POLS 1020 week 6 II (on the week of exam a)
POLS 1020 week 6 II (on the week of exam a) Political science 1020
Popular in Introduction to International Relations
Popular in Political Science
verified elite notetaker
This 3 page Class Notes was uploaded by Eunji Kim on Tuesday February 9, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Political science 1020 at Clemson University taught by Aron G. Tannenbaum in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 33 views. For similar materials see Introduction to International Relations in Political Science at Clemson University.
Reviews for POLS 1020 week 6 II (on the week of exam a)
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: 02/09/16
POLS 1020 week 7 II The Ministry of Happiness (Weeks 6-10) The Return of Great Power Politics What is “Power Politics”? “A perspective……….. states.” Shimko p. 60 Review of Realism Pessimistic view of human nature Westphalia system – int’l anarchy o Political independence/territorial integrity Disbelieving in Democratic Peace Theory Rodney King So what should a state do? The essence of a realist foreign policy “The strong do what they have to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.” – Thucydides Tools for IR analysis - Level 3 analysis, the systemic level - Main characteristics of the int’l system o Anarchy/absence of world gov’t/ o Each state has to arrange for its own survival - The two most important goals of any state o Preserve political independence o Preserve territorial integrity Does Terrorism Threaten National Security a surprising answer - Pearl Harbor (3000 killed), was a direct threat to national security. Military attack to military fleek. Japanese attack. It did threaten political independence, or government. - 9/11 (3000 killed) It wasn’t threatening at all. “Just killed 3000 people”. The Security Dilemma “The problem states face…” Shimko, p. 42 IR Liberal Alternative to Power Politics “The group of [state]… nonviolence.” Shimko p. 72 Two examples of a security Community - Scandinavia (p. 70) - European Union Balance of Power o Equilibrium (balance of power) war less likely [HARD TO STAY equilibrium] o Disequilibrium (Imbalance of Power) war more likely Balance of Power, two smaller states and one large state Power equation: (B + C) = A; B (France), A (Germany), C (Russia) Balance of power in recent history - Power was balance, 1815-1914 o Concert of Europe Balance of Power Russia & France = England = Prussia/Germany & Austria-Hungary But they released their stress by invading other countries except Europe th o Britain as Offshore Balancer, 19 Century - Why did the balance of power fail I n1914, leading to WWI? o There was a rough balance of power among the Great Powers before 194 o But each side feared that the other side would upset that balance = a security dilemma o So each side prepared for war o Those preparations created a trip-wire effect o A small incident touched off the world war o This situation contradicts the idea that a balance pf power makes war less likely - Why did the balance of power fail in 1930s Europe (1939), leading to WWII? o The balance was not maintained by the weaker side o Britain and France did not stop Hitler’s Germany re-arming itself, and didn’t re-arm themselves fast enough o The US was isolationist and refused to lend support to the British and French o Hitler calculated the imbalance of power favored Germany, so he started the war - Balance of Power worked o Cold War equilibrium 1940s-1980s - What if there’s No balance of power? o Why did George W. Bush Decide to invade Iraq in 2003? o Because I can do whatever I want when there’s no strong country challenging us - Balance of Power Failed: o The USA Unleashed itself after the Cold War ISIS 2015 - ? Libya 2011 Iraq 2003 – 2011? Afghanistan 2001 – 2014? Kosovo 1999 Somalia 1992 - 1993 Persian Gulf 1990 - 1991 Panama 1989 st One Superpower, Many Great Powers early 21 Century - The essence of realists says, “The strong do what they have to do and the weak accept what they have to accept.” – Thucydides Power measurement - The difficulty of Measuring Power, US and Vietnam 1961 – 1975 - Power Imbalance Victory Goes to the “Weaker” side o Vietnam 1970s Area 128,000 square miles Population 52 million GNP $ 4 billion GNP / Capita $ 85 o USA 1970s o Area 3,700,000 square miles o Population 210 million o GNP $ 1.7 trillion o GNP / capita $ 19,000 - Amorality of balance of Power, only Nixon could go to China - Revisionist States o Russia o China o India o Iran o US? - Status Quo States o Britain o France o Germany o Most other European States o Japan o US? - Balance of Power Reconsidered o Measurement of power o Security Dilemma Reading for Tuesday - Shimko ch. 3 - Kagan, The world America Made, entire
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'