POLS3501 International Relations

POLS3501 International Relations
Gregory C. Dixon

Who am I? Dr. Gregory C. Dixon Specialty – International Relations
Areas of interest / research: International Institutions Conflict Management Globalization and Global Governance

Office Hours and Contact
Office: Pafford 125 Office Hours: T/Th 12:30 – 2pm; 3:30 – 6pm W noon – 2pm and by appointment

CourseDen Syllabus Course Pack PowerPoint
Electronic submission of assignments Exams Papers

Learning Outcomes Discuss the basic nature, structure, and historical origins of the international system Survey the core vocabulary used in the study of international relations Impart a basic understanding of world geography and its role in international politics Explore the major theoretical approaches to the study of international relations Discuss a range of key issue areas in contemporary international relations

Assignments Take Home Exams (3) 30% each Term Paper
lowest score dropped Term Paper Research Proposal 2% Literature Review 3% Completed Paper 25% Discussion Facilitation 10%

Exams Take-home essay exams Exams are included in the Course Pack
A selection of five questions from which you will answer two These are each roughly equivalent to a 5 – 7 page single spaced paper Exams are included in the Course Pack Exams are to be submitted electronically through Course Den

Don’t wait until the last minute to start the exams

Paper Assignment Articulate a research question related to the course
Do detailed research to answer your research question Write a research paper that answers your research question Papers will be 3,000 – 3,600 words in length

Discussion Facilitation
Small groups (2 – 3 students) Lead discussion for one week The readings The audio lectures Relevant current events (The Economist)

Grading 90% and up = A 80 – 89% = B 70 – 79% = C 60 – 69% = D
59% and below = F No curves or mathematical adjustments will be applied to the grades

Assumption of Adulthood
All students are assumed to be adults and will be held to adult standards of accountability and decorum. You are expected to familiarize yourself with the requirements of the course. You are expected to meet the requirements of the course without having to be reminded of such clearly posted things as exam due dates. It is expected that you will do the required reading for the course. It is expected that you will complete all required assignments.

Class Participation It is expected that students will participate in class Education is not simply a one-way process The subject matter in this course is complex at times and may require clarification Students are encouraged to ask questions

Late or Missed Assignments
Late assignments will suffer a penalty of one letter grade for each business day late The exams are take-home, so extensions will be extremely rare Absolutely no extensions will be given for the final exam due date

Special Needs Students with special needs as identified by the University will be accommodated in accordance with University policy

Attendance Attendance will not be taken and is not required as part of the course grade Attendance is vital to success in this course Students are forewarned that missing lectures may significantly reduce their chances of passing the course It is the responsibility of the student to get the notes from that day of class from another student in the class

Acts of the Gods On very rare occasions truly terrible things happen
If such an event happens, don't wait until the last day of the semester to deal with it

Privacy and FERPA New, stricter rules this year
Nothing related to grades, exams, or any other course information specific to a student will be discussed via normal - period Grades and related information will only be discussed in person (during office hours or after class) or via CourseDen

Classroom Decorum Please arrive on time
Please turn off any device that makes noise Please do not read the newspaper, sleep, send text messages, or work on material for other courses during the class time Mutual respect and politeness is required in the classroom at all times Violations of appropriate classroom decorum will result in penalties in accordance with the syllabus

Academic Honesty All students should be aware of the University rules regarding academic honesty. Cheating, fabrication, and/or plagiarism of any kind will not be tolerated. Any student caught committing any violation of the Honor Code on any assignment will receive an F in the course and will be reported to the University for further action as per University policy The professor reserves the right to seek the harshest possible penalty for any and all violations of the University of West Georgia Honor Code regardless of the value of the individual assignment

Academic Honesty If you are unsure as to what constitutes academic dishonesty, please consult the University of West Georgia Student Handbook Ignorance of the Code will not be accepted as an excuse for violations of it Many things which are perfectly acceptable in high school are considered cheating in college If you have a question about cheating, ask, don’t just assume that you are ok

POLS 3501 International Relations
What is IR and why do we study it?

What is IR? International Relations is the study of politics beyond the nation-state Roughly it is who gets what, where, when, and how across national borders

Why Study IR? It’s a globalized world
Events in the world have a practical impact on your life International events are interesting War and peace International economic relations Human rights And so many more…

Studying IR IR is the scientific study of international processes
There are many approaches to this process Competing theories Competing approaches Questions of ideas and practices IR is complicated and diverse

This Course This is a survey course
We will touch quickly on many different things This class moves fast Hang on

History of the international system The Making of the Modern World Part 1 – The Rise of West

Why Start With History? Impact of historical processes
The international system of today emerged over time The legacy of this history matters History is not deterministic Randomness happens History provides context

Parallax in History History depends on perspective
Most of what follows is Western in orientation Most of the ideas in IR are based in Western thought The West has made a large impact on the world Other historical traditions exist Islamic Confucian Etc.

Global Interconnectedness
Globalization is not new Europe, Africa, and Asia are linked in a hemispheric trade system by 1400 Mongol conquests create a central Asian trade system Chinese and Arab traders link Africa, the Middle East, and Asia by sea

Maritime Trade Routes 1335

Land Trade Routes 1300

African Trade Routes 1350

The World in 1400 Predicting the future in 1400 we’d get it all wrong
China, India, Tawantinsuyu , and the Aztec Empire are the up and comers Europe is backward and divided By 1500 Europe is starting a meteoric rise By 1900 Europe dominates the entire world What happened?

The Birth of the Modern World
Non-European empires fail to capitalize on their dominant position Europe experiences a series of shock events The Black Death (1348) Fall of Constantinople to the Turks (1453) 15th century revolution in military affairs Europe is on the defensive in 1400

The Age of Discovery Europeans explore the world in desperation
In the process they accidentally find the Americas They also establish a global trade system Europeans displace local traders throughout the world

The Americas Europe has massive impact
Americas linked to the world trade system Diseases kill 90 – 95% of the population of the Western Hemisphere The Empires of the Americas collapse under the pressure The Americas become integrated as the first colonial possessions of Spain and Portugal The Europeans export their political systems

Political Legacy Europeans export their political systems
These systems take root and will leave a legacy to the present day Western political systems are set up worldwide The basic international system is built on European political ideas

Westphalia 1648 – Peace of Westphalia ends the Thirty Years’ War
Westphalia marks the start of the modern state system The state system takes its shape over time

The Nation State The central actor in international relations
Traditional definition A geographically defined area (state) in which a people with a shared sense of common identity (nation) live Practical definition Any country recognized as independent

The Nation State Nation states (NS) have the following characteristics
NS are sovereign NS have fixed geography NS have a monopoly on legitimate use of force within their borders NS have a wide range of domestic political systems

Sovereignty No outside power may legitimately interfere in the internal affairs of any state This is the foundation of international law This is the core principle of the international system today

Sovereignty In Question
Globalization raises questions about sovereignty Is it still meaningful? Do we want it to be? Norms are changing More desire for international intervention in national affairs Non-state actors are growing in power and importance

Anarchy NS are sovereign so no power can compel them to do anything
This leads to an international system that is anarchic in nature: No central organizing authority All actors are technically equal

Comparing Ordering Principles
Domestic systems are characterized by hierarchy Members are not equal in authority Legitimate authority can coerce within the system International systems are characterized by anarchy Members are equal in authority Power distinguishes members No legitimate authority

Westphalia as Starting Point
The international system did not magically appear in 1648 The foundations were set down at Westphalia The system evolves over time as the result of actions by the great powers The European model of politics is exported to the world in the colonial system

History of the international system The Making of the Modern World Part 2 – The Age of Colonialism

Colonialism and Controversy
People in many developing states HATE colonialism Colonialism created many very real problems Many postcolonial leaders also use colonialism as an excuse for their own failures This is a major source of tension today

Colonial Diversity Colonialism was different in different places
When were you colonized? Who colonized you? What is the social, economic, and political context? How long were you colonized? These lead to very different results in different places

Pre-Industrial Colonialism
Americas are unique due to depopulation Spain and Portugal extend a semi-feudal system into the Americas France, England, and the Netherlands establish smallholder colonies In Asia and Africa, the established empires keep the Europeans contained Europe lacks a decisive advantage where the population did not die off

Age of Revolution At the dawn of the industrial age you get two major revolutions American Revolution (1776) French Revolution (1789) These shake up the political system The American will have a powerful long-run impact The French will directly threaten the entire international system

The Napoleonic Wars Revolutionary France goes to war with all its neighbors The idea is to spread revolutionary republicanism These wars reach their height with Napoleon These wars threaten to destroy the entire political system in Europe and replace it The conservative states rally and defeat Napoleon

The Congress of Vienna The Great Powers meet in Vienna to rebuild the European political system This is an informal mechanism for managing global conflict It creates a stable political system that lasts nearly 100 years

A Multipolar System The 1800’s are dominated by a multipolar international system There are several great powers The powers are close in strength This system tends towards a balance of power States form alliances to deter other states Balancing works so long as everything goes well

The Tumultuous 1800’s Industrial Revolution Industrial Colonialism
Demographic and social changes Massive movement of populations Significant changes in political systems Rise of nationalism Rise of representative government Colonial integration into European systems

Industrial Colonialism
Industrialization gives Europeans a decisive material advantage This creates a feedback process Industry allows conquest Conquest brings resources for more industry Industry expands: seeks more resources Process drives Europe to expand control across the world

Colonialism: 1st Wave Globalization
By 1870 the world is as integrated as the world of 2000 The process is coercive and disruptive Indigenous cultures and institutions are destroyed and replaced European systems are set up in their place This creates massive tension and dislocation Basic nature is coercive The underlying material support for the system is military power Industrialization made this possible

Colonial Penetration Process of destroying institutions is quick
Process of replacing them is not Replacement institutions are a problem They take time to entrench They have a stigma attached: they were imposed from outside Duration of colonization leaves a lasting legacy

Colonial Empires – 1800 Source:

Impact of Colonialism Local economy and society is reorganized
Local production is displaced by European-oriented production This is incredibly disruptive to the local social order Local social structures are altered at best, crushed at worst A very painful transition in many areas under colonialism

Ideological Justification
Europeans knew the impacts of their actions They justified the high cost through ideology Superior European systems would replace inferior local ones Europe was on a mission to make the world better States preached this to greater and lesser degrees

Race and Colonialism How do you justify tearing apart social, economic, and political systems? Race becomes the key A hierarchy based on race evolved by 1900 Racial hierarchy becomes the justification for the colonial system This leaves a legacy in contemporary politics A powerful memory of European racism still exists

History of the international system The Making of the Modern World Part 3 – Two Wars and a Depression

The World in 1913 A century of growth and progress for Europeans
Major wars had been short and mild Material progress was seen as a universal good Ideology had entrenched a concept of European superiority People had an incredible sense of optimism

The Great War and The Wasteland
WWI utterly destroys the world order of 1913 Political Social Military Economic The war is a devastating shock to the system The world of 1920 is fundamentally different

Political Impact of WWII
WWI destroys the old political order Great powers significantly weakened Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and Russian empires collapse German Empire dismembered UK, France are exhausted US, Japan emerge much stronger

The Character of WWI WWI was unlike any war that have ever taken place
Mass armies led to mass casualties Soldiers were cogs in the War Machine Total War meant that everyone was part of the war effort 1 in 3 Men of fighting age are killed Battle of Somme has over 1.5 million casualties

Slaughter in the Trenches
No one was prepared for modern war Colonial wars were easy The carnage was completely unexpected The elite signed up to fight first, and are slaughtered 11% of the total population of France was killed or wounded 10% of the French males of fighting age were killed, just under 40% were wounded An entire generation is decimated

The Peace of 1919 Victors negotiate the treaty between themselves
US, UK, France are main players Versailles Treaty is handed to Germany No choice is given: accept it or back to the war Japan is snubbed by allies Colonial peoples are sidelined

14 Points vs. Realpolitik Woodrow Wilson had declared 14 Points for a “just peace” UK and French leaders wanted to crush Germany forever This is battle of the Treaty of Versailles Key here is that Wilson wanted to fundamentally change the world, but failed to do so

The League of Nations An organization to prevent future wars
Based on “collective security” The first attempt to create a formal organization to manage world politics The core of Wilson’s 14 Points The only one created at Versailles

Domestic Politics is International
All international politics is local in democracies US popular opinion was against the League The Senate opposed the League The US will fail to ratify the Treaty of Versailles This fatally damages the entire Wilsonian system

Boom and Bust The 1920’s sees a major economic boom It is very fragile
Unstable balance of payments Unstable government economic policies Social and political unrest emerge in response to the changes wrought by WWI Colonial system is very fragile Colonial peoples resent colonialism European powers are too weak to maintain military dominance

It All Goes to Hell The Crash of 1929 slams into this fragile world order Creates liquidity crisis Crashed balance of payments system The world is in very real economic danger And the major powers push each other over the cliff No coordination of economic policy “Beggar thy neighbor” economic strategies US leads the way in narrow policies in crashing the system

The Great Depression Worst global crisis of the industrial age
Unemployment skyrockets in most industrial states World economic output collapses The entire economic system crashes This throws the entire international system into chaos

Road to War The collapse of the interwar system opens a door
Germany, Italy, and Japan want to reorder the world The collapse of the world economy gives them the chance

The 1930’s The League of Nations shatters under the pressures of a resurgent Italy and Japan Key moment: Italian invasion of Ethiopia Haile Selassie’s address to the League Assembly League inaction in the face of Italian aggression Appeasement Britain and France hope to buy off Germany by redressing “legitimate” concerns This fails

WWII Peak of total war Mass civilian casualties
All major powers are devastated other than the US The war ravages the Eurasian landmass

History of the international system The Making of the Modern World Part 4 – The Post-War Global Order

Post WWII World US is predominant world power
US can dictate postwar order USSR is powerful enough to resist, but not to displace the US US and USSR have different visions of the postwar world

The Postwar Order The US begins planning in 1943 Lessons of the past:
Bad peace leads to future war Lack of coordination leads to economic chaos Lack of coordination leads to war Solution Build a new international order to solve these problems

US Plan Magnanimous peace Build global governance architecture
United Nations (collective security) World Bank (international development) International Monetary Fund (monetary stability) The US will create these organizations Created based on US ideas about governance The system is American social democracy writ onto global politics

Theory The organizations will solve the problems of cooperation that led to the Depression and WWII Permanent institutions will bind states together The benefits of cooperation will keep states on board The US will bear the costs of setting all this up and providing incentives for states to join This attempts to apply the rules of governance we know at the domestic level to international politics It looks great on paper

Practice Power politics trumps ideals
The system is based on the US world view: Social democracy This is very different from the view of the USSR: Power politics

From WWII to Cold War USSR sees US plan as attempt at global hegemony
USSR refuses to play along Sets up satellite governments in Eastern Europe Creates a system or organizations to hold its sphere together This will lead to growing tension Both sides see the other as a threat

The Cold War The Cold War dominates world politics from 1947 - 1989
Economic and Security policies are focused on the Cold War The Cold War divides the world First World – US and the West Second World – USSR and the East Third World – everyone else Major impact on international system

Effects on Governance Architecture
The economic organizations were meant to govern the world – but they only govern part of it The West The Third World states that lean Westward This makes the economic organizations part of the Cold War battle Economics is a battleground of the Cold War The IMF, IBRD, and GATT play a role in the ideological struggle The organizations take on a role as promoters of the West's ideas about economics and development

The Embedded Liberal Bargain
Problems with economics in the West: Different Welfare States Different ideas about economic policy These differences have to be accounted for Embedded Liberalism Liberal economic ideas will dominate internationally This will be enshrined in the IMF, IBRD, and GATT Within this, each state manages its own Welfare State The international architecture embeds a core set of values

Effects on UN System The UN is meant to provide collective security
The “Big 5” on the Security Council are to be the world's policemen The problem is that two of the five are rivals in the Cold War Both the US and USSR have Security Council vetoes They use these vetoes any time a serious matter affects them The UN cannot perform its role in collective security

Effects on UN System The UN cannot provide collective security, but this leads to an unintended consequence As decolonization progresses, the membership shifts Former colonial states come to dominate in the General Assembly Create branches of the UN to deal with postcolonial issues The post-colonial states use the architecture built for collective security to meet their needs The UN takes on a much wider role than intended

2nd Wave Globalization The overall impact of the Cold War is to create a divided globalization The West and East blocks integrate within their blocks, but have little contact across the divide The Third World is able to play off the two major powers against each other The result: Tight integration within the First and Second Worlds The Third World is unevenly integrated The “Second Wave” (Cold War) globalization is simultaneous integration within two competing systems

End of the Cold War The Shock of 1989 The West had won the Cold War
No one saw it coming The whole international system changed The 2nd world vanished The West had won the Cold War Everyone joins the architecture created by the West

3rd Wave Globalization Global integration accelerates
Starts in 1973 with changes to finance system Last blocks removed with end of Cold War Integration is truly global again No stone left unturned But the governance architecture is cutting edge 1945 institutional design

Challenges to the Architecture
Decolonization creates many new nations UNCTAD is formed to address needs of developing states NIEO arises from UNCTAD program: seeking a new architecture of economic governance This fails: developing states are stuck with IMF/IBRD or COMECON models

Post Cold War Divided globalization had been eroding since the late 1970’s 1989 ends the Cold War and the remaining barriers between East and West collapse The West’s economic IGO’s expand to encompass the whole world Today’s GG architecture is thus the legacy of 1945 as modified by ideological struggle

9/11 and All That 9/11 does not change the basic structure of international politics The emphasis shifts to security Focus on non-state actors Divides states based on perception of threat The economic system does not change Globalization progresses Integration proceeds The geopolitical structure does not change Nation-state system barrels onward

Actors in International Relations

A Rogues Gallery of IR Nation-States
Inter-Governmental Organizations (IGO’s) International Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) Multinational Corporations (MNC’s) Epistemic Communities / Transnational Civil Society (TCS)

Nation States The major players in IR Sovereign entities
Fixed geography Monopoly on legitimate use of force Wide range of domestic political systems

IGO’s Organizations formed by formal treaties between national governments Have a formal structure detailed by treaty Regular meetings Bureaucracy (wide range in sizes) Come in many different forms

Traditional IGO Typology
Membership Function: Universal Limited General United Nations Organization of American States Arab League African Union Commonwealth of Nations Specific World Trade Organization World Bank Universal Postal Union Intl Telecoms Union NATO OECD ASEAN (originally) SADC

NGO’s Members are individuals, NGO’s, and/or, MNC’s Are member driven
Typically are focused on narrow range of issues Have wide range of relationships to states Bewildering range of institutional forms Funded by many different sources

Multinational Corporations
Legal “persons” created to do business Depend on legal systems of nation states May operate in many nation states Are responsible to shareholders Are motivated by profit Most nation states require “maximizing of shareholder value” The largest MNC’s have sales that exceed the GNP of most nations

Transnational Civil Society
Us! People who actively participate in global politics Can do so in many ways Often most recognized when working through NGO’s Provides a latent potential for organizing politically

Problems and Solutions
Globalization creates problems that require collective action States act collectively to coordinate trade Corporations act collectively to set standards People act collectively to promote their shared ideas All of these are aspects of global governance

GG by States – IGO’s Universal Postal Union (UPU)
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Bank of International Settlements (BIS)

GG by MNC’s The International Chamber of Commerce Blu-Ray
The standardized shipping container

GG by NGO’s FIFA World Anti-Doping Agency Freedom House

Seeking a science of international politics
Theory in IR Seeking a science of international politics

What is Theory Simplifying assumptions for a complex world
Improve understanding by using models of the world

A Typology for Theories
Units of analysis Assumptions All theories are simplifications Parsimony: keep it simple Completeness: explain widest range of cases

The Big Two Realism Idealism/Liberalism

The Realist Family States are the unit of analysis
States are sovereign States are unitary States are rational States are power maximizers Anarchic international system is the key Politics is a 0-sum game

Core Ideas of Realism Human nature is conflictual and unchanging
Anarchy means international politics is clearly different from domestic politics Morality is not possible in international politics

The Liberal Family Individuals are the unit of analysis
Individuals are rational Individuals are utility maximizers Politics and economics have mutual influence International politics can be a positive-sum game

Ideas in Liberalism Human nature is maleable
Incentives drive decisions Institutions can change incentives for actors Institutional design matters People can learn from the past and change how international politics works Improvement is possible

The “Neo-Neo” Debate Realism and Liberalism dominate during the 20th century until the end of the Cold War The “neo” variants are entrenched in most universities They dominate the IR literature This is criticized by others as the “neo-neo” debate Ignores other approaches Impacts how political leaders come to see policy

Marxism Class is the unit of analysis
Classes act in their own material interest Capitalist economics exploits labor in the service of capital Economic forces define and drive political forces History is a directional process that has a clear "end"

Ideas in Marxism Exploitation is the normal state of the international system Exploitation can only be changed by fundamentally changing the system Global politics and economics are the same thing Human nature is malleable Example: World Systems Theory

Social Constructivism
Unit of analysis is the individual We collectively construct our world What we believe to be true, becomes true Ideas/Norms cannot be separated from politics There is no “natural” form of the international system People can change all the parameters of politics

Ideas in Social Constructivism
Norms and ideas are key We build institutions to formalize norms International politics is structured by our ideas about it Anarchy is the state of the system today because leaders act as though the system is anarchic People can change the system in key ways

The Posti Family Postmodernism, Poststructuralism, and Critical theory are hard to categorize They vary a great deal

General Posti Assumptions
The concept of a unit of analysis is not useful There are no absolutes The discourse used to discuss international politics limits our ability to think about it Goal is to move beyond the constraints of language and discourse This can be complicated

Ideas in Posti Theory There is no human nature
Some ideas take on the “power of common sense” Common sense is not inherently “better” than other ideas Ideas drive us in ways we don’t think about Example: Critical Feminist Theory

Who’s Right? No one Everyone

Toolkits and Science Theory is a tool
Reality is too complex to fully grasp We MUST make simplifying assumptions What assumptions we make are driven by theory Ideally theory fits in the context of social science research This can get tricky when theory challenges the possibility of “social” science

Theory and Policy Policy is rarely made by theorists
Theory influences people through assumptions Wilson: prototype Liberal Institutionalist Nixon: the arch-realist Most policy-makers don’t think about their assumptions

Violence in international relations
Policy By Other Means? Violence in international relations

Scientific Study of Violence
War and violence are part of IR Violence is a fact of life We seek to understand it for two reasons Prevent future conflicts Reduce the impact of conflicts when they occur

Theory Creates Tension
There is a tension in the study of war Realists assume war is inevitable Others assume war is avoidable A few argue that war can be eliminated entirely This creates a basic tension in IR Some argue that the study of war avoidance is a waste of time Most argue that understanding war can help prevent it and limit it when it does come Others argue that we can achieve a world without war There is no answer to this dilemma

Methodological Tensions
There is a further divide Quantitative studies: statistical analysis Game theory: rational utility approaches Qualitative studies: case study approaches These approaches cross theoretical lines

Violence in IR War Violence short of war The lines can be very blurry
Large scale Nation-state based (inter-state war) Sub-national based (intra-state war) Violence short of war Terrorism Threats of war Low intensity conflict Proxy war The lines can be very blurry

What is War? And what is it good for?

War is Old All large scale societies fight wars, and always have
Violence is part of politics

War is What States Make of It
Understanding and defining war is a social act Societies define war within their world-view Western war is about decisive battle Aztec war was about capturing enemies Societies constrain war with rules Greek prohibition of archery Celtic ritual taunting Hunter-gatherer ritual combat War is what we make of it

Clausewitz War is policy by other means
War as a tool of national policy War should serve a purpose War is the product of national decision-making War is inevitable War can be desirable

Sun Tzu A different set of ideas
War is using what you have to battle your enemy It covers a large spectrum of tactics Includes full scale war Also includes guerilla tactics Does not share civilian/soldier distinction Doing what needs to be done with what you have

Clausewitz vs. Sun Tzu In Vietnam and Afghanistan Sun Tzu beat Clausewitz If you try and fight Clausewitzian war against an opponent with different tactics, you lose Industrial country armies start to re-learn tactics that had been neglected The strategy and tactics of war changes This accelerates post Cold War

Key Problems War is politics by other means
How and when we fight are determined by politics War brutally punishes the dumb But in modern war, the dumb may be too far away to feel the pain WWI – tactics did not change for nearly three years Iraq War – domestic political concerns prevented thinking about “after the war”

A Self-Help System Anarchy means you can’t rely on anyone
You are on your own: Self-help You must protect yourself at all times from all potential enemies There is no one to enforce the rules “The strong do as they will, the weak suffer what they must.” - Thucydides

The Security Dilemma You cannot make yourself secure without threatening others A sees B as a strong enemy A arms to defend against B C sees A arming and fears A C arms to defend against A B and A both see C arming and fear C Etc.

Asymmetric Warfare The US is unchallenged in traditional war
The US is vulnerable to asymmetric war All the industrial democracies are vulnerable Casualty aversion Rapidly declining political will Short time-horizons Distance accelerates fatigue Non-state actors and rogue states use what they have to hit us where we are vulnerable

Defining War is a Problem
Correlates of War = 1,000 battle deaths PRIO = 100 battle deaths This assumes inter-state war War today is often state vs. non-state actor UCDP includes wars involving non-state parties Force is also often used for reasons other than traditional war Peacekeeping Stability operations

Time of Transition Our ideas about war are changing
Policy is shifting slowly Deal with stability Deal with non-state actors Retain a concern with interstate war Bureaucracies change direction slowly It is not clear how this will affect us in the future

Jus in Bello War Law

Limiting War All societies seek to limit war
Yanamamo Tribes (Brazil) constrain conflict through ritual to prevent violence Greeks eliminated missile weapons Irish “Laws of the Innocents” in pre-Christian Ireland Papal efforts to limit war between Christians Islamic prohibitions against fighting within the Ummah

Modern Laws of War Geneva Conventions
1st – Treatment of sick and wounded Original ratification = 1864 Last modified = 1949 2nd – Treatment of sailors Original ratification = 1906 3rd – POW’s Original ratification = 1929 4th – Civilians in wartime (civil and interstate) Original ratification = 1949 Last modified = 1977 (protocols I and II)

Laws of War

Assumptions of the LoW Interstate war Enforced first by the states
Courts martial Enforced by international jurisprudence only when national justice is not present Ad hoc tribunals Nuremburg Tokyo Yugoslavia Rwanda International Criminal Court

Problems of the LoW No provision for non-state violent actors
Definitions follow older ideas about war Combatants are defined in traditional war terms Clear distinction between civilian and soldier Assume clearly defined boundaries Rely on national power to enforce National policing of militaries Victor enforces against defeated powers International enforcement still requires national cooperation

Post 9/11 Problems Where do terrorists fit?
Domestic legal system International legal system Someplace else? Where do private military contractors fit? Mercenaries? Something new? Who’s laws apply to them?

Enemy or Tactic? Terrorism

Defining Terrorism This is surprisingly hard
There is no universally accepted definition Working definition: The use of unconventional violence for the purpose of generating terror in one's opponents for a political or military end

Goals of Terrorism To breed fear in the enemy
Change policy in the enemy through rising monetary and political cost Erode the confidence of the opponent's military and civilian populations "Bring the conflict home" to the enemy

Methods of Terrorism Unconventional violence Bombings Hijackings
Political Assassinations Covert attack

Character of Terrorist Violence
No civilian/soldier separation Wide variation of means Wide variation of goals Murky definition of victory Symbolism as important as actual damage

Types Of Terrorism State-Sponsored Why sponsor terror?
Cold War Logic Undermine the other side Keeps violence at a low level Post-Cold War Logic Asymmetric violence: way of challenging the North Bargaining power in larger negotiations Much riskier after 9/11 Key features of state terrorism: Terrorists may move freely, but the sponsor is fixed Resources available are much greater than those for independents

Types Of Terrorism Independent: The group acts without the direction or official support of a state Supported by a combination of: Direct financial support Investment and financial strategy Criminal enterprises Key features: Independent of geography Use globalization as a tool Operate outside of traditional state actions and limitations

Problems with Terrorism
Ends of terrorists can be murky Cellular organization means splinter groups are common Strong states are not defeated by terrorism in any significant areas of policy Committed groups may take generations to die out

State Strength Strong states effectively resist terrorism in most cases Middling or weak states struggle Failed states are fertile ground for terror

Old Terrorism Had a clearly defined political motivation – changes to policy Balanced creating terror and maintaining sympathy for “the cause” The most prominent groups were state sponsored Small number of fixed bases for training and deployment

New Terrorism Motivation is loosely defined or based on ideology/identity Seeks largest symbolic impact, not a balance Most prominent groups are non-state actors Many bases in weak or failed states throughout the world Cells in other states

War On Terrorism Terrorism is a tactic
You can make war on terrorist organizations But you face the danger of becoming the enemy

Weapons of Mass Destruction
Why do we care so much about these things? Weapons of Mass Destruction

What’s a WMD? Weapons that kill without discriminating between combatants and non-combatants

Types of WMD 3 general types: Chemical Weapons Biological Weapons
Banned under Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) Biological Weapons Banned under Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) Nuclear Weapons Proliferation of technology is controlled under Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

Chemical Weapons 4 basic types 2 broad categories:
Choking - damage lung tissue Blood Agents - cut off flow of oxygen Vesicants - burn and blister soft tissue Nerve Agents - disable nervous system 2 broad categories: Persistent Non-Persistent

Biological Weapons How they kill: Varies by disease 2 broad categories
Pathogens - diseases which directly kill: bubonic plague, anthrax Biological Toxins - poisons produced by natural agent: ricin (from castor beans)

Nuclear Weapons How they kill: 3 categories:
Primary blast radius: vaporize all living matter and pulverize buildings Secondary blast radius: shock wave crushes people and buildings Tertiary blast radius: radiation, blindness, and burn effects 3 categories: Fission: "first-generation" weapons Fusion: "second-generation" weapons Radiological: Conventional bombs encased in radioactive substances (irradiate only)

Nuclear Biological Chemical Current Possessors United States Russia United Kingdom France China (PRC) Israel North Korea India Pakistan None Iran*** Known Former Possessors: Programs dismantled and weapons destroyed South Africa USSR (Russia) Germany* Japan* Iraq United States‡ USSR (Russia) ‡ Over 20 states on this list Active Acquisition Programs (known) Iran Syria Syria ** Programs abandoned before acquisition Brazil Argentina Germany South Korea Taiwan Libya Netherlands Canada Poland Albania Algeria Australia Romania Jordan Egypt Bulgaria Unknown

Would Terrorists Use WMD?
Any of these weapons would create the following effects: Massive casualties Contamination of key areas Panic Degraded response capability Economic Damage Loss of Strategic Position Social and Psychological damage All of these suite “new terrorist” agendas

What’s Stopping Them? For Bio and Chem: nothing Nuclear
Acquisition is relatively easy Delivery is the hard part Larry Harris: US militia group purchased bubonic plague Rajneesh Puram Cult: used salmonella to sicken people before an election Aum Shinrikyo: Sarin gas attack on Tokyo subway Nuclear Bomb is easy Fissile material is very, very hard to get Fissile material is traceable

Taboo WMD have massive symbolic power
Psychological and normative factors mitigate against use by most actors

Deterrence US and others have a policy of massive retaliation in kind to WMD use US only has nukes: chemical attack on us = nuclear attack on you Works with states Nuclear material is rare and traceable, so deterrence is easier Not clear if deterrence works for new terrorist groups

Post 9/11 WMD The old deterrence rules may be gone
Most likely users are non-state actors Chemical and biological are most likely Old proliferation control regimes are eroding US nuclear deal with India Removal of sanctions on Pakistan Deals with North Korea War in Iraq gave clear lesson: If you have nukes, you are safe If you are building nukes, you are in danger We are in uncharted waters

Human Security Changing the terms of the debate

Problems of Intervention
Any intervention faces potential problems Legal – can the international community intervene? Logistical – does the international community have the capacity to intervene? Moral – should the international community intervene? Political – if it is legal, the capacity exists, and it should be done, is there the political will to do it?

Obstacles to Overcome Sovereignty Communication Coordination
Legal prohibitions against interference Communication Making sure everyone is aware of the extent of the problem Coordination Getting everyone on the same page once you agree to move

Political Will Ultimately it is a combination of will and resources that are necessary Will is almost always lacking

Dark Side of Democracy Political leaders are elected in domestic politics In domestic politics, people vote based on domestic issues Political leaders see (rightly) humanitarian intervention as unpopular Developed electorates don’t want to pay the costs of intervention Developing states lack the resources to undertake effective intervention

International Political Economy
IPE for you and me!

Issues in IPE The distribution of wealth in the global economy
The impact of the market on traditional societies’ Evolving social and cultural issues coming into conflict with economic issues The globalization of commerce and the impact on local needs The conflict between democracy and capitalism

Political Economy The marketplace creates winners and losers
Political leaders are constantly torn between contradictory pressures All leaders must balance the market forces and political forces What kind of government a country has affects how this balance will be struck Policy choices are almost always about the art of the possible – not about the ideal

The Conventional Spectrum
Economic nationalism (mercantilism) The marketplace (the economy) should be a tool for increasing the power of the state. Liberalism (neo-liberalism) The marketplace is the best way to determine who gets what, when, and how.

Economic nationalism Mostly Open: Singapore Cuba Russia USA
Mostly Closed: North Korea Sweden Liberalism Source: Heritage Foundation Economic Freedom World Rankings:

A Constant Tension Countries need strong economies to grow
Political leaders like to stay in power Weak states lose freedom of action International markets can lead to prosperity, but with a loss of autonomy Too much loss of autonomy and a state is at the whim of global economics

Examples Industrial states: Developing states: Agricultural policy
Food is artificially expensive Consumers pay more Rich world policies keep people poor in the developing world Food prices depend on politics Developing states: Industrial policy Limits avenues of investment Seeks expertise, technology, etc.

Government Type Matters
Democracies are richer than autocracies But open countries can be authoritarian But they need effective institutions If your institutions are bad, government type doesn’t make a difference

Why is Democracy Good? Incentives for political leaders
Long term economic growth supports the system as a whole Leaders like stability – they can stay in power Consolidated democracies have a strong interest in long-term growth The need for leaders to appeal to voters over time keeps the long run on their minds

But… The short run pressure is for bad policy
Losers want government to protect them Winners engage in rent-seeking Democracy makes this pressure worse, you need these people in the next election Bad economic times = short run pressure Fragile (or just new) institutions = short run pressure

Autocracy Less worried about pressure Autocrat skims money off the top
No rule of law, so its harder to get investment anyway No real incentive for growth beyond a bare minimum Ruling oligarchs can be rich even if the country is poor Power trumps wealth

In General, In the Long Run…
Democracy is better, but only under some conditions Autocracy is usually worse, but there are rare cases of enlightened despots Oligarchy is a happy (-ish) medium (Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and maybe China)

Governance Governance is as important as regime type
Good governance = effective institutions + good policy environment The trick is knowing what “good” and “effective” mean

Thinking About IPE There is incredible diversity in approaches
There is little agreement Mainline IGO’s and policy-makers in North have a broad consensus There are many critiques Evidence is mixed at best This section of the course will explore these issues

The basic ideas and principles of political economy

Economic Theory 101 The big three of neo-liberal economics:
Adam Smith David Ricardo John Maynard Keynes The big four critics: Karl Marx (with help from Engles) V.I. Lenin Dependencia and World Systems The Austrian School

Adam Smith Mercantilism places politics before economics
The market is superior to the monarch at making economic decisions The efficiency of the market is more egalitarian – efficiency is rewarded, not status The market is a self-regulating mechanism Key points to remember: The short term could be problematic Charity reduces the problem (“fellow feeling”) A Theory of Moral Sentiments was part of free markets

David Ricardo Comparative Advantage
Make goods where you can do so most efficiently Over time, this process results in more efficient production across the world In the global market, this means that production will shift to countries in which there is the greatest efficiency The market will become progressively more integrated

J.M. Keynes Free markets are prone to boom and bust
The impact can be reduced (but not eliminated) with “counter-cyclical” policy General Theory is published just before Depression His ideas are usually not implemented as he argued they should be

“Counter-Cyclical Policy”
Monetary policy Fiscal policy The government acts to moderate the cycle Deficit spending in bad times Pay off deficits in good times This is the policy adopted by all advanced industrial states post WWII This policy is embedded in the global economic order

Embedded Liberalism Global economic governance is based on a particular vision of economics IMF, World Bank, and WTO enshrine this It is also a system that privileges the power of the already wealthy The basic assumptions are built into how governance works

Marx Capitalism = exploitation
The globalization of capitalism is required to achieve a global class consciousness This is necessary before the capitalist system can be overturned In short: the system is exploitative, but its alright because this will lead to its destruction, someday

Lenin Agreed with Marx, but with an important change
Lenin thought you could accelerate the process of movement to revolution WWI and the Depression were evidence of the fragility of the capitalist class You could create a socialist system that would accelerate the global revolution In short: the system is exploitative, but it will change sooner than Marx thought because I’m in power

Dependencia and World Systems Theory
The basic argument is that the advanced states have rigged the game The system favors the already rich The poor are exploited to keep the rich fat and happy The only way out of the system is to recognize that you are “dependent” on the rich Once you realize this you can break the cycle This leads to a school of “Dependent Development”

Austrian School Yes, free markets are good
Now will the advanced industrial states please start practicing what they preach Essentially agrees that the system is rigged Trying to manage the system leads to politics warping the markets This makes everyone worse off in the long run Example: Agricultural policies

Money and Finance

Money, Finance, and Globalization
To understand the world, you have to understand money Finance drives globalization Globalization drives finance This is a self-reinforcing system But it also binds us all together in complicated ways

What is Money? Fiat vs. Specie Almost all money today is fiat money
Specie: money that is some tangible thing (gold, silver, seashells, etc.) Fiat: money that has value by government dictat Almost all money today is fiat money Money is an idea Money is information Money can move as information moves

The Gold Standard The Gold Standard Problems
Makes international exchange easy – you get X gold per $ and Y gold per £ You can easily tell how strong a currency is – does a country have enough gold to meet its commitments? It is very stable over time Problems Money supply is limited to gold on hand – it can’t grow easily Gold can run away – make bad policy decisions and people take their gold elsewhere It can be slow to respond to market forces, delaying policy response It is easy for governments to manipulate (FDR seized all the gold in the USA during the New Deal)

Bretton Woods v1.0 The original IMF system was an indirect gold standard US$ linked to fixed amount of gold All other currencies pegged to the US$ The fixed rates of exchange got out of synch with reality Markets move quickly Politics adapts slowly The system collapsed in 1973

Post 1973 World Money has no basic connection to physical things
Its value is wholly psychological Confidence matters Faith matters Two basic categories of currencies Hard ($, €, ¥, £) Soft (most of the rest) Two ways of exchanging currencies: Fixed rates: peg your currency to a hard currency Floating rates: what the market will bear

Understanding Exchange Rates
Exchange rates are complicated Market forces play a big role Politics and markets mix National accounts matter Money flows have consequences Globalization accelerates this process

National Accounts Governments have bank accounts
There are important elements of this: Official reserves (cash on hand) Current Account Capital Account

Current Account The current account is the sum of the following
Net trade (imports – exports) Factor income (interest on reserve accounts) Direct transfers (foreign aid and/or payments) This can be negative (deficit) or positive (surplus)

Capital Account The capital account is the balance of capital flows:
Capital inflows (money coming in) Capital outflows (money going out) This includes: FDI Portfolio investment All other capital transactions This can be negative or positive

National Reserves You need hard currencies to pay for things, so you need to have money in the bank Starting reserves + capital account + current account = ending reserves If reserves reach zero you are out of money And your life will really, really suck

The Market Will Bear Exchange rates are part of the market’s balancing process If money flows out of a country (current and capital account deficits) there are consequences Reserved dwindle Downward pressure develops on the currency You need more local currency to buy hard currency due to relative demand Over time this lowers the value of the local currency relative to hard currencies

Floating vs. Fixed Rates
Fixed Exchange Rate Systems Peg the value of a local currency to a hard currency Force the local government to give up control of monetary policy Floating Exchange Rate Systems The markets determine the value of the currency Local economy can shift based on global trends Local government will be limited in fiscal and regulatory policy

The Unholy Trinity You cannot simultaneously have:
Exchange rate stability Economic policy flexibility Free movement of capital Governments must balance these factors Examples: Argentina’s dollar peg and its collapse The Euro area and its crisis

Understanding Money Pressure on markets and governments is continuous
The process never ends All elements are mutually dependent This makes things complicated The basics are conceptually simple, but complex in practice Major economic issues arise from this process

Economic Development

Development in Context
The North industrialized early Development environment was very different Systemic legacies exist today Colonialism First mover advantages Global Governance Architecture Development today is a significant challenge

Post-Colonial Development
Context is very different from Northern Development Dependent on North for capital Brain Drain Colonial economies structured to benefit empire MNC's can be more powerful than national government Boundaries drawn by Europeans Lack of national identity Basic infrastructure lacking

How to Develop? Three basic categories of approaches post 1945
Liberal model Import Substitution Export-Led Growth All have strengths and weaknesses None has universal record of success

The Liberal Model Right policy, right institutions = development
Based on structural functionalism Focus is on right policy Private ownership of major industry (privatize if already state owned) Open markets to foreign competition Shrink large state sectors Embrace the global market Problems: Often imposed from the outside Often tried in states without prerequisites for it to work Creates dislocation in the short run that meets resistance

Import Substitution Emerges from World Systems Theory
Focus is on opting out of liberal system High protective tariffs or other barriers Aggregate capital to jump start industry Government coordinates policy Mix of command and market economics Problems: Never become competitive with world market Companies don't learn to compete Companies become tool of the state Rough transition to free market

Export-Led Growth Plays on the margin of liberal system
Focus is on finding a niche and exploiting it Erect barriers to limited area of imports State coordinates economy without ownership Actively seek foreign investors – but with limits Focus is on development of export industry State manages industrial policy Problems: Promotes authoritarianism in the short run Hard to maintain in the long run Companies become over-dependent on the state Promotes “crony-capitalism” and corruption Easy to fall into “middle income trap”

So what works? All have worked to some degree
None works across the board The most successful states have either been in specific contexts (Taiwan, South Korea) or have mixed policies over time (Brazil, India) Policy adaptation leading to success has shifted emphasis to governance

Globalization & Development
States are increasingly bound by international pressure Need for FDI Technology transfers Organizational practice Global institutions set rules The Big 3 – IMF, World Bank, WTO Host of smaller organizations Market pressures Indirect pressure MNC's act as a conduit

Diverging Developing States
“Developing” states have gotten increasingly different Balkanization of development experience Examples: “Middle Class” states “Hopeful Poor” states “Least Developed” states These groups mean it is harder to have a common agenda

Systemic Problems Developing states face problems from the international system Debt Commodity Dependence Shift in capital flows

Today's Development Puzzle
International forces limit options Past models have limited success at best Many of the obstacles to growth are systemic Hard to cooperate on an agenda for all developing states This leads to changes in response Regional integration Middle powers taking on leadership

Regional Integration Creates IGO's, but for specific conditions
Process faces the cooperation problem, but on a smaller scale Focus is on solving the problems of the member states Example: ECOWAS Pool resources for infrastructure and development Harmonize rules Act collectively in international negotiations Provide collective security

Rise of Emerging Markets
Larger and more developed states (“Middle Class” states) are beginning to take a greater role in IPE Cooperation is still a problem, but it can be overcome if states are willing to bear the cost Larger states act as “mini-hegemon” to get cooperation among developing states Works best if there is an IGO that has an open system of voting Examples: BRIC’s, Nigeria, Chile

Prospects for the Future
Development is hotly debated Right model Right goals Sustainability Divergence creates tension Emerging markets wealth is growing Tens of millions rising out of poverty Where will all this lead?

Herding cats while riding a unicycle in a snowstorm
Global Governance

POLS3501 International Relations

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "POLS3501 International Relations"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

POLS3501 International Relations

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "POLS3501 International Relations"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback