PSC 231 Tuman Midterm Review Answers
PSC 231 Tuman Midterm Review Answers PSC 231
Popular in Intro to Int'l Relations
Popular in Political Science
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
This 12 page Study Guide was uploaded by Stephanie Smith on Tuesday August 16, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to PSC 231 at University of Nevada - Las Vegas taught by John Tuman in Summer 2016. Since its upload, it has received 8 views. For similar materials see Intro to Int'l Relations in Political Science at University of Nevada - Las Vegas.
Reviews for PSC 231 Tuman Midterm Review Answers
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: 08/16/16
231 Midterm Review Answers 1) Brieﬂy discuss the differences between Intergovernmental organizations and non- governmental actors. Provide examples of each type of organization. Intergovernmental organization (IGO) - An organization (such as the United Nations and its agencies) whose members are state governments. nongovernmental organization (NGO)- A transnational group or entity (such as the Catholic Church, Greenpeace, or the International Olympic Committee) that interacts with states, multinational corporations (MNCs), other NGOs, and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs). nonstate actors - Actors other than state governments that operate either below the level of the state (that is, within states) or across state borders. -intergovernmental organization (World Bank, IMF, UN) -Non-governmental actors (Red Cross, Amnesty International) Type Who Are They? Examples Intergovernmental Organizations Members are national UN, NATO, World Bank governments Nongovernmental Organizations Members are individuals and Amnesty International, Red groups Cross 2) Deﬁne and discuss the principles of reciprocity, dominance, and identity. How does these principles relate to the study of IR? dominance - A principle for solving collective goods problems by imposing solutions hierarchically. reciprocity - A response in kind to another’s actions; a strategy of reciprocity uses positive forms of leverage to promise rewards and negative forms of leverage to threaten punishment. identity - A principle for solving collective goods problems by changing participants’ preferences based on their shared sense of belonging to a community. —> relate because of the collective goods problem collective goods problem - A tangible or intangible good, created by the members of a group, that is available to all group members regardless of their individual contributions; participants can gain by lowering their own contribution to the collective good, yet if too many participants do so, the good cannot be provided. Dominance as a way to solve the collective goods problem “hegemons” at the top force others to contribute Identity Reciprocity - operates according to incentives eg. free trade (low tariffs for your exports, means you as a state have to have low tariffs on imports) 3) Analyze the theory of Structural Realism. What are the assumptions of Structural Realism? According to Structural Realism, when is conﬂict and war in the international states system more likely? In general, what does this theory suggest about the behavior of states? Assumptions of structural realism 1. International system is characterized by anarchy -anarchy does not mean chaos - it implies that states are competing within a system in which there is no centralized authority to impose outcomes, rules, hierarchy; -no state is going to help other states willingly -realists don’t think that the UN or IOs have much ability to restrain the behavior of sovereign states -The UN will just end up reﬂecting the structure of power that already exists -a range of power distributions (unipolar, bipolar, multipolar) is possible in the anarchical international system, but realists note that when great powers exist, which implies an inequality in the distribution of power in the system, they are the most important actors in the system. 2. States are rational; and their main objective is survival -rational: they formulate strategies to maximize beneﬁts (power), minimize costs. also implies consistency between preferences and behavior -assume that values, altruism etc. have no inﬂuence on the conduct of states -i.e. always strive to maximize power, minimize costs 3. States have offensive military capability, although this capacity varies All states have offensive military capability, though it varies across times and across states at any one point in time. Military capability is inﬂuenced by economic structure. Realists divide states into great powers (and hegemonic states), middle powers, and minor powers 4. States have uncertainty regarding other states’ intentions Given the structure of power in the international system, one can never be sure if any other state is a revisionist state or status quo state. Difﬁcult to discern intentions of other states. eg. never be surprised when an ally spies on you 5. States are relatively autonomous from domestic interests -controversial assumption -Interests groups, voters, or social classes on state behavior in the international system, realists suggest that states are relatively autonomous 6. States are cohesive when they formulate foreign polity (unitary actor assumption) Assume that the state is a unitary actor; they ignore possible divisions within the state, including bureaucratic competition, or struggles between executive and legislative 7. Regime type is not relevant in explaining state behavior -states are driven to behave in a similar way, regardless of whether state is governed by an authoritarian or democratic regime. John Meerschimer at UChicago says it doesn’t matter whether Iran has a nuclear bomb because Iran will never use it (even though they are oppressive and evil) because states only do things in the interest of their own survival and if Iran used the bomb it would never survive When war is most likely according to structural realists: 1) Power transition and war -war is inﬂuenced by the power distribution of the international system Realists hypothesize that war among great powers, in particular, is more likely when: -the system is multipolar (right before WWI) -the system is unipolar by shows great signs of power transition (a single power is in decline, and a challenge has emerged) (Currently, China rising as a challenger) Multipolar systems make balancing less efﬁcient and miscalculations more likely. In a unipolar system, where power is in transition, the single great power may be tempted to engage in preemptive war with a challenger. China’s activities are watched carefully by realist scholars. However, when the system is bipolar, the system tends to be more stable; Great powers are relatively equal and have resources to counter-balance each other. Collective action problems are fewer and miscalculation is less likely. The result: proxy wars, small conﬂicts, stable international system. 4) Analyze the theory of Neoliberalism. What are some of the differences between Liberal and Neoliberal theories of IR? What are some of the assumptions made by neoliberal theories? Discuss what neoliberal suggest about the basis for cooperation in the international system. Overview 1. Intellectual Origins Kant, Smith 2. “Liberal” in IR theory has a different meaning in contemporary US political discourse. Classical liberalism here refers to limited government with democracy; economically, it refers to free markets and open trade. Historically, in the European context, these ideas were seen as liberal compared to their predecessors. 3. Difference between Liberal and Neoliberal Approaches Liberal theory acknowledges effects of domestic-level on foreign policy (example: democratic peace theory) Neoliberal theory, in contrast, shares the assumptions of Structural Realism; but it departs signiﬁcantly from the conclusions of realism Assumptions of Neoliberalism 1. International system characterized by anarchy 2. Stats are self-interest;a nd they’re unitary actors 3. The domestic level does not inﬂuence conduct of states in the int. system 4. Although states are self-interested, the can adapt and learn “enlightened self-interest” Neoliberal Explanations of IR 1. International regimes inﬂuence cooperation and conﬂict What are regimes? Regimes may be narrow or brand. They may deal with a single issues area, such as management of whales or conservation of certain species, or they may be fairly broad, such as ones that address security or health. Regimes are often associated with IGOs such as the UN, World Trade Organization, World Health Organization, and the International Whaling Commission Regimes include rules, procedures, and norms. Neoliberal hypothesize that the rules and norms associated with regimes restrain the myopic self-interested behavior of states. 2. Regimes overcome the collective action problem; result is cooperation Decision-making procedures in regimes promote transparency because it is easy to see if any one state is free-riding; reinforces effects of reciprocity and helps to overcome free rider problem. Regimes also have mechanisms to resolve disputes, and provided that these disputes resolution procedures are seen as relatively fair and neutral, this keeps states from defecting. Eg. WTO Staff and agencies associated with regimes function to monitor compliance an identify sets who are free riders. Members of regimes meet often, facilitating cooperation (eg. 2008 global economic crisis and the IMF) 5) Discuss World-Systems and the Dependency perspective. In what ways, if any, do these theories differ from Structural Realism and Neoliberalism? According to World-Systems and Dependency theories, what are the effects of trade and investment relations between “core” and “peripheral” states? What role does the “semi-periphery” play in the international system? Theories of IR - Dependency and Historical-Structural Approaches Intellectual Background -Marx - view of capitalism, state; signiﬁcance of social classes -believed that history is progressive -cycle of overproduction and underconsumption -Lenin - focus on imperialism in “solving” capitalist crises; war as caused by imperialist rivalry (scramble for colonies and resources) -force colonies to take excess when companies overproduce -Wallerstein (World Systems Theory) - core / periphery -core (owners) —> US, Japan, China, Germany, periphery (workers) —> global south, and semi-periphery (middle class)—> south Korea, South Africa Assumptions 1. States are not autonomous from social class inﬂuences -Reduction of international relations and politics to agenda of MNC and transnational elite 2. Global capitalism is prone to crisis, contradiction -Overproduction, underconsumption are endemic problems in capitalist economies -Finance capital continues to create problem Explanations of International and Regional Relations 1. Transnational elites and networks of inﬂuence in periphery Elites in periphery linked to elites in IGOs, MNC’s, and elite in Core Displacement of “nationalist” elites in Global South with “neoliberal” elites Democratization as a project of the Core 2. Global Distribution of Wealth Core-Periphery relations result in perpetuation of poverty in Global South Mechanisms: unequal exchange, commodity chains, effects of FDI, race to the bottom Relative movement of some to semi-periphery exception, not the rule 3. International Conﬂict 6) What do constructivists claim about state identities and interests? How do constructivists explain the emergence and diffusion of international norms? Also, note some of the points made by feminist scholars of IR. constructivism - A movement in IR theory that examines how changing international norms and actors’ identities help shape the content of state interests. p 81 Constructivism draws heavily on the identity principle Constructivism is interested in how actors deﬁne their national interests, threats to those national interests, and their interests’ relationships to one another. Just as a shopper may decide to buy a particular smartwatch because it will be perceived as cool (that is, more socially acceptable), so states may choose policies based on what they perceive will be “popular” with other states. Example: For example, why is the United States con- cerned when North Korea builds nuclear weapons, but not when Great Britain does? Realists would quickly answer that North Korea poses a bigger threat, but from a pure military power perspective, Great Britain is a far superior military force to North Korea. Yet no one would argue that Great Britain is a threat to the United States no matter how many nuclear weapons it builds and no matter how deep disagreements CONSTRUCTING IDENTITIES Constructivist theories, based on the core principle of identity, see actors’ preferences as constructed by the actors rather than given “objectively.” These theories may do better than realist or liberal approaches in explaining major changes in a state’s foreign policy goals and image in the world that arise from internal changes and new self- concepts rather than external constraints or opportunities. Examples might include the breakup of the Soviet Union and the election of Barack Obama as U.S. president. Iran’s identity as an Islamic revolutionary state affects its foreign policies. Here, the morals police close a barber shop in Iran for giving Western-style haircuts, 2008. about foreign policy become. Constructivist schol- ars would point out the shared history, shared alli- ances, and shared norms that tell Americans and the British they are not a threat to one another, although they are very powerful militarily. The identity of the potential adversary matters, not just its military capabilities and interests. This is a rejection of the realist assumption that states always want more rather than less power and wealth as well as the assumption that state interests exist independently of a context of interactions among states. Constructivists hold that these state identities are complex and changing, and arise from interactions with other states—often through a process of socialization. States may also come to value and covet something like status or reputation, which are social, not material, concepts. Switzerland, for example, values its role as a neutral, nonaligned state (it belongs to neither the European Union nor NATO, and joined the UN only in 2002). This status as a neutral state gives Switzerland prestige and power—not a material power like money or guns—but a normative power to intervene diplomatically in important international affairs. difference feminism - A strand of feminism that believes gender differences are not just socially constructed and that views women as inherently less warlike than men (on average) p93 7) Review some of the “domestic level” inﬂuences on foreign-policy making, with a focus on bureaucracy, interest groups, legislatures, and public opinion. What do bounded-rationality and prospect theory suggest about foreign-policy decisions? Domestic Politics / Foreign Policy Making Public opinion -media - frame issue - interest groups can have inﬂuence -public opinion is more salient on domestic issue than on foreign issues Rally around the ﬂag effect prospect theory - A decision-making theory that holds that options are assessed by comparison to a reference point, which is often the status quo but might be some past or expected situation. The model also holds that decision makers fear losses more than they value gains. Prospect Theory - Tuman is really really into this, know it well p 111 -Tursky and Konnoman -Consumer behavior in insurance markets -Make decisions in reference to the status quo -Domain of loss - hypothesize that they will adopt risky policies (if you’re successful, the public will support you) -Domain of gain - Bounded Rationality Model P111 “Satisﬁcing” model - know this -may not generate maximum utility, but will provide a satisfactory outcome (rather than an optimal one) -may be constraints on information (no perfect information), may be opportunity cost 8) Analyze the structure and composition o the UN, with a focus on speciﬁc parts (e.g., the UN General Assembly, etc.). What are some of the functions of the UN? What types of programs does it provide? I. International Organizations II. Case Study: The UN, 1945. Basic Principles: security, HR, development. A. Structure and Composition 1. UN Secretariat a) Secretary General (SG) of the UN: ban-ki Moon (Republic of Korea, 2007-11; reelected unanimously in June 2011) (1) SG serves 5-year term which is renewable; however, no one has ever served more than two terms (one, Boutros Boutros-Ghali (Egypt), served only one term due to US resistance); another, Dag Hammarskjold, died in 1961 in a plane crash while visiting peace keep operation in Rhodesia (Zambia)). (2) SG is nominated by Security Council (note signiﬁcance of veto power of permanent members). (3) Elected by majority in vote of the general assembly; election this year, with candidates (for ﬁrst time) answering questions from GA. (4) By tradition, SG does not come from a Great Power; expectation is that he should be ﬂuent in English and French (because French historically, was the language of diplomacy). (5) SG serves as spokesperson of UN; helps promote consensus among members of Security Council; is manager of UN staff, which serves no one state. b) Departments and Ofﬁces: The Secretariat is organized into 13 major departments and ofﬁces (and each is further sub-divided into speciﬁc ofﬁces and sections). (1) These ofﬁces include, for example: Executive Ofﬁce of The Secretary- General (EOSG), Ofﬁce of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), Ofﬁce of Legal Affairs (OLA) ect. (2) In addition there are 6 other divisions that are formally unter the Secretariat but more autonomous (eg. Internal Justice Bodies, International Criminal Tribunals, Special Envoys and Representatives, etc.). c) UN Staff: Civil servants (approximately 44,000, globally, in 2014) that assist the SG, Security Council, and member states in a number of areas. Note: size of “bureaucracy” has been a course of tension between UN and some in US Congress (and, during the Bush administration). 2. UN General Assembly (GA) (kinda like the legislative branch) a) Membership (1) 193 mimers (South Sudan, the newest sovereign state, saws admitted on July 14, 2011 as the newest member; prior to that, Montenegro was the last one, in 2006). (2) Permanent Observer status for other delegations (Holy See-Vatican; “State of Palestine, Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the UN”), including IGOs (Aftrican Union, Caribbean Community, European Union, ICC, ect.) (3) Admission: Section 14, rules 134-138. Security Council must recommend (9 of 15 members must approve; any permanent member may veto); GA approves with 2/3 vote of those present and voting. GA may ask SC to reconsider but can’t override a veto. b) Functions of the GA (1) Accreditation: Whose “credentials” are recognized to represent a member state? (2) Budget: GAApproves budges for UN, including peacekeeping. (3) Coordination: Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which has 54 member states selected for 3-year terms by GA, coordinates a number of programs, e.g., UNICEF. (4) Voting: Pass non-binding resolutions; elect SG; select 10 non-permanent members of the Security Council. (5) Forum: While GA is in session, members have many opportunities to voices a vision that challenges the major powers in the system. c) Politics (1) Regional groupings; North-South division; etc. 3. UN Security Council (SC) a) Membership (1) Permanent members: France, UK, China, Russia (former Soviet Union), US. Any one permanent member may veto resolution (2) Non-permanent members: Total of 10, selected in staggered terms (5 elected to 2-year staggered terms). Selected by GA, nominated through “regional” groups in GA (led by a regional middle-power, eg., Canada). (3) Note: decision rule = one member, one vote. Requires afﬁrmative vote of 9 members to pass a resolution; but any permanent member may veto. (Article 27, UN Charter). Members may abstain. b) Functions of the SC (1) Pass resolutions that seed to identify threats and resolve conﬂicts; these are binding (although the language often does not involve any sanction). (2) Sanction states that are a threat to international security (3) Authorize limited multilateral military operations to punish an aggressor state (4) Authorize peacekeeping operations of an UN military force (usually for 6 months, with possibility for renewal; note: GA must appropriate and authorize funds for these missions). 4. Autonomous Agencies a) 20 agencies are afﬁliated with the UN and coordinate their activities - including reporting and research, but their management is under control of member states. b) Examples: (1) International Civil Aviation Authority (air trafﬁc) (2) International Atomic Energy Agency (nuclear power safety, and proliferation) (3) World Health Organization (global health governance) (4) International Labor Organization (labor standards & rights) (5) International Monetary Fund (global ﬁnance & monetary relations) (6) World Bank (ﬁnance for developing world) B. Issues & Controversies with UN 1. Budgeting a) Issues: Who should bear burden? If US is major contributor, shoals UN serve US interests? b) Budget - do they waste money? (1) biennial budget (2 years) c) Components: (1) Regular Budget: Assessments on member states, based upon principle of ability to pay (“Scale of Assessment,” taking into account GDP; a ceiling; currently at 22%; level of indebtedness); 2014-2015 biennium: $5.53 billion 1% nominal reduction (2) Note: Annual budget of NYI police department in 2014: $4.67 billion. (3) % Total (2014 budget, which is $2.83 billion) - Ten states contributed more close to 60% of the annual budget; US the most. (a) US: 22% (b) Japan: 10.83% (c) China: 5.15% (d) France: 5.59% (e) Germany: 7.14% (f) Italy: 4.49% (g) Mexico: 1.84% (h) R of Korea: 1.99% (i) Russian Fed. 2.44% (j) Spain: 2.97% (k) UK: 5.18% (l) Saudi Arabia: 0.86% (m)Yemen: 0.01% (n) Zambia: 0.006% (4) Peacekeeping budget. Assessed (as a % of Regular Budget Assessment, with discounts to poor countries and additional levies on Permanent Members of Security council) in addition to Regular Budget. 2013-2014 FY $7.83 billion (less than 1% of global military expenditures) (a) Top Contributors by % for 2013-14 i) US 28.38% ii) Japan 10.83% iii) France 7.22% iv) Germany 7.14% v) UK 6.68% vi) China 6.64% vii) Italy 4.45% viii)Russian Federation 3.15% ix) Canada 2.98% x) Spain 2.97% (5) Voluntary Contributions (Supplementary Programs) (a) Some states make additional voluntary contributions to support the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Food Programme (WFP), and the UN Development Programme (UNDP). (b) 2010-2014: Difﬁcult to obtain aggregate, but >$10 billion (WFP —> $18 billion cumulative between 2010-2014). (c) 2010-2014: US contributed 36% of WFP; European Commission, Canada & Japan aout 6-8% each (d) Supperters of US contributions say these programs are vital to US security interests 2. Governance in the Security Council a) Should other large world economies have a permanent seat in SC? Germany, Japan? b) What about emerging world powers, or countries with large population? India, Brazil? Nigeria? Indonesia? 3. North-South divisions a) Although each member state has one vote, many in the Global South feel that the structure of the SC, and the budgeting system, given the US and other staes in the Global North excessive inﬂuence. 4. Effectiveness of the UN a) Peacekeeping Empirical research suggest s Un peacekeeping operations have been successful, but this varies and is contingent upon a number of factors. In cases of civil war? (Review of literature and analysis by Lise Morje Howard, UN peacekeeping in civil wars Cambridge University Press, 2008) (1) Situational difﬁculty (the greater the situational difﬁculty, the lower the chance of success). Do warring parties consent to UN force? Have the warring parties reached stalemate? Duration and causality rate of the conﬂict (shorter conﬂicts with fewer casualties are easier to end). (2) Security Council: Consensus, and Intensity of Interest, among Permanent Members (reﬂect Structural Realist assumption that UN is simply avenue for Great Powers to achieve their security ends in the international system). Consensus measured by debate; interest by number of resolutions. (3) Peacekeeping rules - adherence or not? Are the rules clear? IS there a division between the ﬁeld command and others? (a) Cases: i) Namibia 1989-1990: Success ii) El Salvador 1991-95: Success iii) Cambodia 1992-93 Mixed (situational difﬁculty higher) iv) Mozambique 1992-1994 Success v) E. Slovania 1996-97 Success vi) East Timor 1999-2002 Success vii) Angola 1996-97 Failure (low interest by SC; situational difﬁculty) viii)Somalia 1993-1995 Failure (situational difﬁculty; lack of consensus in SC; rules inconsistent) ix) Bosnia 1992-95 Failure (situational difﬁculty; lack of consensus in SC; rues inconsistent) x) Rwanda 1993- 1996 Failure (division in SC, moderate interest; rues unclear) (b) Food, health 9) Discuss the foundations of international law. In addition, discuss and analyze the World Court, the International Criminal Court, and other ad hoc international tribunals. I. International Law A. What is the Foundation of International Law? 1. Unlike national law, international law has different foundation due to fact that no IO is sovereign. 2. Decisions and legal briefs - those written & rendered in national courts, may be used by World Court or ICC 3. Treatises, conventions - create obligations for successor governments & generations (eg. Universal Declaration of Human Rights; ABM Treaty, etc.) 4. Norms, customs - for example, reciprocity is considered a cornerstone of international law 5. Principles - sometimes, national legal principles becomes a foundations for international law. Examples: Use of force without justiﬁcation; habeas corpus rights, etc. B. Issues Areas in International Legal Disputes & Cases 1. Human Rights 2. War and Conﬂict (Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes, Aggression, etc.). 3. Territorial Disputes 4. National Legal Decisions that affect other states C. International Legal Decisions that Affect Other States 1. International Criminal Court (ICC) a) Created in 1998 by treaty (Rome, Statute); the ICC is not part of the UN. Located in The Hague (Netherlands). b) Membership: 122 countries (May 2013). China, US, Russian Federation are not members; France & UK are members (US withdrew in 2002). c) Three divisions (Pre-Trial, Trial Division and Appellate). 18 judges, who are elected to 9 year terms by member states of the ICC. There is also an Ofﬁce of the Prosecutor, and a President (led by 3 judges, who are administrators). d) Recent Cases: (1) Democratic Republic of Congo (War Crimes indictments; ﬁve separate cases involving rebels & gov ofﬁcials). (2) Central Africa Republic (War Crimes & Crimes Against Humanity; 1 case rebel). (3) Uganda (War Crimes & Crimes Against Humanity; 4 cases, Lord’s Resistance Army - 3 at large, 1 deceased). (4) Sudan (Darfur) (War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity; 6 cases, head of state, government, militias). (5) Kenya (Crimes against humanity, 2 cases, ofﬁcials with different government factions). (6) Libya (indictments in June 2011) 2. Ad Hoc International Tribunals - International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) a) Created by UN Council - part of UN system; have jurisdiction in cases involving crimes against humanity & war crimes, but only in those countries. ICC, by contrast, is created by a multilateral treaty. b) ICTY: >160 cases to date; many from former high ranking Serbian military ofﬁcials and heads of state, although some from Bosnia and Herzegovina also have been indicted. (1) Similar ad hoc international tribunal for Rwanda. 3. The World Court (International Court of Justice) - more permanent and more jurisdiction than AD Hoc International Tribunals a) The World Court is part of the UN system b) Jurisdiction: Only states may be a party to cases in the World Court (not individuals); the Security Council (SC) may also ask for an “advisory” opinion on matters of international law from the WC. c) Composition: 15 justices, each serving 9 year terms; staggered elections (5 elected at a time). Elected by majority of SC and GA (the Permanent Court of Arbitration nominates candidates). Permanent members of SC usually have at least one judge on WC. Additional “ad hoc” justices may be added if state involved in case does not have a justice from its country on the case. d) Many states that are signatories to the convention creating the WC have placed stipulations
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'