STATES & NON-STATE ACTORS Parties to Conflict STATES & NON-STATE ACTORS

1. States Two major explanations for interstate war: structural (systemic) & dyadic (state-level, relationship btwn 2)

Systemic (Structural) Explanation for Interstate War Characteristics of int’l system are root of war btwn states Anarchy Polarity Interdependence

Anarchy Realism  int’l system is anarchic States focus on self-interest, when must be aggressive, it’s for own protection Inevitable for wars to break out periodically

Polarity Another realist explanation Distribution of power (polarity: number of power centers- poles) Unipolar, bipolar, multipolar, etc. Which system of polarity is likely to lead to increased chance of conflict???

Interdependence Liberal theory  importance of interdependence, cooperation Multiple channels + varied issues in which states have interests = war is too costly Relationships w/ high degree of interdependence ---- don’t see same effects of anarchic system

“Particularly among industrialized, pluralist countries, the perceived margin of safety has widened: Fears of attack in general have declined, and fears of attacks by one another are virtually nonexistent. . . . Canada’s last war plans for fighting the United States were abandoned half a century ago. Britain and Germany no longer feel threatened by each other. Intense relationships of mutual influence exist between these countries, but in most of them force is irrelevant or unimportant as an instrument of policy.” “Global Politics” by Juliet Kaarbo, James Ray Chapter 6: International Conflict: Explaining Interstate War

State-Level (Dyadic) Explanation for Interstate War Dyadic explanations: interaction of characteristics of 2 states War w/in democratic dyads extremely rare Some types of state more war-prone than others due to various factors Economy Internal political opposition Nature of political system

1. Economy Marxist theory– capitalist states are more war-prone Overproduction, surplus, wealth inequality  want to fix these via imperialism Imperialism involves military conflict “In a world of many capitalist countries imperialism means economic competition between rival states. Each state strives to gain exclusive control over markets, raw materials, sources of cheap labor, naval bases, and investment opportunities. At some point, these can be gained only at the expense of other capitalist states. Economic conflict eventually leads to military conflict.”

But! Not all capitalist states have engaged in imperialism? Not all conflicts btwn capitalist states end in war? War has been around longer than capitalist economic systems? States w/ socialist economies have often been in conflict, even w/ each other?

But again! Even w/ criticisms, large possibility that economic conditions provide explanation for war (good conditions is when states can afford military ventures!) War may benefit certain economic interests Weapons manufacturers Military industrial complex (military + bureaucracy + defense)

2. Internal Opposition & Types of Political Systems Liberal theory: states w/ democratic systems less war prone than non-demo states Cultural values of peaceful resolution Constraints in democratic structures Opposition often views war as counter to cultural norms Leaders of demo states are accountable (vote)

Democratic states just as likely to go to war, but much less likely to become involved in war with each other “Democratic peace proposition” Criticism: depends on definition & scope of definition of democracy

“If democracy is designed as a type of political system in which the identities of the leaders of the executive branch and the members of the national legislature are selected in elections involving at least two independent political parties, in which at least half the adult population is eligible to vote, and in which the possibility that the governing party will lose has been established by historical precedent, then . . . None of those [controversial] cases is appropriately categorized as an international war between democratic states.”

Should states intervene to promote democratization? Groups of 2 (one 3) Develop argument for one side Will be paired with group from opposing side Present arguments to each other/ take notes on opposing side’s argument(s) so you can give a brief rebuttal afterwards Take off role play hats & discuss as a group your personal consensus

2. Non-State Actors