PSC124-M200 9/12-9/15 PSC 124 - M200
Popular in International Relations
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Department
This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Cara-Liesel Ransom on Saturday September 24, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PSC 124 - M200 at Syracuse University taught by Professor A. Klotz in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 211 views.
Reviews for PSC124-M200 9/12-9/15
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: 09/24/16
Monday 9/12/16 Realism: From Assumptions to Explanatory Theories 4 Assumptions 1. Anarchical System 2. Sovereign State 3. Military Power 4. Rational Choices 2 Concepts 1. Security Dilemma 2. System Polarity 2 Theories 1. Balance of Power 2. Hegemonic Stability The Assumptions Assumption #1: Anarchical System [post 1648 Era] Sovereignty = territorial authority, especially religion Anarchy = no over *remember that 1648 was a realist turning point* [post 1945 Era) Sovereignty = territorial authority, especially laws Anarchy = no world government *states are now expected to have the autonomy to make laws* *no international rules states are forced to follow* Assumption #2: States as Actors If we’re operating at a level of international analysis we don’t have to worry about individual power. Assumption #3: Military Power How do you aggregate military capabilities & see who is more powerful? Assumption #4: Rational Choices To be rational you make fairly consistent choices on what you prefer. Once you know what you want, you think of the benefits & costs. *A over B over C. It involves costs of benefits* The Concepts Concept #1: Security Dilemma [Nuclear Weapons During the Cold War] Take it back to the Soviets and the US You think that you’ve done something rational, but in turn you’ve actually done something detrimental. Concept #2: Polarity The Great Powers get to do more of what they want. We are trying to map out who these Great Powers are. In 1815, if one of the Five Great Powers got too powerful, the other countries ganged up on them & essentially knock them back down into equality. In the later 1800s, Japan and the US began to show their faces, creating instability and a new distribution of polarity. The Theories Theory #1: Balance of Power Is the system stable or unstable at the current power distribution? “Family Dynamics” as polarity If you are a second-tier country how are you managing – they aren’t going to sit back b/c they have their own ambitions too. World War is a key factor. Theory #2: Hegemonic Stability “hegemonic” means predominant power Pax Britannica controlled the sea. A period of relative peace where Britain wrote and controlled the laws. (i.e. the slave trade) A great power will recreate the rules to favor what the power wants -Inherent Limitations- Theories do have limits Emphasis on military capabilities. Realism isn’t good at taking economics into considerations. With the emergence of the EU, it doesn’t fit the mold when the countries come together. ~REVIEW~ Anarchy – definition (absence of world govt.) Sovereignty – autonomy in the territory, what issues are important, historical origins & evolution. Polarity – configurations and examples, why one polarity is more stable than another Rationality – preferences and interests. Wednesday 9/14/16 Realism of War (and Peace) Why should Russia be considered powerful in the Syrian conflict? Russia has military capabilities. System: Does anarchy inevitably result in war? At the most general level, realists think that it’s an inevitable phenomenon. State: Why does nationalism sometimes spur aggression? Sub-State: Do leaders always overestimate the likelihood of success? *when we use realism, we shift through levels of analysis* Revolutionary States: Power Transition Theory This comes out of hegemonic theory. The basic argument is whether or not a rising power aspires to be the new hegemon? Will the rising power cooperate w/ the current hegemon. Are powers rising to power interested in changing the rules of the game. A revolutionary state is one that wants to change the rules. ** Is China a revisionist or revolutionary power? ~It is a revisionist power. Make sure you know the distinctions between a status-quo state, a revisionist state And a revolutionary state. War of 1812: Empire & Aggregation of Power For realists, an alliance if an agreement for convenience. World War 1: pros and cons of alliances Maybe multi-polarity doesn’t work, but some argue that at the peak of the beginning of WWI the multi-polarity turned into bipolarity. World War 2: Combining Levels of Analysis Underlying Causes Proximate Causes ~ 1919: Peace of Versailles ~ Demise of Democracy Reparations Fascism & Hitler ~ 1930s: Great Depression ~ British Miscalculation Tariff Wars Appeasement What is at stake, for whom, in Syria? [why would America care?] Refugees Nuclear proliferation Oil Turkey Post-Cold War: Nationalism in the Balkans Revisited When can intervention succeed? Thursday 9/15/16 – recitation - Anarchy is not chaos, not in international relations. States act on their own accord. - Sovereign states: protected by their own being. An outside force is not governing them. - States as the central actors: not looking at any kind of institutions. The Prisoners Dilemma Applied to the States: 1. Arms races 2. States working/not working together. 3. Should the state cooperate of defect?
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'