PS5: Midterm 1

Terms & Essay Qs

Mercantilism

An economic doctrine based on the belief that military power and economic influences complement each other; applied especially to colonial empires in the 16th-18th century. Monopolies were at the center of mercantilist trade policies, which favored the mother countries over their colonies and competitors. '

• Ex. Dutch West Indian Company, established in 1621 for the lucrative fur trade by the Dutch government

Peace of Westphalia

A series of peace treaties that ended the Thirty Year War (1648) is often said to have created the modern state system because it included a general recognition of the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention

• Ex. Laying the groundwork for the modern nation-state system and international law by prioritizing national interest over religious unity and fostering a system of independent states

Sovereignty

The expectation that states have legal and political supremacy/ultimate authority within their territorial boundaries

• The U.S.has legal and political supremacy over its territory

Hegemony

The predominance of one nation-state over others

• The pax Britannica is an example of British hegemony over European states and the world at large

Decolonization

The process by which the colonial possessions won their independence, especially during the rapid end of the European empires in Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean between the 1940s and 1960s

• Ex. Both India and Pakistan gained independence from Britain in 1947

Interests

What actors want to achieve through political actions, and their preferences among the possible outcomes that might result from their political choices (their preferred outcome)

• Ex. a nation may be interested in a territory because of its farmland. 

Actors

The basic unit for the analysis of international politics, can be either groups of individuals or groups of people with a common interest

• Ex. Somalia can be an actor and Amnesty International can also be an actor

Anarchy

The absence of a central authority with the ability to make and enforce laws that bind all actors

• Ex. According to the realism framework, the world lives in anarchy. More specifically, where the UN is an institution, it has no way of enforcing. 

National interests

Interests attributed to the state itself, usually security and power.

• Ex. The U.S. and the Panama Canal

Interactions

The way in which the choices of two or more actors combine to produce political outcomes.

• The recent UN meeting in New York was filled with interactions between countries, leaders, and diplomats, all with different interests trying to achieve a political outcome.

Cooperation

AN interaction in which two or more actors adopt policies that make at least one actor better off relative to the status quo without making others worse off.

Bargaining

An interaction in which two or more actors must decide how to distribute something of values. Increasing one actor’s share of the good decreases the share available to others.

• Ex. The recent tension over the South China Sea access between Vietnam and China, in particular

Coordination

A type of cooperative interaction in which actors benefit from all making the same choices and subsequently have no incentive not to comply. It is self-sustaining because once it is achieved, no one can benefit from defecting.

Collaboration

A type of cooperative interaction in which actors gain from working together but nonetheless have incentives not to comply with any agreement

• Ex. The Prisoner’s Dilemma 

Public Goods

Products that are non-excludable and non-rival in consumption

• Ex. National Defense

Collective Action Problems

Obstacles to cooperation that occur when actors have incentives to collaborate but each acts with the expectation that others will pay the costs of cooperation.

• Ex. There are several collective action problems, like free riding and the prisoner’s dilemma.

Free Rider Problem

Failure to contribute to a public good while benefiting from the contributions of others

• Ex. People who do not pay taxes but benefit from infrastructure, such as highways and parks

Iteration (In Game Theory)

Repeated interactions with the same partners (good behavior today can guarantee cooperation tomorrow)

• Ex. The UK and France are making a deal on tariffs; both parties know that they are going to be interacting more in the future, so they might be more willing to have a deal

Linkage

The linking of cooperation of one issue of interaction to a second issue (information available is important for cooperation)

• Ex. Interactions between Russia and the U.S. can change based on how supportive the U.S. is of Russia and in its invasion of Ukraine. Any sort of economic deal or talk of cooperation is dependent on support for the Ukraine invasion.

Power

The ability of Actor A to get Actor B to do something B otherwise wouldn’t do. The ability to get the other side to make concessions and to avoid having to make concessions oneself.

• Ex. The U.S. can use its superior military power to get a smaller nation like Nicaragua to cooperate. 

Coercion

A strategy of imposing or threatening to impose costs or other actions in order to induce a change in their behavior

• Ex. When Hussain threatened to get Kuwait to stop selling so muhc oil and drive the price of oil down. 

Outside Options

The alternatives to bargaining with a specific actor

• Ex. One of Kuwait’s outside options was to appeal to the U.S. 

Agenda Setting

Actions taken before or during bargaining that made the reversion outcome more favorable for one party

Institutions

Sets of rules (known and shared by the relevant community) that structure interactions in specific ways

• Ex. The U.N.

Interstate War

A war in which the main participants are states

• Ex. WWI

Civil War

A war in which the main participants are within the same state, such as the government and a rebel group

• Ex. U.S. Civil War or the Syrian Civil War 

Security Dilemma

A dilemma that arises when efforts made by the states to defend themselves cause other states to feel less secure, potentially leading to arms races and war due to the fear of being attacked

• Ex. In the lead-up to WWII, Germany was building its army in violation of the Treaty of Versailles as well as invading the Rhineland, which put France in an uncomfortable position, forcing it and Britain to shirt towards an increase in military spending, further encouraging Germany. 

Crisis Bargaining

A bargaining interaction in which at least one actor threatens to use force if their demands are not met 

• Ex. The U.S. threatened Iraq if it didn’t stop its nuclear weapons program

Coercive Diplomacy

The use of threats to advance specific demands in a bargaining interaction

Bargaining Range

The set of deals that both parties in a bargain interaction prefer over the reversion outcome. When the reversion outcome is war, the bargaining range is the set of deals that both sides prefer over war. 

Compellence

An effort to change the status quo through the threat of force

• Ex. Iraq’s threats to Kuwait to get it to stop producing so much oil and lowering the price of oil in general

Deterrence

An effort to preserve the status quo through the threat of force

• Ex. NATO agreement if a nation is threatened or attacked, all other have to respond militarily

Incomplete Information

A situation in which actions in a strategic interaction lack information about other actors’ interests and/or capabilities

• Ex. Vietnam, the resolve of the Vietnamese people was not something the U.S. calculated correctly

Resolve

The willingness of an actor to endure costs to acquire a particular good

• Ex. The Vietnamese people’s passion for their independence 

Risk-return trade-off

In crisis bargaining, the trade-off between trying to get a better deal and trying to avoid a war 

• Ex. Kuwait and Iraq, the threats by Iraq were something that Kuwait was wiling to tolerate as long it did not need to stop producing oil 

Credibility 

(Believability). A credible threat is a threat that the target believes will be carried out. A credible commitment is a commitment or promise that the recipient believes will be honored.

• Ex. Nuclear war, how believable is it that one side will use a nuclear warhead? 

• When the U.S threatened to use nuclear forces against Soviet Union

Brinkmanship

A foreign policy practice in which one or both parties force the interaction between them to the threshold of confrontation

• Ex. The Cuban Missile Crisis

Audience costs

Negative repercussions for failing to follow through on a threat or to honor a commitment

• Ex. Obama’s red line with the use of chemical weapons, sarin, by Syria. When a year later they crossed the line, it made him and the U.S. look weak. 

Preventive war

A war fought with the intention of preventing an adversary from becoming stronger in the future. They arise because a state whose power is increasing cannot commit not to exploit that power in future bargaining interactions

• Ex. The U.S. invaded Iraq in order to, in theory, prevent its rise in nuclear power and the building of its program

First-strike advantage

The situation arises when military technology, military strategies, and/or geography give a significant advantage to whichever state attacks first in a war.

• Ex. The territory disputed between Israel and Syria, the Golan Heights, gives an incredible first-strike advantage to Syria over Israel because of its position 

• Ex. To some extent, Pearl Harbor was a first-strike advantage; the only reason it did not work was because they did not attack strongly enough, but if they had, the U.S. would have had a significant part of its military in the pacific crippled

Preemptive war

A war fought with the anticipation that an attack by the other side is imminent

• Ex. In WWI, when Germany launched its attack on the Russian territory, Russia would have attacked Germany when Germany attacked France. The attack of Germany to Russia was preemptive because it expected to get attacked as soon as it went against France

Indivisible Good

A good that cannot be divided without destroying its value. This can be a truly indivisible value or one that is perceived as indivisible by the actors involved

• Ex. The Temple Mount in Jerusalem is valuable to three main religions in the world (Judaism, Islam, and Christianity)

Nationalism

A political ideology that prioritizes attachment to one’s nation, where nations are groups defined by common origin, ethnicity, language, or cultural ties

• Ex. Nazism was an extended version of German patriotism

Bureaucracy

The collection or organizations (the military, diplomatic corps, and intelligence agencies) that carry out most tasks of governance within a state

• Ex. The military, in particular, the Pentagon, which is greatly responsible for decisions concerning war

Interest groups

Groups of individuals with common interests that organize to influence public policy in a manner that benefits their members

• Ex. Emily’s List, Amnesty International, etc. 

Rally effect

People’s tendency to become more supportive of their country’s government in times of dramatic international events, such as crises or wars

• Ex. The Falklands example for both Britain and Argentina at the state, but particularly for Margaret Thatcher when she won reelection the next year, greatly jumped in the polls from 23% to 51% favorability

Diversionary Incentive

The temptation that state leaders have to start international crisis to rally public support at home 

Military-industrial complex

An alliance between military leaders and the industries that benefits from international conflict, such as arms manufacturers

Democratic peace

The observation that there are few, if any, clear cases of war between mature democratic states

• Ex. No war between the U.K. and France since Waterloo in 1815

Democracy

A political system in which candidates compete for political office through frequent, fair elections in which a sizable portion of the adult population can vote

• Ex. The U.S. has a system of checks and balances, the House and Senate being elected, the election of the President every 4 years, etc. 

Autocracy

A political system in which an individual or small group exercises power with few constraints and no meaningful competition or participation by the general public 

• Ex. The USSR under Stalin. The People’s Republic of China

Accountability

The ability to punish or reward leaders for the decisions they make, as when frequent, fair elections enable voters to hold elected officials responsible for their actions by granting or withholding access to political office

Alliances

Institutions that help their members cooperate militarily in the event of a war. They specify standards of behavior/expectations. Codify bargaining that settle distributional issues. There is offensive and defensive alliances

• Ex. NATO, OSA

Balance of Power

The posture and policy of a nation or group of nations protecting itself against another nation or group of nations by matching its power against the power of the other side

• Ex. Previous to WWI, Britain would often ally itself with the 3rd biggest power to counter balance the 2nd one and have a balance of power

• Ex. While an asymmetrical balance of power, Russia joined France and the UK in the explosion of WWII

Bandwagoning

A strategy in which states join forces with the stronger side in a conflict

• Ex. Italy joining the Triple Entente, joining one side that was more powerful 

• Ex. Nations joining NATO after WWII, even though the Warsaw Pact and the USSR were technically not the bigger threat (perceived threat)

Entrapment

The condition of being dragged into an unwanted war because of the opportunistic actions of an ally 

• Ex. Germany signing the black check to Austria-Hungary

Collective Security Organizations

Broad-based institutions that promote peace and security among their members

• Ex. The League of Nations and the UN

Genocide

Intentional and systematic killing aimed at eliminating an identifiable group of people, such as an ethnic or religious group 

• Ex. The Rwanda genocide, the Bosnia genocide, and the Holocaust

Humanitarian interventions

Interventions designed to relieve humanitarian crises stemming from civil conflicts or large-scale human rights abuses, including genocide

• Ex. UNDOF: United Nations Disengagement Observer Force, supervised the withdrawal of Israeli and Syrian forces from the Golan heights and maintains a case-fire between them

Un Security Council and the P5

The five permanent members of the UN Security Council: The U.S., France, Great Britain, Russia (formerly the Soviet Union), and China

Veto Power

The ability to prevent the passage of a measure through a unilateral act, such as a single negative vote

• Ex. The P5 members have veto power

Peace-enforcement operation

A military operation in which force is used to make and/or enforce peace among warring parties that have not agreed to end their fighting 

• Ex. Korea in 1950-1953

Peacekeeping operation

An operation in which troops and observers are deployed to monitor a cease-fire or peace agreement

• Ex. Rwanda

What are the three I’s and why are they potentially useful to understand world politics?

• Institutions, interactions, and interests

• They are useful to understand world politics because they provide an analytical framework through which conflicts, diplomacy, and how actors behave can be explained

Why do states ever cooperate and follow the rules? When is this more likely to occur?

• States cooperate and follow rules when they have a similar interest and are able to cooperate to achieve it. This can be made easier by an institution that sets the rules for the cooperation and, to some extent, helps enforce it

• It is helpful for cooperation for actors not to have incentives to defect

• States, the main actors in interactions, want what is best for them, and often they share those interests with other states and are willing to cooperate. Furthermore, states are more wiling to cooperate than they are to go to war. The cost of war is too high in most instances, and there exists a bargaining model that nation are wiling to negotiate

What is the bargaining model of war, and how does it help us understand why wars occur?

The bargaining model of war is the set of deals that both actors in an interaction would prefer over war. This is all the outcomes they deem better and are willing to participate in, rather than the reserve outcome of war. It helps us understand why wars occur because it can point to why there was a war in the first place. There are 3 main reasons why wars happen that shrink the bargaining model, or make it completely irrational for states to follow. One is war from incomplete information, which can happen when one actor is unaware of the capabilities or resolve of the other. This makes it harder to determine where the actors stand in the bargaining range and can lead to demanding too much or yielding too little, like what happened between Kuwait and Iraq. In addition, incomplete information can also come from a misrepresentation by the other actor in the interaction. They might want to misrepresent their capabilities and resolve to appear weaker or stronger, or to add uncertainty, trying to gain an upper hand in the bargaining process. Two, war from commitment problems. Three, indivisibility.

Do collective security institutions help keep the peace? Why or why not? Reference at least one collective security institution in your answer

• Institutions help keep the peace by having a set of rules that help solve collective action problems like free riding and the prisoner’s dilemma. You don’t need to invent the wheel every time there is a conflict, there are already guidelines that aid in conflict resolution

• However, the lack of enforcement and the ever-present anarchy in the world make it hard for these rules to actually be applied and serve their function

What are the 3 basic 2×2 games and how can they help students understand they dynamics of world politics? Focus on how they help us understand different strategic settings? What are the type of settings that each game helps us understand?

Collaboration problem and public goods:

• The Prisoner’s Dilemma

• Chicken Game 

• The Stag Hunt