IAFF 1005, Week 2 Notes
IAFF 1005, Week 2 Notes IAFF 1005
Popular in Introduction to International Affairs: A Washington Perspective
Popular in International Affairs
verified elite notetaker
This 10 page Class Notes was uploaded by Samantha Notetaker on Saturday September 17, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to IAFF 1005 at George Washington University taught by Brown, M in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 2 views. For similar materials see Introduction to International Affairs: A Washington Perspective in International Affairs at George Washington University.
Reviews for IAFF 1005, Week 2 Notes
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: 09/17/16
9/6/2016 Governance Decolonization o 1939- 1/3 of world lived under colonial rule o Decolonization was disorderly at best o Many states were born weak and are still weak o Weak State rankings Somalia South Sudan Central African Republic Sudan Yemen Syria Chad DRC Afghanistan Haiti Also on ‘high alert’: Iraq, Guinea Nigeria, Pakistan, Burundi, Zimbabwe A total of 125 states are under ‘alert’ or ‘warning’ Only 53 states are defined at ‘stable/sustainable’ Corruption o Corruption is a global problem 114 states have ‘serious problems’ No state is corruption is free o Corruption is growing due to globalization and the rise of drug use and human trafficking o Corruption is a transnational problem due to the criminal organizations involved Democracy o Democracy is the worst form of government -except for all the alternatives -Winston Churchill o How Democracy promotes stability Mechanisms for participation in governance Feedback to improve Transparency o Democratization is a contest for power Takes years and decades o Democracy is winning 1973- 69 authoritarian 38 partly free 44 free countries 2015- 50 authoritarian 59 partly free 86 free countries o Democracy faces challenges There have been setbacks 72 countries have become less free Security and Conflict Trends Good news: Conflict between states has declines since 1945 Bad News: The post-cold war era has been violent and deadly Today, most conflicts take place within states o In state conflicts are deadly and difficult to resolve, most involve direct attacks on civilians and many are ‘internationalized’ Security and Conflict prospects The world has 193 recognized states +575 groups with self-governance 300-9000 ethnic groups Ongoing, structural, conflict management problems o 15,000 to 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world 193 Member-States in the United Nations U.S. NIC Report: Global Trends 2030 Game Changers and Black Swans Unexpected, system shaking events o EU/Euro collapse o A democratic or collapsed China o A reformed Iran o A nuclear war of WMD/cyber attack Why This Matters: Progress Seemingly intractable problems have gone away: the Cold War, the Soviet- American nuclear arms race Giving peace a chance Global economy has more than tripled since 1990 o Global Poverty has been substantially reduced Gender equality has improved Why This Matters: Problems Democratic, economic, resource and environmental pressures are mounting Why This Matters: Action Progress has been slow, limited, and uneven but progress has been made Key Components and Forces in International Relations Levels of analysis Actors and Interests Power Ethics and Morality Levels of Analysis The Individual o Intra-state The state o Supra-state The international system The Individual Level Human Nature o Evil, greed, vanity, hubris, fear, anger, etc. Decision making dynamics o Information processing problems, persistence of belief systems, misuse of analogies (cognitive psychology) Risk taking tendencies o Taking risks to avoid loses (prospect theory) Leaders o Idiosyncratic proclivities and problems o Cognitive, emotional, social Solutions? o Multiple advocacy, devil’s advocates, checks/balances The State Level Some types of states are more peaceful/belligerent o Kant: democracies are peaceful o Cobden: trading, capitalist countries are peaceful o Lenin: capitalist systems are inherently expansionist Communist systems are inherently peaceful o Kennan: soviet/communist system is aggressive Recent social science o Democracies are less likely to go to war with each other o Democratizing systems are volatile o Greedy/aggressive/hegemony-seeking states vs. needy/defensive/security-seeking states Solutions? o Regime change/reform, democracy promotion The Intra-State Level Governmental and policy making arrangements o Constitutional provisions, governmental institutions, interest groups, factions and public opinion Organizational processes o Governmental policies are shaped and implemented by large governmental agencies and organizations o Organizations have established idiosyncratic beliefs, cultures, doctrines, standard operating procedures Bureaucratic Politics o Bureaucratic interests are not identical to national interests National policies are often the product of b interests, decisions, and negotiations Solutions? o Governmental reform, leadership at the top Supra-State Level The European Union project o States coming together to promote economic development, political cooperation, democracy., human rights, social mobility The International System Anarchy o There is no world government or world police force to provide for the security of states and peoples Self-help o Every state must provide for its own security o Internal options- building military forces and defenses o External options- forming alliances Uncertainty o About the capabilities and intentions of others o Produces mistrust (preventative war) Security Dilemma Even defensive actions can provoke responses Can lead arms race, crisis escalation, war Defensive actions can lead to reduced security o Bottom Lime Competition and conflict are possible (likely?) Cooperation can be difficult (very?) Solutions? o Try to reduce uncertainty, promote tryst and credibility, dampen security dilemmas 9.8.2016 Actors and interests States and nations Sub-state groups Non-state groups International organizations States, Nations, Nation-States These are distinct phenomena Try to be precise and consistent Unfortunately, these terms are often used interchangeably and carelessly by policymakers, journalists, commentators State Is a political entity Has borders, territory Has sovereignty Has a government Is recognized by other states, international organizations, other international actors The best synonym is “country” NOT ‘Nation’ Nation Is a group of people with a political identity Has a political agenda and political aspirations: has (or seeks) some form of self-governance May already have some political/governmental institutions Ethnic-based Nations- Based on ethnic (cultural, religious, linguistic) or racial ties (North Korea) Civic-based Nations- Multi-ethnic; based on shared civic/political commitments (United States) Nation-State A widely used and highly problematic term Idea developed in 18 and 19 centuries o The idea: Every nation would have its own state o The hope: Conflict would therefore decline Problem: Hard/impossible to do o Many arbitrary borders; few countries are homogenous o Mixed populations/people; impossible to partition/divide o Remaining minorities; homogeneity is impossible Problem: Promoting “national self-determination” o Can raise aspirations; can lead to action and then violence o Irredentism, secessionism, forced assimilation, forced expulsion, genocide (don’t call it ‘ethnic cleansing’) Sub-State Groups Family-based groups: clans and tribes Social-cultural groups: ethnic groups o Shared history, shared culture (often language, religion), attachment to territory, solidarity, a name Politically-minded groups: Nations o Ethnic based nation: has or seeks self-governance; “an ethnic group with an attitude” Fuzzy line between ‘ethnic group’ and ‘nation’ o Political disagreements over use of these terms Ex) Kurds vs. established states in the region Non-State, International Actors The good: Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) o Interests: humanitarian assistance, human rights, conservation and the environment, health, education, arms control, conflict resolution, good governance The bad: Criminal organizations o Interests: economic (for-profit) The ugly: Terrorist organizations o Interests: political, ethno-national, religious The rich: Multinational Corporations (MNCs) o Interests: economic (for-profit) International Organizations Terminology o “Inter-governmental” would be more accurate o “Inter-national” isn’t quite right Regional and international organizations o Territorial scope: regional vs. global o Functional scope: broad vs. narrow o Formality/durability: formal/ongoing vs. informal/temporary o The United Nations and the UN system Dag Hammarskjöld- “The purpose of the UN is not to get us to heaven but to save us from hell.” Why This Matters Differentiation, precision and rigor are some of the fundamental of analysis There are both continuity and change in the 21st century How do specific developments in specific areas affect the prospects for: o War and peace o Disorder and order o Instability and stability o Conflict and cooperation Power Definitions o The ability to achieve one’s goals o The ability to get others to do what they otherwise would not do Power is relational/relative, not absolute o Depends on one’s environment/circumstances o Depends on others Power is difficult to observe o Difficult to know the intentions/reasons of others o Scholars/analysts therefore focus on what they can observe: tangible sources of power Sources and Types of Power Geographic Demographic Military Economic Technological Political Soft Power Geography and State Power A country’s location, size o Neighbors and neighborhoods External barriers and buffers o Oceans, mountains, harsh terrain, long distances Internal transportation and communication o Rivers, lakes, plains Natural resources o Land, water, forests, fisheries, energy, raw materials Climate and climate change o Suitability for agriculture; vulnerabilities to disease o Vulnerabilities to climate change People and Power “Demography is destiny” Population parameters o Overall size, age distribution Human capital o Education, training, skill levels, organization o Increasingly important in the 21 century Economic potential o Size an skill of the labor force; a key to economic power Military potential o Nationalism led to mass armies (18 -19 -20 centuries) o High skill levels are increasingly important Military Power Inputs o Human: people, training, organization o Financial: budget allocations/expenditures U.S.- spends more than the next 7 countries combined U.S./allies/friends- more than 75% of global military spending China- 12% of global military spending Russia- 5% of global military spending Outputs o Forces: Armies, navies, air forces, nuclear weapons, special forces, space systems o Capabilities: Defensive, offensive, power-projection; U.S. ‘command of the commons’ Measurement problems o “bean-counting” is incomplete o What matters: useable, operational capacities Economic Power Economic inputs o Natural resources, human capital o Financial (public spending, private investments) Economic outputs o GDP, GDP per capita, accumulated “ inclusive wealth” o Innovativeness and innovations o Potential to convert economic power into military capacities Economic leverage o Carrots: aid/finance, trade o Sticks: tariffs, quotas, sanctions o Cartels: collaboration to enhance influence Sustainability o Resource needs; environmental damage/constraints Technology and Power Inputs o Spending on science, research and development (R&D) Public/governmental, private/industrial o Higher education: key to long-term capabilities o Size of the science/technology/industrial base o Culture of innovativeness; intellectual property protections Outputs o Science, engineering applications, innovations 21 century priorities o IT, data analysis, AI o Automation and manufacturing, robotics o Energy, resources, agriculture o Bio-medical, genomics Political Power Political and diplomatic influence o With allies, friends, neutrals, adversaries o In regional/international organizations Perceptions o Perceived as honest broker? Interested in win-win outcomes? o Perceived as committed to the common good? Connections with allies and partners o United States: 60+ military partnerships o Russia: 8 military partnerships o China: 1 military partnership (North Korea) Soft Power Misperceptions o Often thought of as “anything other than military power” o Often thought of as inherently benign Attributes o Hard power: coercion, blackmail, sanction, force – ‘push’ o Soft power: attraction, persuasion, co-optation – ‘pull’ Resources o Hard power: lawyers, guns and money o Soft power: values, ideas, legitimacy, policies, culture Power Transitions Dangers of a great-power transition o Leading power likes the status quo; is worried o Rising power wants to change the status quo; is impatient o Worst-case scenario: all-out, system-wide hegemonic war Crossover period is especially dangerous o When one power has clear superiority, war is less likely Preventive war o Leading power acts while it is still ahead Good news o UK-US example: late 1800s, early 1900s o US-China case: geographic distance, nuclear deterrence
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'