Popular in American Foreign Relations
Popular in Government
verified elite notetaker
This 2 page One Day of Notes was uploaded by Nicolas Mai on Friday September 19, 2014. The One Day of Notes belongs to Government 344 at a university taught by a professor in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 127 views.
Reviews for TheTheoryOfWar.pdf
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: 09/19/14
The theory of war We should ask why 2 countries are fighting when they could have actually negotiated After a war countries sign a peace treaty with a deal but still 2 parties Most peace settlements like the revision of a border the agreement to stop ethnic cleansing are struck peaceful without blood shed Why would they fight then sign the treaty than sign it at once Look at countries with disagreement many countries but not at war War is the most expensive option it39s not obvious 2 things answer to this question Why fight rather than negotiate Uncertainty and incentives to lie Shifting power and commitment problems Punitive expedition in Mexico invasion of Mexican territories first time with a machine gun in a vehicle WW1 first war with all great powers WW2 Korean War Vietnam War Persian Gulf War Kosovo War Afghan War Iraq War Korean War In 1950 North Korea attacks South Korea The US steps in and later a peace settlement that does not change anything the border barely moves But it took hundred of casualties Persian Gulf War Iraq invades Kuwait Saudi Arabia starts to get nervous The first CNN war continuously covered Not so many American causalities in the end but thousands of Iraqi casualties Te US spent a lot of money lost equipment Iraq lost a lot of things men machines And they were just pushed back to where they were before the invasion Why wasn39t that agreement signed before War is the most costly thing in politics If you go to war you might destruct what you39re fighting for the land the people some of your civilians or soldiers might die So what you fight is shrinking If you fight you know you39re going to get half But if A and B negotiate you still have half of it but the land did not shrink You39re better off with negotiation Question is if countries A and B split in half it is better than fighting and splitting in half Answer 1 Uncertainty with incentives to lie 9 If I know my strength and you don39t Maybe I know something about the strategy this new way of fighting and it39s going to change the game 9 Then we disagree on who39d do better in war Why can39t I just tell you how strong I am 9 IfI just say I39m strong you won39t believe me Because I could lie 9 So you might offer me a deal that39s worse for me than war 9And we end up fighting If you offer me terms that I don39t like and don39t believe me that I39m stronger then it39s war Example of the Persian Gulf War a key point of disagreement about what the war will look like in case of war How willing was the coalition to fight After weeks of bombing you have marines invading 9 you want Iraq to think that Marines will land in Kuwait But the US is good at amphibious assaults 9 the Marines don39t end up landing where Iraq thought they would They crush Iraq in a few weeks Why did it require a war As the ciaition could not prove they would destroy Iraq by words they had to prove it by action Disagreement on how the war would play out prevented them from negotiating Answer 2 Shifting power and commitment problems 9 I I ll grow strong in the future 9 Then I39ll be tempted to use that strength to my advantage Russia after the war against apan Russia is bleeding of the war 9 massive program to put back Russia on the work stage They feel like they need to be stronger Russia increases its military power and they kept saying that they were just rearming When they tried to reassure Germany it did not actually work 9 If I just say that I can refrain you won t believe me The Germans know the French will need the Russians in case of war Russia39s getting stronger claims that it s not going to seek revision of past treaties 9 So you might choose to fight me today 9 Rather than deal with my increased strength in the future War is going to be costly today but not as costly as if we39re weak in the future Example of the Korean war Kim Il Sung in North Korea Situated in the least fertile economic part of the peninsula also doesn39t have the support of the US A 3year war that is catastrophic What we get when the war ends is that the Americans commit to helping South Korea But as South Korea grew stronger North Korea senses temporary strength a window of opportunity so you have to attack on time Conclusion War is inefficient but it may occur when o Both sides disagree on likely outcome o One side will be unacceptably stronger in the future If an explanation can t rule out negotiation as alternative then it s not a food explanation Next the theory of trade Russia controlled Ukraine until the Soviet Union gave it to the Ukrainians in the late 50 s
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'