Weeks 2 and 3 Notes Introduction to International Affairs: A Washington Perspective
Weeks 2 and 3 Notes Introduction to International Affairs: A Washington Perspective IAFF 1005
Popular in Introduction to International Affairs: A Washington Perspective
verified elite notetaker
Popular in International Studies
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
One Day of Notes
Aaron Delouya Rabinowitz
verified elite notetaker
Intro to International Affairs
verified elite notetaker
One Day of Notes
Intro to International Affairs
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
This 13 page Class Notes was uploaded by Lizzy Dawahare on Monday September 21, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to IAFF 1005 at George Washington University taught by Sell, S in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 49 views. For similar materials see Introduction to International Affairs: A Washington Perspective in International Studies at George Washington University.
Reviews for Weeks 2 and 3 Notes Introduction to International Affairs: A Washington Perspective
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: 09/21/15
disadvantageous or when they believe that they have the power to challenge the legitimacy of global norms 1 Norm Characteristics 1 Forces for behavior that are consistent with global norms 1 Involuntary coercion the enforcement process can be seen as illegitimate reinforcing perceptions of bias in global normative order Enforcement mechanisms include economicpolitical sanctions military force market forces peer pressure and public shaming Better compliance when goval norms are seen as both substantively and procedurally legitimate Symmetrical application of norms is seen as more legitimate rather than a selective application of norms Global norms can serve as focal points for debate benchmarks for behavior devices for signaling identity and means to bolster or undercut legitimacy of state action ii Consensual persuasion September 4 2015 Discussion Cold War Capitalism versus Communism liberalism versus socialism What does liberalism entail 1 Free market free trade Democracy International organizationsinstitutions International norms human rights moral code etc Rulebased system Increased Western presenceinfluence 9301 Maximalist selfinterest Minimalist Solidarist international community Realism versus liberalism versus constructivism idealism Sovereignty a nation s right to govern authority within a border Shared sovereignty the fading of those borders Imperial rule direct force direct imposition of order Liberal rule a certain amount of choice left for others their choice to subscribe or not to subscribe Samuel Huntington Clash of Civilizations September 8 2015 2 Anarchy and Hierarchy a Anarchy is not chaos in international politics Anarchy means that there is no world government no authority standing above the sovereign state i Hobbes state of nature very Darwinian The concept of anarchy misses two important factors hierarchy and democratic community normative b Hierarchy C i Polarity the distribution of capabilities minimalist concept bedrock concept ii International order the rules and arrangements informed by norms Hierarchy is a form of order PostWWII Americanled hierarchical order had liberal characteristics lkenberry Not the same as an empire according to lkenberry because of the normative characteristics though there is such thing as a hierarchical empire The Global norms of postwar Liberal Hierarchy Commitment to multilateral institutions Rulesbased system binding on hegemon Open system easy to join hard to overturn After 1989 Western norms became global norms Power shifts and polarity 1 Cold War a bipolar world 2 Post1989 a unipolar world 3 Looking ahead Multipolar Bipolar Medieval WPWNT 3 Liberal Hegemony a b Foundations of postwar order shifting i Westphalian system under stress Unipolarity unbalanced America because it holds a majority of the world s power i Doesn t go long without being challenged British Empire Roman Empire Erosion of sovereignty norm Liberal Leviathan To overcome Hobbes s state of nature 1 Others let America take the wheel 2 Open markets security guarantees postwar aid democratic institutions Undergirded by highly unequal power Mechanisms to create order logics of order lkenberry page 48 1 Command minimalist conception material powerinterests of stronghierarchy rulers and subjects 2 Balance pluralist conception sovereigntyautonomyanarchy 3 Consent solidarist conception rule of lawcreation of public goodssometimes hierarchy leaders and followers Never mutually exclusive always in tension September 10 2015 g Shapes of order 1 Flat Wilson 2 Hierarchical 3 Lumpy regionalism vii Foundation of postwar order realismminimalism 1 Plus acceptance of Westphalian system 2 Plus frameworks to manage great power relations pluralism 3 Leaders in minimalism and pluralist orders have pushed toward solidarist orders 4 With particularistic benefits for US West and quotsome of the restquot vii Japan and Germany 1 Hegemon constrained by rules and institutions 2 Mitigate the effects of power politics 3 Provides public goods eg security open markets 4 Offers voice to weaker actors vii Uneasy tension between all three types of order 1 US imperial minimalist Or liberal pluralist 2 Democratic peace solidarists Which type of international order usually has the most norm takers Command Power Transition Theorv Neorealism and Causes of War Waltz Anarchy States seek security not always power alliances tunnels switzerland Phenomenon of war itself what causes war Dofferent wars have different causes Vietnam vs WWll Generally why doe war happen repeatedly in IR What are the units that make up international systems nation states are the most important with unitsactors State39s constituents units What is the structure of the system for Waltz it is anarchy Absence of central monopoly of legitimate force no one world enforcer that keeps all the kids behaving How does that system stay in a structure of anarchy shape and shove states to act in particular ways Waltz is interested in shape of states how they are internally and behave similarly despite internal differences Different units behave similarly because states are functionally similar have to perform same functions Provide security for itself in anarchy system Not all do well not all have the same capabilities In international system characterized by anarchy states 1 priority is security Have to be attentive to power some are stronger and weaker but need to do the same thing Different from lkenberry who is looking at distinctive features inside the states Waltz is looking at the phenomenon of war in general anarchy Selfhelp system Neorealism analysis of system as the whole not about foreign policies individually Theorizing system as a whole Waltz contribution Structure of anarchy How does living in anarchical structure socialize states States tend to choose whether or not they have nuclear weapons Neither would unilaterally decide to dismantle nuclear weapons leaves them vulnerable to others Basic concept of anarchy you can predict certain behaviors Collection actions according to neorealists is difficult among units Hard to get collective action in a state of anarchy units looking out for themselves But within states collective action is easy Ex US government Across states in a system of anarchy it is hard States are the focal points for provision of private and collections goods in general and for security in particular 1 job in a system of anarchy is to provide security Does polarity matter Waltz says multipolarity is destabilizing who is your enemy and who is not in your selfhelp world who will turn on you Bipolarity is most stable Cold War international arrangement War occurs because there is nothing there to stop it Waltz Prediction war will happen until we supercede anarchy Centralization of monopoly with legitimate use of force only thing that will get us out of anarchy Anarchy is a permissive condition War and Change Giplin Theory of Hegemonic War States tend to balance when one state looks like it is becoming dangerously strong others will try to counterbalance it Coalitions form to curve that state Napoleon WWI and WW with rise of German state lkenberry puzzle that states have not banded together to curve American power what makes us not so threatening Mutually assured destruction nuclear war made things incredibly stable Waltz As a system as a whole systemic peace Stability is a good thing Waltz and in a polaric system the most stable option is bipolaric Balance of power before WWI flexible alignments treaties things behind people s backs didn t know what people were up to Flexible alignments priority Multipolar world is less easy to read Waltz Multipolarity less freedom of action uncertainty Bipolarity less dependent on allies more stability minimal interdependence no commerce between Western and Eastern and less entangled allowed states to achieve security objectives without the use of force Gilpin Theory of Hegemonic War September 11 2015 Discussion Minimalist Pluralist Solidarist Realism Gilpin Kenneth Waltz Kissinger The most important unit in an international system is state 0 Most prominent actors for realists Relative power do things that benefit your own state more so than another state 0 Seek security states are like unitary units 0 Marked distinctly by sovereignty but not all equal same in the sense of sovereignty but different in the sense of equality o Anarchy no hierarchy lack of central authority to which all states answer 0 Always security competition states are always vying to make sure they re secure in order to do that they can t depend on an authority figure Selfhelp system Security dilemma states are in a selfhelp system in which they have to make sure they have an adequate military for selfdefense so then everyone begins to mobilize and there is a general atmosphere of distrust The more one state feels safe through arms the less another state feel safe and the more that state feels inclined to arm itself 0 Fragile or no sense of trust states cannot genuinely trust other states if each state is vying for itself 0 International institutions might be formed by states They hold no legitimate power Each state is out for its own advancement and is not going to invest its trust into a multilateral institution Less autonomy more commonly used as tools The UN does not really have much legitimate authority Liberalism lkenberry Keohane Woodrow Wilson States and nonstate actors are the most important a Trust is possible 0 Working together in the form of multilateral institutions alliances coalitions reiteration engaging with each other on more than one occasion Absolute power states should seek mutual benefit everybody should benefit from the system and no state should have an advantage over another International institutions are the most important 0 Nonstate actors that can have influence Constructivism Alexander Wendt Martha Finnemore Ideas are the most important unit of analysis Norm development Anarchy is what states choose to make of it does anarchy mean that you have to fear other states Polarity distribution of power capabilities unipolar bipolar multipolar Unipolar Current world US is essentially unmatched Bipolar two major powers the Cold War Multipolar September 11 2015 Guest lecturer Hugh Agnew September 15 2015 Power Transition Theorv Gilpin Hegemonic war changes in the distribution of capabilities Hegemonic wars can be thought of as a fundamental realignment of the system like tectonic plates moving leading to an earthquake and creating a new settlement Unit level factors are important to understand you have to look inside the states to explain hegemonic war 3 Propositions 1 Caused by broad changes in political strategic and economic affairs 1 Waltz doesn t look at economic capabilities 2 Gilpin looks at more multidimensional factors b System is not anarchy it s relations among states oldstyle realism c Systemwide distinctive trait of hegemonic war Structure is a necessary but not sufficient cause of war Why do these particular cataclysmic wars occur To find the answer you must explore inside of states Thesis rise of Hitler antithesis US Soviet Russia synthesis bipolar system Fundamental disequilibrium between underlying distribution of power and the status quo China wants more say in IMF negotiations about climate change institutions of power set up after WWII don t reflect balance of power today Peloponnesian War Sparta was the regional hegemon conservative regime in power for a long time autocratic Democratic Athens rises seafaring commerce different type of system Thesis Sparta status quo Antithesis Athens challenger Synthesis regionwide hegemonic war both Sparta and Athens lost and Persia rose as hegemon o Fundamentally realigned the region 0 It s not always the states involved in thesisantithesis that end up being the synthesis Can t predict a hegemonic war but a hegemonic war can be identified in hindsight Gilpin believes that a bipolar world is actually unstable SpartaAthens the war is between the rising powers and the declining powers rising Athens declining Sparta Thirty Years War 1618 1648 Hapsburg imperial power Catholicism and feudalism versus autonomous nation states protestantism and capitalism End of war Treaty of Westphalia Established the principle of national sovereignty Gave way to the norm of nonintervention Unlike feudalism Modern nationstate system as we know it today Napoleonic Wars 1789 1816 French nationalism and mass armies France gets beaten back into its original order Napoleon loses Balance of power in Europe until German unification in 1871 Treaty of Vienna until 1871 when the German empire unites Large power in the center of Europe seen as a challenger to the neighboring countries 1919 Treaty of Versailles Punitive of Germany postwar AustroHungarian and Ottoman empires have been shut down League of Nations Charter outlawed war Iol established a system of collective security WWI didn t settle the question of who is the next hegemon realignment of power but no rising power despite the collapse of two empires WWII was when the definitive synthesis came about Strongest powers were US relatively unscathed Soviet Union Gilpin says that the US was the hegemon due to the SU s lack of developed economy and weak points Tophat question Which author incorporates domestic factors in his analysis of the causes of war o Waltz Gilpin September 17 2015 Constructing the American Svstem Original vision ad hoc implementation End of WWII US engaged in most rigorous institution building in history Four freedoms informs American order Domestic features of hegemon End of war seen as hay day before reality sets in End of the Cold War people believed in a smooth transition to democracy End of WWII just defeated fascism Hegemonic war hegemon wants to change the system in a way that benefits them New Deal ideas Roosevelt s Four Freedoms freedom of speech freedom from want freedom from fear freedom of worship US wanted to create likeminded states states that mirrored their own ideas Wanted other countries to conform US aimed to restructure entire international system instead of preserving its interests Milieuoriented whole restructuring instead of positional grand strategy American capabilities 1945 23 world s gold reserves 3A1 world s invested capital 12 shipping vessels 12 manufacturing GNP three times greater than that of USSR and five times greater than that of UK Unique position to take charge Original vision hands off approach System to be left to its own devices without strong central authority Leaderless security community Based on cooperation to foster peace System building 1944 1 95 1 Economically devastated Europe post WWII influenced USIed system and put constraints on it USSR does not retreat back into prewar borders Churchill and the Iron Curtain speech 1946 Western Europe versus Eastern Europe Ideological divide US invests in allies to mitigate the spread of communism domino effect Political instability communism may gain power Links between poverty and security Instability might open power vacuum that could be usurped by communists US wanted to eliminate the power vacuum Civil unrest in Greece and Turkey 1947 Political insecurity Domino effect between Greece gt Turkey gt entire Middle East Truman calls for support of Greece and Turkey The Marshall Plan initiative passed by the Truman Administration with the objective to strengthen struggling societies that had power vacuums 5 of America s GNP in 1948 Link between economic prosperity and security Recognized the urgency of getting Western Europe back on its feet No conditions on aid no strings attached Multilateral Institutions UN Security Council General Assembly Help manage anarchic system study failure of League of Nations Flaw everyone could vote hampered ability to function gt Security council and veto power reflection of the victors of WWII Bretton Woods Institutions World Bank International Monetary Fund Conference brought together delegates from 44 nations to redesign rules for a postWWII monetary system An Americanled opendemocratic order Cold War paralyzed UN Security Council UN was stuck could not make progress due to stalemate between US and Soviet Union both had veto power NATO 1949 An attack on one is an attack on all USIed economic system Bretton Woods system International financial institution that looked to regulate how countries managed their financial systems Walter Lippman quote about the Atlantic Ocean divide The idea of the West no longer a separate state instead a community of shared values 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights Represented the first global expression of rights to which all human beings are inherently entitled Some states should have their sovereignty revoked eg when they are massacring their own people When is it ethical to intervene Rwanda 1994 genocide Presentday Syria When does state sovereignty matter When do other states have an obligation to step in September 18 Discussion Gilpin What question interests him Causes of war particularly hegemonic war significance redefines international order ie how states behave etc How does hegemonic war occur Hegemon rising power surfacing and increasingly challenging the status of the reigning dominant power Dominant state can either increase resources domestic taxes or reduce costs Gilpin argues that increasing resources is always a bad idea Domestic French revolution taxes International Greece What happens when states raise taxes Civil unrest people don t want to pay higher taxes and when they do they expect accountability More efficient use of resources domestic Manipulate terms of trade international Reduction of cost Reduce retrenchment international commitment 1 Unilateral abandonment economic political military 2 Alliances formation with weaker but helpful states Might take advantage of the great power USNATO Minor war issues Riker s theory 3 Appeasement Farther expansion problem with taxes overexpansion prestige Eliminate the reason for cost preventive war Preventive War goal is to eliminate the threat not always a good idea Peloponnesian War Athens rose to challenge Sparta Sparta tried to go on the offensive and got crushed
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'