of the three regions allow individuals and larger social groupings, such as corporations and governments, to engage in decision-making which seems rational in terms of the broad attitudinal frameworks dominant in these regions, but which may contrast sharply with the rational actions of individuals and groups in other regions. As the world becomes more integrated globally, knowledge of the differences in these perceptions and their concomitant implications for the actions taken by decision-makers will become increasingly essential to international understanding. As a case-study for this discussion, I focus upon the war in Iraq, highlighting reactions and attitudes in the United States, where risk is in proportion to fear; among Irag’s Islamic Middle Eastern neighbours, where risk is really ‘no risk; and among the nations of East Asia, particularly Japan, where risk is normative and drives the course of history.”