Week of Notes 9
Week of Notes 9 403-2B
Popular in International Relations Seminar
Popular in Public Relations
verified elite notetaker
This 5 page Class Notes was uploaded by Dora Notetaker on Friday October 23, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to 403-2B at University of Alabama at Birmingham taught by Nikolaos Zahariadis in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 33 views. For similar materials see International Relations Seminar in Public Relations at University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Reviews for Week of Notes 9
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 10/23/15
PSC 403 Seminar in International Studies Dr Zahariadis Notes Set 9 Week of Oct 19 Our proposal for our capstone is due on Thurs Oct 22 in class Tue Oct 20 Discussion on Outline theory of integration use this NeoFunc Federalism Consocialism Where does your issuepolicy fit theory tells you about the big picture So you re going from the theory to the empirical and connect it back to the theory You derive your argument from the theory Because it tells you what s important about what you are writing on State theory then make hypothesis use empirical evidence then connect it back to the theory CFSP o Started with the EPC political cooperation o Ministers understood that they needed some kind of understanding in what they re doing 0 Understood that there is power in numbers in speaking collectively 0 And major powers in Europe esp GB were not necessarily interested in what smaller powers were saying 0 Some countries that were not interested in integrating foreign policy GB and some powers are France amp Ger 0 1980 s Ger maintained great guilt about WWII so they didn t want to go against USSR and they were on the frontline border I So they created Eastern Policy which meant that they were mostly neutral not doing what US wanted amp not going against the USSR Maastricht Treaty 0 It said we need to go beyond economics 0 And this meant foreign policy cooperation 0 So they changed the name from European Communities to European Union 0 To show that we are a group of countries that want no more war by cooperation high politics notjust countries that were interested in moneyeconomics 0 Here they negotiated a CFSP common foreign sec policy 0 But not great in practice O Yugoslavia They also needed carrots and sticks O O 0 Their test Yugoslavia legitimized civil war Needed things to get governments to do what they wanted Trade aid packages Told Yugoslavia if you stop the fighting we will give you aid and give you trade benefits Allowed Yugoslavia to produce things like the Yugo car practical not appealing to facilitate the process Another step in the process maps They used maps to divide which groups can control which territories But realized they have no sticks Didn t know which groups were gonna agree How do you get groups to not just agree but also to go through with what they ve agreed to O 0 00000 Needed the ability to implement their threats If they didn t have ability to send in the military so at the end of the day nobody cared Ger had biggest military but FR and GB most effective military After WWII Ger had limited access to send military constitutionally French were interested and could do it GB was not interested So you had a common front but indiv countries pushing in diff directions So troops that were there were UN Peacekeepers I And theirjob is not to make peace but to keep it I These troops became prisoners and bargaining chips So CFSP was a failure So how did Yugoslavian civil war end NATO and the US got involved So it showed that power works in bringing people to the table Treaty of Maastricht Created High Representative of the CFSP O O O 0 An institution To become the face of the EU that could bring people together Made the Spanish foreign minister as the head of this institution Solana He was the secretary of NATO But when they created new institution but didn t know where to take power from to give power to him 0 0 Can he go above foreign ministers Yes in theory but not in practice Have they solved the teeth of the organization do they have power yet No didn t solved this So we have Yugoslavia 2 in 19981999 Albanians in Serbia wanted independence They weren t recognized in the Dayton Accords Kosovo was part of Serbia proper not just a region of Yugoslavia Serbs started bombing them CFSP needed to take a position 0 Issued ultimatum against Serb military so provoked them by telling them where their military should be c It told Europeans that they still lack the punch no capacity to follow through the threat Eurocorps 0 Based on an idea of integrating militaries under European command Came up with this idea with the blessings of the Clinton administration It would be well trained force at the command of the EU About 180000 troops which is not enough if you want to rotate your troops in battle They already had a force NATO but how do you coordinate your troops with them No need to duplicate forces when they already had something like this Because US military finances amp runs NATO and Yugoslavia showed that NATO can end small conflicts but you have to ask the Americans And they didn t want to do this Said they would create Eurocorps in any conflict where NATO is not willing to engage in The Americans gave their blessings 0 But 911 happened 0 Bush admin happened So now we have the RRF Rapid Response Force under NATO command Still have Eurocorps but the idea never came to realization Since there was already a force out there and someone else is paying for it Thurs Oct 22 CFSP continued 0 IGO s often have to water down decisions 0 To understand this think of a cycle of decisionmaking Cycle of decision making 1 We decide what issues we want to discuss what issues are problematic 2 What are we going to do about it 3 Implementation a When looking at implementation you have to look at 2 factors i Resources to put decision into practice ii Implications your decisions will have consequences 0 The only way to implement foreign policy decisions is with the use of carrots and sticks o If you don t have the sticks your decisions mean nothing 0 Politicians don t address what you want but what they want because if they try to address things that they don t know anything about it makes them look impotent which they don t want 0 Since CFSP was a failure they came up with the ESDP European Security Defense Policy ESDP 0 They understood that you have to have 0 Integrated command at a geographic level I Where are troops going to be stationed in Europe I But if you put them in many different countries who gets to do what 0 Resources at a collective level 0 Command and control 0 This was an issue they faced but it did not work out very well Lessons 1 Responses need to be My in institutional development but also in terms of resources War on Terror happened in the 2000 s and the ESDP cannot address that 0 Terrorism cannot be dealt with by the military with conventional approaches because you cannot go after the means instead of the ends 0 What you need with terrorism intelligence 0 Human intelligence is the most satisfying expensive and most unreliable 0 Our problem is that there is too much information out there especially with the internet but we need to be able to sort through things we don t need After 911 US didn t have experts on the Middle East or speaking Arabic But there is a bias against investing in human intelligence 0 Because it is much easier to see a return of investment from technology than human intelligence People may quit or die but technology has an immediate return on investment And by investing in technology you are going to get money and support votes Armament industries want more money to build new things Investment of armaments means you re going to keep bombing people rather than investing in people In Europe this problem has to be made by 28 countries 0 And 28 countries have different capabilities 0 It s not going to happen 0 Because this problem is already complicated on a national level 0000 During the European Coal and Steel Community they proposed a European Defense Community in 1954 0 French proposed it 0 They wanted to create integrate militaries o Idea was if you can integrate coal and steel you can do military high to low politics 0 It was a miserable failure 0 Because French proposed it but the French National Assembly voted it down Instead they created the WEU Western European Union 1950 s 0 It was a security organization designed to be the European response to NATO without the military It was a political meeting of defense ministers But they are politicians not generals Why They didn t want to do the same thing as the EDC since it failed and they didn t want to recreate NATO o If you want to recreate NATO the first problem is money 1991 0 Why are we spending money to create something that we already have Second is the US 0 What will the Americans say 0 What will the US say about an organization that they cannot control they will want to know the purpose of the organization Third is it was a French idea 0 And they ran into an opponent a Eurosceptic Britain 0 British were not interested in integrating command or militaries amp didn t want to pay for it 0 And this would antagonize the US and the British didn t want that they think of themselves as the favorite ally End of the Cold War Ideas about how to make the EU more integrated Wanted to merge the WEU with the CFSP So the CFSP absorbed the WEU and it was the military muscle but it wasn t It was just an idea that they wanted to get it running by the Maastricht Treaty but couldn39t Objectives of CFSP 1 39F thDN Safeguard common European values Strengthen European security Reserve peace Promote international cooperation Develop consolidate democracy But these objectives are so broad that if you don t have a catastrophic event like a world war you ve basically accomplished them Why was NATO effective not like the CFSP NATO had specific objectives o It was a defense alliance created to repel a Soviet invasion of Europe I And it accomplished this objective so now has to justify why it s still around 0 Everyone agreed on who was the enemy and US paid for it CFSP they can t agree on who is the enemy And nobody could agree on who s going to lead it They didn t trust the French to lead it CFSP they didn t want to pay for it