- five quizzes, 5 percent each, lowest quiz is dropped
- russia-ukraine conflict simulation unless the war finishes before february 16; mock state debate; competitive grading = 20% total(2 parts)
- mid-term on march 6th(20%)
- final on may 4th = 20%
- data analysis exercise = 5%
- diplomatic cable = 10%
- class participation = 5%
FIRST QUIZ NEXT FRIDAY
quizzes are from 12:00 - 12:10
- late assignments = -5% per day up until 1 week
theory: a logically consistent set of statements that attempts to explain a phenomenon of interest
description: factors and important details about events
interest: goal of an international actor
an state's interest: sovreignty, security, economic prosperity, ideological influence
a corporation's interest: profit
rational: behaving according to preference of interest
interaction: the ways in which two or more political actors combine to produce political outcome
institution: a set of rules that structure political interactions
international actors: states, international organizations
transnational actors: groups whose members span borders; multinational corporations; terrorist organizations; transnational advocacy groups
domestic actors: subnational actors with different interests; politicians, bureaucrats, voters
realism:
- the state is the dominant actor
- the state seeks security or power
- cooperation is not possible
- bargaining: two actors dividing something they both want
- coercion
- the international system is anarchic
- security dilemmas(arms races)
- internatioanl instituions are weak and dominated by powerful states
liberalism:
- diverse actors
- wealth is a common goal
- cooperation is possible when we share common interests
- conflict is not inevitable but occurs when actors fail to act on common interests
- international instituions facilitate cooperation by setting out rules, providing informaation, creating procedures for decision making
- democratic instituions increase a chance of cooperation
constructivism:
- diverse actors
- actors' interests are influenced by culture, identity, and ideas
- actors' choices often reflect norms rather than interests
how to avoid war
realism: inevitable, only by careful diplomacy and temporary alliance
liberalism: avoidable, international institutions, democracy, international economic interdependence
constructivism: avoidable, sharing norms and rules(e.g. international agreements), understanding different identities
The Mercantilist Era(16th to 18th Century)
- expansion of military power
- imperial governments used military power to increase wealth
- "Wealth is power and power is wealth" - Thomas Hobbes
empire: a political institution used by colonizers against colonies; living within an empire does not guarentee participation in sovreignty
third world comes from the idea of countries not aligned with the "1st" or "2nd" world
oil shock(1973) --> increase in power of oil producing countries --> opec(organization of the petroleum exporting countries)
soviet union economic failure: relaxed control of eastern european allies, withdrew from afghanistan, fall of the berlin wall
dissolution into 15 new, independent, non-communist, countries
gulf war: saddam hussein invades kuwait, american led coalition launched masssive strikes and air attacks
9/11 --> invasion of afghanistan
iraq war(2003-2011)
arab spring(2010): protests for democracy in the middle east beginning on social media; every other country except tunisia(maybe) went back to autocracy
syrian civil war --> millions of refugees
emergece of the islamic state of iraq and syria(isis)
if any side loses, it cannot be cooperation
bargaining: actors must decide how to distribute something of value
collaboration: working together to acheive a shared goal
coordination: taking separate action to acheive a shared goal
institutions can promote cooperation through:
establishing standards of behavior
verifying compliance
reducing the costs of joint decision making
resolving disputes
war: at least two parties, at least 1000 battle deaths, interstate war if main adversaries are states, civil war if main adversaries are within a state
realist purpose of war: preventive attack and security dilemma
a bargaining model shares an assumption of realism:
- the use of military poiwer is costly
- threatening force is useful for a better deal
- states are usually better off if they do not use force
misperception and mistakes:
- underestimation of the costs of war
interests at war:
territory:
- valuable resources, economically valuable, military/strategic value, ethnic/cultural/historical reasons
states' policies:
- compelling policy change(e.g. the u.s. participation in 1998-99 kosovo war)
different regime types:
- e.g. vietnam war
coercive diplomacy:
- using threats to advance specific demands in a bargaining interaction
compellance: an effort to change the status quo through threat of force
deterrence: an effort to preeserve the status quo by threatening with unacceptable costs
bargaining zone: the "area" wherein neither country gains by going to war
- a credible threeat is a threat that the target believes will be carried out
brinksmanship: a strategy that increases the risk of accidental war, with the hope that the other will blink
tying hands:
- audience(domestic[elections]/international) cost: negative repercussions for failing to follow through on a threat or honor a commitment
paying for power: increasing military capabilities --> increasing threat credibility
prevention: cutting your opponent off before they can develop
preemption: first-strike advantage, anticipating the opponent's attack so you attack first