University of Colorado – Denver Notes 9.1 - 9.2 Windham E. Loopesko INTB 3000 Fall 2013 University of Colorado – Denver October 14-17, 2013 Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013

Week 9.1 – Realism and the balance of power The realist approach to maintaining peace Requirements to maintain a balance of power Stay vigilant Seek allies when you can’t match adversaries’ arms Alliances are flexible – not a marriage Oppose any state seeking hegemony Be moderate in victory Looking back on course 30-40 years from now, quaint -- typewriters and punch cards Equally valid viewpoints – best run companies have both, American strength Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013

Week 9.1 – Problems with the balance of power “Bandwagoning” vs. opposing hegemons Getting accurate and current information (shifting alliances) The need to maintain parity = arms race States aren’t always risk averse or rational Perceptions more important than realities Balance of power hasn’t always worked Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013

Week 9.1 – A great-power concert? At times, the great powers may come together to bring order to the international system The record is mixed Success – the Congress of Vienna Failure – the Treaty of Versailles Are China and the US in the process of trying something similar? Such concerts are fragile and easily eroded Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013

Week 9.2 – The liberal approach to achieving peace The liberal approach – international agreements (e.g., arms control) and joint action Arms control – agreements to limit arms levels by controlling growth or restricting use Disarmament (much rarer) – reducing or eliminating weapons Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013

Week 9.2 – US/Russia arms control agreements The US/Russia – 25 arms control agreements As a result, no direct clashes but proxy wars Major agreements -- SALT (1972 and 1979); START (1991, 1993, 2010); SORT (2002) These agreement substantially reduced number of nuclear weapons and created trust – with the hope of other, wider peace-keeping arrangements Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013

Week 9.2 – Agreements against weapons of mass destruction The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has 189 signers – but it has not kept India, Pakistan and North Korea from going nuclear (and Israel widely suspected of nuclear arms) The 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention has even wider reach, but . . . US has refused to accept enforcement measures Syria shows the problems of preventing use Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013

Week 9.2 – Obstacles to arms control and disarmament Such agreements tend to fight the last war Controls of one system can prompt development in others (“whack-a-mole”) Failure to control most dangerous weapons (e.g., land mines) discredits whole movement Innovation means new systems are constantly emerging But arms control alternatives are even worse Achieving peace 10/14-10/17 2013