verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
Pols 1337 US Govt Congress Pres and Crts
verified elite notetaker
One Day of Notes
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Department
This 58 page Bundle was uploaded by latifa elidrissi on Monday February 2, 2015. The Bundle belongs to at George Washington University taught by in Spring2014. Since its upload, it has received 75 views.
Reviews for IAF 1001
I was sick all last week and these notes were exactly what I needed to get caught up. Cheers!
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/02/15
Anarchy and Power IAF 1005 Introduction three images is war passe popular line of thought war is declining explaining international affairs models of war dan writer Introduction Thucydides security dilemmas anarchy there is no world government nation state are the highest form of authority al states are equally sovereign but not all states are equally capable their capabilities differ dramatically anarachy is self help system Theres no world governemt At the end of the day each sovereign nation state is responsible for providing for their own security for its citizens and interests exernal means getting involved in alliances can be helpful for the countries that aren39t as powerful example NATO internal means USA spends on the highest military expenditure in the world on security technology developing weapons etc declare neutrality is also another way switzerland sovereign state no agency that exists above the nation state to regulate states When a nation state breaks the law The security dilemma Athens had sea power and was engaged in sea trading sparta more conservative more land based power and they were getting worried about the growing power of athens and athens was getting more allies sparta was nervous athens was growing quickly they wanted to preserve their power so they decided to strike before athens gets too strong Sparta launched a preventative war in order to stop Athens from getting power anaylists who are realists had made similar arguments about rising powers rising powers threatens existing powers Chinas ambitions Realists tend to be skeptical of chinas ambitions They advice the USA to protect its self and try to contain china Realists tend to be suspicious of the growth of chinese power RealiStS PerSPeCtWe i ThUCydidEdS the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they must the melian dialogue states act because of power differences Security Mutual Dependence No state can afford to disregard what other states are doing nor can it afford to disregard the effects of its behavior that it has on its neighbors nationa states pay attention to what other nation states are doing and to what effects that it has on their allies and neighbors anarchy security dilemma can lead to this action reaction dynamic it can escalate 1 states feel insecure 2 so they arm themeslves but 3 that makes their rivals feel insecure so 5 their rivals arm themselves which makes Enhancing ones security may make others feel threatened wars occurout of fear there was fear that germany defeating france there was concern there was german ambition britian began to fear germany as well because germany went threw a huge industrial push big ship building enterprise britian was a naval power thats how they built their empire the german empire was worried about russia so they felt russian power was growing and russsia too was going through a massive industrialization preventative war bounce of power shifting towards russia so they wanted to attack it security dilemma Actors canot risk not reacting to security of other states but sometimes in reacting they risk outcomes then they started off example hitler losing the war and the japanese rising power in world war 2 but in reacting they can produce circumstances that leave them worse off than before THREE IMAGES man the state and war waltz 1st image MAN Human nature is human nature fundamentally good or is human nature fundamentally flaud example the founding fathers had a negative view of human nature they thought if any one branch of gov got too much power that would be corrupting people cant help themselves etc thats why they established the sys of checks and balances in contrasts political theorists like karl marks had a good view of human nature naturally seeking to share care about good of the whole good of the society the institution of property turned communal beings into corrupt territorial humans positive no private property negative checks and balances stable mature democracies do not go to war with each other the democratic peace thesis walts its not man its not states wars still happens The causes of war in the international system itself Anarchy and secutriy dilemma is the issue War is a product of the international system Anarchy is a permissive condition for war he thought The phenomenon of war why does war occur because a system of anarchy there nothing to prevent it 3images levels of analysis causation outside in inside out many levels January 17 2014 International affairs The shape of things to come trends and factors that will shape the world in the first half of the 21 st century People population growth distribution movement Economics energy environment Governance strong good democratic Security intra state transnational interstate 12 PEGS of global affairs How will non military factors affect the prospects for stability and security Population issues Population growth life average span increases example 2030 life expectancy 76 years old people are living loner because of technology and nutrition and medicine improvement 95 o of population increase will be in developing ountries thats least capable of taking on the burden of additional human beings shelter health care education etc india will pass chiina in the most populace place in the world more than china by 2050 some populations arent growing aging rapidly like japan russia Gender distribution 160 million women missing world wide over 100 million women and girls are missing in asia alone tremendous human and stability implications human trafficking population movement Urbanization in 1990 5 lived in cities in 2050 70 will live in cities populations moement in 1960 70 million migrants mainly in the developing world today 215 million migrants mailn Economic development necessary and probable In the 20th century Industrial output increased 40x energy use increased 16x water used increased 9x hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of deep poverty global economy has to grow is population is growing Development is Essential poverty and hunger today 12 billion people live on less than 125 a day 1 billion lack access to safe drinking water 870 million are chronically undernourished 25 billion lack access to improved sanitation 13 lack access to electricity 26 billion if the global economy continues to grow it has a bad effect by 2030 another 40 increase or more in energy use if current practices continue more than 75 of the increase will come from fossil fuels coals gas oil Other resources buffers are now gone land water forests fisheries Governance strong governance good governance democratic governance Governance and decolonization 1939 13 of the worlds population lived under colonial rule today less than 01 lives under colonial rule decolonization was widespread praid and recent africa in 1960s island in 197080s ugosolovia and USSR in the 1990s UN member states 51 in 1945 193 today Colonial legacies stability implications weak states today Sommm congo sudan sou tsudan chad Yemen Afghanistan haiti central african republic Zimbabwe only 36 states defined as stable 125 states under alert or warning conditions good governance corruption free and rule of law 120 states now have medium to strong corruption problems not just crime problem its a threat to the rule of law the functioning of states not just a local problem its transitional criminal organizations Democaracy is difficult Democratization is a contest for power dictators are tenacious and vicious political institutions and civil society are usually weak democratization does not happen overnight it takes years and decades Democracy is winning in 1973 151 countries 69 authoritarian governments 38 partly free countries Nuclear Concerns bad news 17000 weapons in 9 countries including North korea and Pakistan SIPRI Federatoin of American scientists 18 cases of these oss in key countries 50 nuclear energy plants under contraction Good news no nuclear weapon used in was in 65 years 190 countries signes the non proliferation treaty 4 countries have given up nuclear weapons south Africa Ukraine Kazakhstan Belarus end of cold war end of US soviet arms race New start treaty Ongoing potential for US China arms race Policy prospects some seemingly intractable problems have gone away many potential conflicts have ot become violent conflicts international actions can be effective its hard to make predictions especially about the future yogi berra NUCLEAR WEAPONS a new weapons 1 3dimensional warefare definition technology that allows a state to directly harm another states homeland without first deafeating examples strategic bombing in ww2 germany vs netherlands us vs japan tokyo hiroshima nagasaki 2 1st and 2nd Strike 1st is the ability to destroy their ability to retaliate example israel attacking iran the important one youde like to ave in terms of security is the 2nd strike capabilities ability to destroy an adversary in retaliation its the one you really want to have if both have a 2nd strike capabilities then they are mutually assured destruction 3 the nucear triad five types of effects of nuclear weapon radiation thermal radiation firestorms nuclear fallout prompt ionizing radiation Anarchy And Power Transnational relationships example Integration of global finance The transnational between banks hedge fund managers waltz isn39t looking inside the nation states just the big picture economic form of a country instituion the way the govt is set upparlimantery presidential etc system of government how does the bureaucracy function beauractratic politics relationships between the state and society is it pluralist society or is it more like N Korea Military civilian relationships is war passe 1O an amermed conflict is considered to be a war if at least a 100 battle or battle related deaths are inflicted in the indicated year Muleller p page 300 Mueler constructivist perspective for mueller war is an idea the implication is we can change the way we think about it and maybe change the incidents of war so for mueller he argues that the way we think about things matters a lot War could become obsolete just like state sponsored slavery could become obselute He39s making a constructivst argument War could become obsolete and maybe anarchy is just an idea were not just puppets of the structure joshua goldstein winning the war on war mueler pinker thers no agency were just evolving to be more peaceful without doing anything aboutH goldstein what has made a difference is the existence of the UN and peace keeping forces and have been deployed in very great numbers he argues the UN peace keepers have become very effective put all have a fairly optimistic punchline they agree on basic direction but have different arguments about why thats the case Explaining International Affairs 1 realism thucydeds cares more about power the bargaining model is a realist problem which is a security probem 2 liberalism instituions helping to manage anarchy joshua goldsteins argument peacekeeprs like the UN has helped to make less war because of their activity 11 3 constructivism mueller who argues that changing the way we think about the world can change the world example apart hide was okay but now its not we use to not pay attention to the environment but now were trying to preserve the environment slavery taboo of nuclear weapons etc all sorts of things have become pass rational choice dan writer when you assume that people are rational they make their decision based on cost benefit analyses they are strategic Its an analytic approach thats increasingly popular in International politics game theory you want to maximize utility get the most do as much as possible Models of War dan writer article he lays out four different models of war 1 Spiral model where there an action react cycle that spirals up and is based on fear and one states actions to improve its security might make another state feel less secure deterence model referes to nuclear weapon only works when you dont have to use it defensive approach cognitive model focuses on phycological biases Research has shown that states tend to over estimate their capabilities can lead to aggressive behavior example hitler bargaining model dan writer writes about it the rational approach to International politics It focusses on the unitary rational actor refers to the biliar ball by calling them unitary actor you39re not opening up the ball you39re looking from outside not breaking the ball Its not an imbalance of power that causes war lts disagreement over the balance of power and uncertainty ove the likely outcome of the war this can lead to war because it can lead to war due to uncertainty of outcomes between two evenly balanced of states theres incomplete information Two realist arguments about war 12 one is represented about kenneth salts and one by robert gilpens Neorealism is the phrase is used refers to the work of kenneth waits There was no theorizing about the big international system Neorealism is talking about the system of war the security dilemma its a self help system Kenneth waltz he argues that states seek security and survival They dont seek power necessarily he seeks to explain why wars occur repeatedly Wars happen because anarchy is a permissive condition for war nation states are the most important to him he39s not interested in Ngos etc hes all about nation states and what the system of anarchy leads us to expect he also thinks states are functionally similar and have to provide for their security and survival in an anarcteic world Another argument he makes in the origins of war collective action is difficult among units but relatively easy within them states as focal points for provision of private and collective goods in general and for security in particular states are the focal points for waltz core unit He also argues peace is fragile he would not agree with goldstein or mueller he would argue peace is fragile and finds states tend to balance when one states become stronger or growing rapidly other states may join to have the equivalent power what causes war security dilemma info asymmetry bargaining model commitment and misrepresent theres an indivisibie issue example jerusalam anarchy hajimonic transition theory when reading what theory levels of analysis 1 system other people in the system 2 state their team 3 individual personal cognitive theories 13 what causes war Waltz he found that bipolarity was very stable and it was a balance system he finds multipoluarity more destabilizing when theres more actors with equal power an example the balance of powers before world war 1 there was all these intingaling alliances and they ended up acting on things that they have not found to be in their particular interest Your freedom of decision is more limited you don39t have that autonomy of your own actions and it leads to uncertainty It can lead to rigid strategies because you might miscalculate Theres too much having to rely on states that may or may not be reliable salts like bipolarity and likes nuclear weapons bbut bi polarity is more stable for him Nuclear weapons increased the chances of peace because the soviet union and americans had both the opportunity to destroy each other and bi polarity creates a much more pe theories arent law what theories do do is depict the the key to theory with walts To try to have some framework of why things happen is why we study international politics rational considering outcomes maximiza utility consistant decisions preference ordering priorities based on what you want anarchy hes saying all state are the same and all states want the same security and in the same preference order this assumes that everyone will order their preferences in their own way which can create problems Gilpin a hajimon the most powerful state in the system example rome usa mosts powerful after ww2 britain powerful economy colony 14 the security population movement january 27 realists the state is the most important actor its the one thats most responsible for providing security states seek security or they may seek power classical realistsargue that states try to seek power walts security is the paramount the differences between realism economic goals serve security goals traditionally empires were intimately connected realism security and economics are tightly intertwined and economic goals serve security goals states have different interests theres more friction when states have interests that are in conflict interatctions between states realists tend to think of bargaining threats of sanctions or wars unbalanaced interactions can cause wars ex athens and sparta a lack of conflict that may indicate domination rather than true peace realists international insitutions institutions arent important for realists most of these multi lateral institutions are comprised of member states Institutions dont have an independent effect that modifies 15 Gilpin more unaligned with classical realism gilpin classical realists very influenced by thucydedes in the pelopenisian wars hes interested in one particular kind of war hes interested in the hegemonic war Hegimonic wars can be thought of fundamental resifting of power in the system like shifting tectonic plates you have to look inside the biliar balls and look whats going on inside according to gilpin the hegemon has the strongest resources the strongest base etc and its resources outstrip the other potential opposing side when the hegemony has all this resources its in the hegemonies interest to spread out for security reasons more and more control over the world and wants to remake its subjects in their own image since its spreading all of its capabilities people in other states can benefit from that and developing in their own capabilities its an inevitable logic so over time the reletaev capabilities of the hegemony gets smaller because they are starting to become equal stable walts was saying the system was anarchic gilpin hegemonic war is hierarchical hagemonic war leads to the rise of a new hegemon hegemonic war 19141945 usa became the most predominant hegemony the exception was the soviet union walt bi polar world between soviets and americans gilpin argues that us was the predominant hegemony soviet wasn39t close walts doesn39t consider economics counting war heads thats how he was defining polarity and the system 16 some people argue that in the future we might have three big blcoks asian european african etc and these might be competing against each other gilpin interested in change overtime whose at the top of higheroarchy they39re asking different questions and different phenomonenons so they39re using different tools it just depends on the question your asking gilpin and waltz are interested in different things gilpin 3 propositions 1 caused by broad changes in political strategic and economic affairs there something really fundamental shifting 2 system relations among states who has the preponderant power 3 hegemonic war system wide the game changer war for him structure is a necessary but not sufficient cause of war constantly moving set of factors and growth rates and rates of power fundamental disequilibrium between underlying distribution of power and the status quo compare and contrast walts theory static gilpins dynamic dynaism within stasis rise and fall of great powers walts bi polar wolrd with nuclear weapons stable gilpin bi polarity unstable waltz nuclear weapons increase the chances of peace thats counter intuitive for a lot of people though gilpin what if they get into the wrong hands 17 January 29 Anarchy and war Rational choice and the bargaining model of war feron wants to drill down deeper why is it when states know the war is costly they still want to go to war fern wants to understand how things actually lead to war rather than say its a permissive condition feron neorealism is an incomplete explanation for war according to him model of war pusszles incentives to lie implications For feron information or lack of information it can lead to war A MODEL OF WAR in IA we use models a lot think of two parties 1 king andys castle 2 kind bills castle and inbetween these castles exists fertile farm land it could be a holy land money natural resource trade anything that might lead to war this is something that can be divided in some way fertile farmland theres a current border king andy has a larger share just an example when they start to bargain there would be a probable new border and andy will lose and bill will gain some land so they have to figure out what are the costs for fighting to each party for fighting war is costly 18 gt the net value to a for fighting and the net value to b of fighting b woud get more the border would move in b s favor b has more interest in going to war what this means is the range of possible border settlements that both a and b prefer to fighting before war breaks out both parties would prefer to go into war the PUZZtee that tetonS aSktng tS why dont states avoid wawr by reaching a bargain somewhere on the blue line range of possible border settlement that both a and b prefer to fighting b Proposes 3 GW border b says lets agree to move our border if you do not agree to move the border i will start a war b would rather fight than accept the current border so if a refuses to new proposed border there is war both a and b get more from bs proposal than they could get by gh ng for any a and b if war is costly the object of contention is divisible then there is always at least one negotiated setlltmenet that A and B will both prefer to war 9X ante Why is there ever war states have incentives to lie about capabilities states expect capabilities to change over time there was a status quo border but capabilities changed over time and b got stronger states expect these capabilities to change over ime and that changes the bargaining range internal divisions lead states to make silly decisions 19 symmetric information when both parties have symmetric info this is when they have both sides are being honest b knows what a knows and vise versus b accepted as demand to move the border only if both a and b know the new border is better than war BUT if two sides have different beliefs then its less symmetrical they have completely different perceptions of who would win this is different beliefs of what the outcome of war would be but one of the parties has to be wrong they cant both be right the answer has to be somewhere in between these two or maybe one side is complexity ight since war is costly they have a common interest in discovering the truth sometimes war happens is because they want to demonstrate capabilities to war what are the incentives to lie bluffing A thinks that the probable new border if a and b fight is here two things difficult to communicate military secrets they dont have people to ave full info of military secrets b has a secret weapon putting the ACTUAL probable new border if they fight here military secrets examples russo japanese war 1904 asymmetric information and lead japanese to win the war and caught russia by surprise saddam hussein and WMD sadam hussein never denied that he had weapons of mass D the problem was he didn39t want us to think he had WMD it was for the regional audience having WMD would inflate the capabilities of iraq to make it stronger than it was sad am hussein had rational strategic incentives to bluff for iraqs neighbors us iraq 1991 resolve how willing are they willing to actually fight over this border 20 from 61 s perspective the cost of fighting would be to it but what it doesn39t know how costly would it be for b to fight whats b s resolve b says my costs of fighting are low that indicates thats b s resolves are high exmples of resolve ww1 russias commitment to serbia germanys commitment to austria ww2 britians commitment to poland how likely that britian was going to intervene US willingness to fight japan until pearl harbor a commitment problem one or more state has an incentive to renege on a settlement term these commitment problems lead to war its related to the difficult in communicating resolve Implications democracy they are different than autocratic countries its more difficult for a democratic country to bluff or keep secrets it can keep military secerst but bluffing is harder when people know the truth and have an incentive to blurt it out if one branch is more keen on going to war sometimes there can be leeks within the admin that might reduce the credibility of the presidents statements when you have opposition parties they might have incentives to make the executive to make him look less clear there can be whistle blowers also in democracies more info is public we have elections and opposition parities or inter agency conflicts that lead to people leaking information more likely to get accurate info when two democratic countries are fighting so less likely to war threats by democracies are less likely to be met by armed resistance about 30 less likely COnclusion 21 rational explanation for war from feron incomplete info with incentives to lie can contribute to the outbreak of war even if both states would be better off without war or a bargaining rane this is why it happens hes fleshing out the neorealist theory at the strategic levels hes treating them like biliar balls but focusing on the war model and the borders with incomplete info asymetric private info strategic military secrets etc he39s filling in the micro foundations how those conditions can lead to war he argues that his model is superior to spiral model it doesn39t pin down why rational actors would be better of not going to war predicatablilty there are so many possible agreements which one would they pick feb 3 ANARCHY constructivism alex went ways to think about international affairs anarchy a social construction legitimacy does it matter constructivism many different kinds of actors are important in itl affairs all society are socially instructed they are infused with identities and intercommunication the social construction refers to all societies are socially constructed major issues questions of identity meaning and what constitues an appropriate behavior what it means to be a good citizen or a decent states etc realism looks outside in in contructivism its inside out how they interpret meanings of things they encounter in the world interactions can socialize people and also transform what our interests are they arent fixed or given in waltz realism they are transformed in different wayswe can change the world and we can change 22 intl institutions help to define identities and they shape behavior and the norms ex war crimes arent okay so these institutions can really change how people think about war unlike realism constructivism is about change and possibilities of change constructivism the way we think of social problems are always changing ex slavery used to be okay its not okay now apart hide the environmental movement pollution used to be fine littering but now we recycle etc constructivism doesn39t aways have to be happy thought it can also be constructing a world thats more darker and negative ways to think about international affairs anarchy how constraining waltz would say anarchy is incredibly constraining but not everyone agrees with that is anarchy surmountable is anarchy a necesssary constrait yes can power be tamed no is anarchy a necessary constraint no can power be tames yes wendt selfhelp is contengent anarchy doesn39t define friends or fo its misleading that anarchy is enough to understand international affairs like fear on wendt argues that anarchy is incomplete it leaves out the entire interpretive dimension of intl politics anarchy is a social construction to wendt relative gains be aware of counter parts realist perspective absolutre gains liberal concept cooperation happens more often constructivism spectrum 23 competitive atomisticindividualistic liberal collectiveinterdependent interdependent sovreignty construction exogenous outside state system waltz competition socizlization rationalism endogenous wendt meanings emerge though interaction social threats are constructed not natural comes from identities and interactions with other states wendt takeaway even realism is a social construction its a self fulfilling proficey and if we believe it thats how we will behave legitamacy lan herd why obey you39re afraid you39ll get punished consequencealso out of self interest and because rule is legitimate and ought to be obeyed constructivist legitamcy what equals appropriate behavior what does it men to be a good citizen based on logic of appropriateness they take legitimacy the most serious liberals self interest realist fear of punishment they were necessary to combat things and win wars etc coercion and self interest easy justifications should come from perceptions of legitimacy rightness appropriteness identities what it means to be a decent legitamcy subjective quality or fule or institutions rules should be obeyed because of actors perception of legitimacy of either substance of the rule or from the procedure or source of the rule 24 how does a particular norm rule or institution come to be seen as either legitimate or illegitimate reframe an issue and think about it in a different way feb 5 MANAGING ANARCHY constructivist like alex went and ian they feel that anarchy is what stats make of it and condition that we can over come not like waltz r0bert lUfViSi talks about the offense defense balance he is a realist more of a classic realist robert goes down to look at the perceptions between different states and depending on what those balances are anarchy and security delimma can be a constraining feature of IA or it might no be such a big deal Jurvis and waltz both are defensive realistswho are realist that believe states are motivated to seek security by contrast offensive realism is john meere shimmer not going to read about him theres features within realism you can differe enter your defensive vs offensive jurvis anarchy is a variable contraint cooperation under anarchy syria what are the challenges jurvis the offense defense balance offense has the advantage conditions under which its easier to destroy someone else39s army and territory than to defend own territory defense has the advantage its easier to defend territory than it is to attack Worst scenario in the security dillema when offense has the advantage security elimma is sharp which increases incentives to preamp war 25 when only toute to security expansion status quo powers will be forced to act as aggressors incentives to attach first victory can be quick and decisive war will be profitable WHen defense has the advantage and states of roughly equal size anarchy is not so constraining status quo states can make themselves secure without threatening others security dilemmaanarchy not such a big constraint example soviet union and usa mutual deterred distruction defense has advantages you have incentives to protect wars would be long and costly reduces security delimma cooperates is easier geography The offense defense balance 26 gt technology game changers sails 19th century heavy mobile artillery ww11 highly mechanized armies nukes 2nd strike capability and deterrence security cheap when offensive and defensive postures are distinguishable unertainty of intentions that exacerbates security dilemma is removed when force postures are easy to distinguish how can actors distinguish between offense and defense when its walls and tunnels and fences and razor wires are easy cases of defense but when its not clear to distinguish things get complicated worst of all possible worls implications offensice posture is not distinguishable from defensive one and offensive has t he advantage its the worst of ALL scenarios according to jarvis leads to uncertainty when anarchy and the security delimma are determining what states do and limiting their options Next worst of all possible worlds can distinguish postures offensive has advantage Offensive posture is distinguishable from defensive and offensive has the advantage No secutiry dilemma but agression is possible so its not the spiral model but the rival and counter part are starting to guid up and threaten you and its clear status quo powers can pursue different policy than aggressors get warning In a better safer world uncertainty cant distinguish the posture but defense has advantage Defense has the advantage but cant distinguish offensive from defensive posture security dilemma yes but security requirements may be compatible BEST OF ALL POSSIBLE WORLDS 27 when security is abundant defense has the advantage and can distinguish offensive from defensive posture doubly stable peace anarchy and security dilemma is not at all contraining security is ABDUNDANT in other conditions security is scarce its really hard to feel secure and be secure in the conditions jurvis very important to study Managing anarchy another way anarchy can be managed waltz second image breaking open the black balls looking inside the biliar balls they would argue what goes on inside those countries MAKES a difference kant s perpetual peace liberal states tend to be more peaceful non liberal states are more dangerous hes making a second image analyses liberal states versus nonliberal states Kants perpetual peace if you believe democracy are inheritnaly more peaceful then it may be in your interest to make other countries more peaceful they can become more like us citizens enjoy juridical equality and civic rights sovreigns rule by consent of the governed private property rights respected economic decisions supply and demand BREAKING OPEN THE BLACK BOX 28 international implications of liberal principles and institutions mutual respect for principles freedom from forge in intervention represetantive governments rights to political independence Widrow wilsons war message 1917 oppose quotselfsih and autocratic power set up concert of purpose among free and self governed peoples of the world Kants perpetual peace 1795 3 articles of peace 1st article repulican government private property market legal equality of citizens representative government 2nd article of peace pacific union not world government steady spread of liberal republics not one treaty not world government non agression 3rd article of peace cosmopolitan law free trade free movement of labor 29 universali hospitality rights of access to fellow member states for commerce and entry borders would be opened interdependence leading to peace adding to absolute gain everyone will be winning and represented and everyone will have sovereign equality and citizenship Kant perpetual peace Constitutional law check political power representation and separation of pwerrs tame ambitions rulers need for consent of governed who will bear burden of war GUARANTEES CAUTION kant has a lot of faith in international law can have an independent effect that leads to a more peaceful world transparency free speech communication guarantees mutual respect its an idealistic perspective anarchy vs hierarchy how institutions can help feb 10 Kants perpetual peace idealistic perspective 1st law Constitutional law representation and separation of powers tames ambitions 3O rulers need for consent of governed who will bear burdens of war Guarantees caution 2nd law is International law transperancy free speech communication Guarantees respect 3rd law cosmopolitain law free trade mutual interdpendence facilitates mutual accommodation ALL THREE TYPES OF LAW REQUIRED FOR PERPETUAL PEACE PACIFIC UNION kant cracks open the biliar ball and this is where constitutional law and democratic values go in Democratic peace theory gt applies to mature stable democracies will not go to war with each other peaceful transition UK to US will go to war with nondemocracies managing anarchy WaltZ s second image anarchy versus hierarchy 31 how institutions can help realism power is the most important thing kant and rationalists state preferences also matter rationalist argument its about state preferences not about their identity i intentionsresolvereputationsexpectations they map nicely onto jurvisces argument about force postures centuries of stability in asia hierarchy dominant status quo power smaller states adjust only european engaged in classical realist balancing past 150 years not universal contra realism anarchy vs hierarchy what states want and what states do matter not just distribution of power hierarchy within anarchy hierarchy not empire communication can promote stability weaker states accommodate adjust context matters including secondimage factors How institutions can help states manage anarchy WaltS second image anarchy versus hierarchy 32 how institutions can help NATO promotes stability the UN how do states monitor institutions can help monitor international atomic agency conduct surveillance and make sure states are sticking by agreements they39ve made and keep states from CHEATING if they have some kind of mechanism that they can punish the states the world trade organizations if you violate there laws it can authorize the states thats been harmed to issue economic sanctions rational logic of consequences HOW INSTITUTIONS CAN HELP recude uncertainty foster communication promote transperancy reduce transaction costs provide a focal point for cooperation monitor compliance enforce agreements feb 12 POWER use of force compel its an active use of force and top capability defend 2nd best capability if you dont have the resources ex tunnels big walls weaponry to protect territory deter passive use of force you have it there you39re not really intending to use it its the cheapest version of security some might argue sawgger showing your colors your capabilities and weaponry 33 all states seek defensive capabilities this comes from the notion of the security deliemma we are in an anarchic world and you have to be able to provide for your own security the uses of force preemptive the attack can happen any moment and if you strike first you39ll hav the advantage attack imminent prevent attack inevitable difference urgencytimig types of power basic notion of power coercive power a gets b to do what b otherwise would not do how do states coerce they might bomb threaten how do terrorists coerce suicide attacks constructive understanding f power barnett and duvall power and kind of social relation power tat produces effects on capacities of actors to determine conditions of their existence structural power refers to constitution of capacities and the structural relation of one to another example they might talk about the structural power of capitalism hw capitalism structures our society etc productive power unique contrcstivist notion of power barnet and duval point of view is why do we see THIS a problem and not THAT example a lot of focus and attention on rape as a use of war but whats ignored is the children born of war that are treated badly and born in these conditions thinking of productive power its a problem that define language is very important in this perspective 34 contructivist productive power languages has a big influence communicative interactions alter international affairs types of powe power as attribute of specific actors and their interactions power as a social process of constituting which actors are social beings their identities and capacities effects of power specificallt does power work through social relations directly and specifically hard power or does it work through social relations indirectly and diffucly soft power power over power to capacity opportunity different types of power can operate simultaneously cumpolsuray institutional SirUCtUFaI Unique constructivist contribution productive unique constructivist contribution logic of terrorism use of viol eve against civilians terrorists are strategic actors terrorist have goals terreorsits extremists are politically weak relative to the demands they make and not likely to get their goals going through government processes and not enough 35 supporters and votes for whatever it is that they want so they have to use alternative means to achieve their goals are ancient hatreds to blame if people want peace why not just make a deal why does mistrust prevent a deal in some situations but not others incomplete info terrorists work in small and secretive networks its hard for gmont to get infos about them so the targeted states often lack info terrorist networks have every incentives to exaggerate strengths and skills and commitment to the cause they use attacks to demonstrate their power there are a lot of limitations to information that states and terrorists will share with each other terrorists cant reveal their plans and strategies ahead of time so incomplete info is part of it they have incentives not to fully share info and target states have a hard time getting info about the info according to rational perspective its a bargaining problem and the problem of incomplete info this is very similar to james fern how is it similar commitment problems and indivisibility feb19 terrorism as a bargaining problem bargaining failures that can lead to terrorism 1 incomplete information 2 commitment problems must demonstrate credibilty they have to appear to be credible actors that are capable of carrying out what they say they have incentives to exaggerate strengths and commitment to the cause 3 indivisibilities terrorism as a result of indivisibilities many claim religious sites are indivisible example Jerusalem 36 states make concessions they make concessions to terrorist in order to reduce the fear of future attacks but lack of credibility on both sides makes it harder for the two parties to make deals that would make them both better off targets must be able to judge how credible their commitments are or wether they can control their own members most acts of terrorism have nothing to do with religion mostly request for independence and nationalist claims terrorists have an incentive to construct an issue as indivisible one strategy coercion to reduce fear hoping to induce policy change will get americans to pressure congress to remove soldiers from arab peninsulas credible a threat of future violence the usa uses drones to attack terrorists this activity can actually play in to the terrorist strategy this has hurt our reputation and increased mistrust of usa and more sympathetic example palestinians have lead the israeli gmont to go to far with the western settlements etc so it reduces the legitimacy of the israeli gmonts actions to some people who are actors a target state or population aterrorist organization feb 21 embedded liberalism 37 multilateralism liberalization policy autonomy social saftey nets Mercantilist era sought goods to satisfy empire merchantilism was costly Merchantilism interests security through power control of markets and resources interactions Zero sum bargaining among states institutions few international institutions beyond the norm of sovereignty Struggle for supremacy economic competition in europe fight over wealth power and influence the thirty years war SEALED THE DECLINE OF SPAIN ended with the peace of Westphalia the hundred years peace the gold standard gold becomes a major monetary system effect first era of globalization because with gold you had something that all people could exchange and this monetary system was recognized across empires it was a national currency 38 the golden era interests economic wealth through trade and investment interactions informal diplomacy state cooperation in security and economic affairs institutions british hegemony gold standard free trade agreements economic security and the concert of Europe THE COLONIAL EMPIRES 1914 austria hungary belguim britain china denmark ffrance germany italy japan netherlands ottoman empire ponugal russia spain usa TENSION IN EUROPE sources of conflict after 1900 changing european power balance 39 weakening ottoman austrohungarian and russian empires new political and economic actors emerge Rise of Germany population and econ largest in europe economic recovery after ww1 in europe recovery slow and partial hypenn a on in germany prices rose to a level of trillion times prewar effects bankrupted middle classes increased labor and socialist party support nationalism intensified politics polarized THE GLOBAL GREAT DEPRESSION downward spiral began in 1929 no country left untouched every country was bankrupt massive poverty every country started to adopt really strong measures smoot hawley abandoning the gold standard 30 years crisis interests security through alliances and expansion economic selfsufficiency interactions world war 1 and 2 economic beggarthyneighbors policies institutions global cooperations collapsed in 1914 the league of nations attempted to resolve conflict failed albeit without US participation the political trilemma of the world economy 40 EMBEDDED LIBERALISM multilateralism liberalization policy autonomy social safety nets feb 26 International trade trade is mutually beneficial oppetrunties new markets more efficiency cheaper products division of labor specialization absolute advantage aggregate gains adam smith on comparative advantage if a foreign country can supply us with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it better buy it of them with some part of the produce of our own industry employed in a way in which we have some advantage factors of production land gt labor capital is it abundant or scarce whats a countries advantage 41 capital abundant country like usa you are going to export capital intensive goods if you39re labor abundant pakistan china export labor intensive goods Hecksherohlin model nation 1 labour abundant nation 2 trade restrictions tarrifs quoats non tarrif barriers subsidies prohibition why do countries restrict trade trade barriers redistribute income from patterns of trade restrictions domestic preferences in trade policy factor based preferences stopler samuelson free trade favors abundant factors capital in US restrictions on trade favor scarce factors labor in US patterns of trade restrictios Domestic preferences in trade policy specific factors based preferences Ricardo Viner preferences stem not from ownership but by employmentindustry everyone in a competitive industry favors free trade capital and labor consumers benefits from open trade large group poorly organized import competitors benefits from trade restrictions small group well organized exporters and import competitors government listens to them 42 some actors enjoy advantages in political power over trade policy collective action policy change as a public good consumers and foreign producers rarely able to organize for collective action summary political institutions effect power over trade policy representation no rep for consumers broader based institutions favor large groups check power of smaller ones and promote liberalized trade WTO democracies less protectionist than dictatorships in Us president less protectionist than us congress IPE midterm will focus on this IV patterns of trade restrictions compensation and trade policy trade produces winners and losers INTERNATIONAL TRADE Interaction trade policy can be seen as a strategic interaction between trading partners how can international trade policies a result of strategic interaction among states every states wants to have consumers to sell to they want markets no one wants others to have access to their consumers you want to be winner take all and be the biggest market share how can game theory help us understand the logic of strategic interaction if two countries both act like mercantilists A has a choice A can close a s market B has a choice B can close b s market if both have closed markets the economy isn39t going to grow A has a choice a decides to open its market but b decides to close it suckers ay off in prisoners dillemma worst thing for a but best thing for b also the same if switched around 2nd best for both if a and b keeps its market to each other 3rd best closed markets and then theres at lining in a prisoners dilemma how can states move policy towards the direction where both benefits in positive econ growth for both parties 43 global trade agreements GATT open up world markets promote mutual trade liberalization by reducing tariffs agriculture was completely left out people were paranoid about food security 1 norms of reciprocity and national safeguards 2 negotiating rounds addressed different issues or sectors after 1945 US barriers get smaller and smaller international institutions can help keep countries committed to open trade the world trade origination replaced the GATT in 1994 general agreements of trade and tarrifs GATT vs WTO 1 membership is huge WTO different preferences over trade diff capabilities diff resources this helps to complicate reaching agreement 2 GATT is small 3 WTO hard law enforcable binding laws if you violate the treaties the GATT wasn39t there was a lot of wiggle room if you violate in WTO thers a lot of consequences why wto with more members parties felt that a stronger institution was needed GATT had addressed the easiest issues yet stalled on more contenious ones such as services and agriculture international trade diff interest we have producers and consumers we have importers and eXporters capital labor and land interactions in intl trade strategic interactions institutions can promote cooperation summary international institutions can help promote trade INTERNATIONAL TRADE domestic politics small groups can mobilize to protect interests when interettes are directly threatened 1970s and 1980s players disney pharmacuetical HRMA bill gatesmicrosoft they had surpluses and positive trade balances they were making tons of money we are the industries Of the future wall street also did this if we could get the usa government to enforce our policies abroad then we would make even more money so this would help us they were able to make a legitimate case to tell government to have open markets abroad and have intellectual property protection of US based goods and services 44 PROMISES PROMISES uruguay round 1986 1995 TRIPS GATS Financial services these proiese had yet to be delivered SINGAPORE ISSUES trade facilitation trade and competition policy transparency in government procurement trade and investment STALEMATE battle for seatlle 1999 doha 2001 cancun 2003 a lot more vertical form shifting ins tea of staying at the WTO level the rich countries are very upset they didn39t get a stronger agreement in WTO a lot of suspicion a lot of mistrust between developmental countries and developed countries TRADE and labor environment The international politics of monetary policy Introduction IPE focuses on the POLITICS of economic policy Distributional consequences winner and losers political con ict over choose money the ultimate social construction purpose of money its a store of value it has a medium of exchange foreigen exchange systems fixed requires a lot of political intervention state led approach to exchange rate mixed mixture of state and market state intervention to keep it within a band they don39t last very long not ever very successful bc of push and pull between state and markets 45 oating exible pure market all about supply and demand yor currency is more valuable in high demad if its not in demand its not worth so much will go up and down with uctuations in the market gold standard the fixed system where britain said the pound sterling x amount of bars in gold it requires a lot of political intervention britain until the great depression usa was the guarantee until 1971 wizzard of 022 was about the gold standard the yellow brick road gold standard tin man industrial worker ozz capitalists bretton woods system negotiated a new monetary system US guaranteed that 35 us 1 ounce of gold mundell eming the euro crisis Bretton Woods system fixed to get economic growth after the war to create a monetary system that would be stable and organized around the dollar to ge the economy going again dollar gold parity gold standard cacpital controls after ww2 theres a spectacular and successful postwar boom credibility of USA commitment strong until 1971 speculative attacks lead to US ABANDONS B W system of fixed exchange rates war on poverty nixon didn39t want the gold standard international monetary funds initial purpose was to help countries out and its biggest clients were our post war allies Mundell eming the impossible trinity 46 countries ade different trade offs states began to abandon capital controls you cant have all 3 international free ow of capital monetary autonomy and fixed exchange fixed rates independent moneytary policy policycapital controls BW system post nixon for the US oating rates independependet monetary policy delinking gold freed nixons hands Mundel eming oating rates inject unpredictablity set by market supply and demand options give up autonomy for stability EURO DOLLARIZATION Financial Crises competition between new york and london as a result the USA started to allow bankers to go offshore and set up subsidiers in the city of london and lend dollars regulatory arbitrage 1999 US repeal of glass steagall act removed firewall between commercial and investment banking ASIAN financial crisis all about currency speculation 2008 financial crisis definition and example comparative advantage lower opportunity cost embedded liberalism want to create free markets International financial relations credit crunch toxic assets new financial instruments foreign aid BRICS challengers or partners 47 unequal growth is causing a lot of dissatisfaction how are leaders of these countries going to manage that social and political stability Ikenberry the liberal international order has no competitors FAILED STATES CRISES and The UNITED NATIONS failed states theres no functioning government some do but theyrre not serving their people and theres famine and civil war mainly a threat to their own people blamed on the west are they destined to fail do we have a moral obligation do we need a policy international states burma sudan do states want to be helped ghani and lockhart failed states need to be connected to global markets to unleash their potential politics and power not a simple matter of economics and efficiency R2P responsibility to protect a doctrine that supports the idea of humanitarian intervention an unaaceptable assault on a countries sovreighnty or a moral duty A balancing Act Values in Tension morality and justice law order politics Who decides whats a violation Responsibility to protect 1990s humanitarian intervention the right to intervene 48 SOMALIA december 4 1992 usa will lead a peace keeping mission with the main aid of food delivery the rational was humanitarian the CNN effect somali walaod mohammed farah aideed 1993 october 1993 usa army rangers delta force ambushed by somali men women and children armed with automatic weapons and rocket propelled grenades famine civil war and escalating hostilities between UsUn peace keeping forces and aideed and his supporters a 90 minute operation has lasted 17 hours black hawk down Responsibility to protect inconsistent application protecting communities and individuals from internal violence rwanda darfur bosnia syria HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION AND CIVIL WAR THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL can authorize military intervention in a sovereign country BUT needs consensus of 5 permanent members of security council each has a veto UN lacks a standing army must rely on contributions of member states post cold war peace keeping to offer humanitarian protection to manage failed states in 1992 UNS agenfa for peace Expanding conditions for intervention e g genocide UNSC resolution 1674 april 2006 asserted responsibility to protect R2p populations from u genoc1de war crimes ethnic cleans1ng and cromes aga1nsthuman1ty RAWANDA 1916 belgium took it over from germany 49 Hutus and tutSi liVeS as 0116 spoke same language intermarried and obeyed nearly god like tutsi king after independence in 1956 monarchy dissolved the belgian troops withdrew two new contries emerged ethnic con ict in 1994 with the civil war in rwanda hundereds of thousands of tutsi dead in burundi a hutu won the countries first democratic election in 1993 he was killed in an attempted coup four months later and his sucessor in a suspicious lane crash afterwards UNAMIR united nations assistance mission in rwanda Belgian led UN peacekeeping mission in rwanda tutsi and hutu parties had signed a ceasefire agreement General Romeo Dellaire force commander january 11 1994 cable seeks protection of top level trained informant of interhamwe armed militia Cases DARFUF 2003 Black Africans in Darfur rebelled against countries arab muslims leadership sought infrastructure proceeds from oil wealth power sharing government of sudan organized and supplied J anj aweed militia DARFUR Genocide convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide signed by all members of the UN General assembly in 1948 july 2007 UNSC unanimous resolution joint UnAfrica union peacekeeping force UNAMID authorized 26000 soldiers Why national interests get in the way russia china UNAMID trying to keep a peace that doesn39t eXist sudan doesn39t want them in violence and location makes it difficult to operate 50 HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERVENTION a balancig act Questions and challenges selective hypocrisy of western countries dallaire on arbitrariness re yugoslavia vs darfur u war crimes crimes against humanity genoc1de acts of genocide ethnic cleansing who decides lesson of the 1990s lasting humanitarian protection requires peaceMAKING not just peacekeeping is foreign intervention in failed states or to punish genocide leaders a new form of imperialism what would happen if the international community embraced this principle Humanitarian Intervention and the Cil war 2 humanitarian intervention sounds good but its not as clear cut as it seems at first 0 why not issue of whose inviting you in are they authentic 0 what are some of he complications of humanitarian intervention opportunity cost of humanitarian intervention 0 Valentino The true costs of humanitarian intervention why regimes change is harder than it sounds 0 Roland paris on afghanistan 0 AleX Downes on Libya and historical record 0 bottom line should we stay or should we go 0 What would biddle freedom and long say about a continuing presence in iraq o would they agree with the clash If i the us stay tree will be trouble Ifi go it will be double 0 what are the most important factors that should guide US judgement on its containing presence or withdrawal important terms GLOBALIZATION the speed of activities and ideas across the globe as applied to economics globalization involves increasing integration of national economies through the movement of goods services and money across borders 3 perspectives of globalizations 51 REALISM and GLOBALIZATION focus on the distribution of power see globalization as a factor of distribution of power precede and determine trade interdependence institutions and ideas global trade ourishes under hegemony and recedes under multipolarity key periods age of mercantilism and colonialism an britannica multipolar interwar period an america LIBERALISM and GLOBALIZATION focus on technological change and institutions keyevents agriculture and industrial revolution emergence of markets and laisses faire creation of bretton woods institutions the advent of the information revolution globalization is enabled and caused by technological change specialization trade and interdependence and global rules and institutions CONSTRUCTIVISM and GLOBALIZATION focus on ideas values norms etc key periods renaissance and reformation enlightenment marXism versus capitalism keynesian versus neoclassical liberalism the washington consensus idea transform the way people interact what activities they pursue and what institutions they create summary realism globalization is the result of a hegemony liberalism globalization as a result of technological change and institutions constructivism globalization as a result of changing ideas norms and identities IS GLOBALIZATION SUSTAINABLE current wave of globalization began in the early 1980s spread of neoliberal ideology opened economies to global markets technological innovations in communications internet and high speed commenting and transportation improved commerce fall of ussr opened new markets and reduced hostility to global markets globalization is a positive thing it has increased material welfare HOWEVER it has created both winners and losers doesn39t mean everyone benefits the same distributional consequences IS GLOBALIZATION SUSTAINABLE ricardo viner theory trade interests are determined by sector eXporters want open trade import competing industries domestic producers want protection like the sugar producing industry in orida 52 Stopler samuelson theorem focuses on factors of production land capital labor abundant factors want more and scarce factors want less open trade you get capital versus labor you have a class divide over the long run stopler samuelson more relevant capital verus labor CHALLENGES EOM THE DEVELOPED COUTNRIES production of labor intensive goods has moved to the developing world earner labor rights in the developed wprld minimum wage prohibition of child labor limits on hours worked worker safety regulations rapid growth of economic activity hastens the degradation of the environment developing countries lack environmental regulations from the developing countries perspective cons weak social nets lead to greater insecurity less access to institutions for collective action less political clout and less redistribution increased volatility can lead to in ation and unemployment WILL GLOBALIZATION LEAD TO GLOBAL GOVERNMENT as globalization deepens the deman for institutions increases institutions set rules and provide ways to monitor and enforce compliance they are useful when you have many actors who share the same interest and find it hard to organize most international organizations are represented at the state level but theres a problem because the state might not be interested in the losers from globalization if you ave an oppressive regime for example institutions are not neutral in their distributional effects example IMF there is USA japan germ nay great britain and france as the biggest share holders if this distribution was made by population china would be onto as well as india international law umberella term includes international humanitarian law itl criminal law itl investment law trade law relevance realism pessismistic about intl law only care about hard law Liberalism functionalist perspective regulative aspects of law contsructivism 53 optimistic emphasize soft law Evidence of slow down less official multilateral treaties preference for informal groups and meetings reasons for the slowdown new actors 116W pI OCCSSCS new outputs international criminal court in 1998 rome statute example of traditional intl law other ad hoc international criminal tribunals ie ICTY and ICTR Jurisdiction over genocide war crimes crimes against humanity nationals of a state that has signed the treaty cromes commited on the territory of a signatory state simons and danner puzzle why would states sign the rome statue they do not care about desirability or effectiveness of the court argument credivle commitment theory raises eXpected costs relative to a regime of impunity sovriengty costs most likely signatories unaccountable autocracies with recent history of internal con ict highly principles non violent states ie scandinavian countries Thomas Lubanga sentenced to 14 years for recruiting and using child soldiers on congo con ict 2002 2003 lst ICC conviction transnational networks and human rights 54 examples ngos environment doctors wo borders bbc world news aljazeera types of transnational networks churches professional judges labor unions impact of TANS agenda settingdeveloping new norms commit implement policy presuring states boomerang amnesty international human rights watch human rights a half century of progress Human rights a half century of progress abefore wwl universal claim to human rights for individuals lacked legitimacy state sovereignty or rights of groups prevailed over individual rights before 1940 UN universal declaration of human rights UNDHR there was no written code of international human rights Defining human rights conception of human rights usually follow western ideals freedom of speech assembly etc UDHR two binding agreements international covenant on economics social and cultural rights ICESCR defining human rights weaker states may see foreign efforts to promote individual political rights as a means of increasing western in uence human rights global public goos nonexcludable nonrival like all public goods human rights suffers states can use sovereignty to de ect foreign challenges to a poor human rights record strengthening of human rights regime 55 some states grant in constitution right of citizens to appeal to international bodies in revised international institutions replacement of UN commission on human rights with UN human rights council 2006 Human rights human rights in international domestic politics levels of analysis rationalism constructivism does membership in international organizations affect human rights behavior socialization billiard balls rational choice constructivism does commitments to international institutions have independent effects on state behavior like fearon micro mechanisms and role of information does the rise of china pose a threat to us or global security while always a major power has significantly increased strength in past 25 years economic reforms in 1978 created a long lasting economic boom rise of china economic gains have led to military modernization china more diplomatically and politically engaged projecting power globally mearshimers says yes known capabilities uncertainty of intentions cant always distinguish defensive capabilities jervis US does not tolerate competitors mearshimer offensive realist o o o o o o o international politics is nasty and dangerous bus1ness and no amount of good Wlll can ameliorate the intense security competition that sets in when an aspiring hegemony appears in eurasia we cant know chinas intention so we should assume the worst would a transition to a chinese hegemony significantly change the world as sovereign state china has its own security and economic interests to pursue that it may not be able to now due to us hegemony china has been socialized into international institutions and norms may lead to stability 56 china seems to have a vested stake in current economic order The decline of the west debray and adelman argument reading both authors believe unipolarity or dominance of the west may not go away any time soon but it wont be there forever deb ray talks about historical dans structural elements and adelman talks about choices and behaviors debray goes through plus and minuses hes a critic of the US hes left of center in terms of the argument he lists 5 trumps and 5 minuses the five trumps unprecedented cohesion according to deb ray nato speaks with a single voice its a consolidated security alliance nobody in the western sphere challenges primacy the us is the main voice the second plus is that it has a monopoly on the universal it can promote its own particularistic interest as being good for the whole world freedom prossperity emancipation progress etc and its packaged for something thats positive for everyone the third is global and business school programming human sensibilities and scientific innovation third deb ray talks about the us as a global business school the role of the us in educated international elites many leaders from abroad have come here to study the us plays a big role in teaching foreigners the rule of law good governance the washington consensus the us degree is prestiges in many parts of the world and that means they39re learning western views and according to deb ray this turns dominance into acceptance its a lot easier to maintain control if your subjects accept and buy into your basic values the fourth programming human sensibilities this is really about soft power our culture our values deb ray talks about the dollar being the reserve currency which gives us a lot of advantage in terms of spreading our word abroad he points to hollywood mcshonalds blue jeans baseball etc so the role of soft power isn39t to be underestimated the fifth plus for the west is scientific innovation he highlights MIT silicone valley etc He talks about the weld wide web and the web promotes the individual over the group and the web eevates the horizontal quality of social relationships it creates space for individual initiative and this is important for the western ways of thinking however there are negatives one is hubris of the global imperial overstretch the UN seems little more than a cork on the ocean stubbornness of the local superiority compleX insists on primacy of the individual we have a lot of ignorance sometimes theres no plan or strategy no knowledge of local culture this can create blind spots and were often ignorant of the local context the us really focuses on the individual whereas most of the rest of the world doesn39t really see the world that way its a western conceptio most of the world is composed of communities that 57 are shaping their values in important ways according to derby this hemisphere of communities sets its compass neither by human rights or human groups the usa sees itself as exceptional and countries that appose the international criminal court another weakness in rems of the west is this refusal of sacrifice only one percent of the american population sacrificed in war which is not healthy for society theres refusal of sacrifice and prison of short termismdispersal of trouble makers moravcsik a lberal analysis stein a hegemon needs followers mearssheimer vs debray different antologies the world is made up of 58 individuals rationalist self interest freedom on speech etc states ralists communities constructivists like identity shared values the logic of approprriateness what does it mean to be a good and just person live together in the world how do we shape each others ways of thinking about things they are interested in change and focus on how communities shape our identity
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'