BHB 7, 8 and Bargaining model

 What are the foundational definitions of war from Clausewitz and Weber?

 Clausewitz: "Continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means."

• Weber: "The decisive means for politics is violence."

Identify the core data projects used to track war and their specific thresholds.

Correlates of War (COW): Focuses on interstate wars; threshold is 1,000+ battle deaths.

• Uppsala (UCDP): Broader focus on "armed conflict," including intrastate/civil wars and non-state groups.

• Militarized Interstate Disputes (MIDs): Military force that falls below the 1,000-death threshold.

Classify the four types of warfare based on legality and timing.

 1. Aggression: Unprovoked attack; violates international law (e.g., Russia/Ukraine 2022). 2. Self-Defense: Individual or collective (e.g., Kuwait 1990; NATO Article 5). 3. Preemption: Striking an imminent threat (e.g., Bush Doctrine). 4. Prevention: Striking a potential threat before it emerges (not imminent).

 Explain the First Image (Individual Level) causes of war.

Human Nature: Violence as instinctual/territorial.

• Psychological: Aggression from stress or frustration (e.g., post-WWI Germany).

• Leaders: Personality traits (Assad’s pragmatism) or personal experiences (Bush vs. Saddam).

Explain the Second Image (State Level) causes of war.

 Statecraft: Force as a tool for national interest.

• Militarism: Belief in strong military capabilities.

• Diversionary Theory ("Wagging the Dog"): Starting foreign crises to distract from domestic issues (e.g., Falklands 1982).

Explain the Third Image (System Level) causes of war.

• Security Dilemma: Defensive buildup makes others insecure.

• Power Transitions: Declining vs. Rising powers (e.g., Austro-Hungarian Empire).

• Economic: Resource access (Oil/Gulf War) or Relative Deprivation (wealth gap).

Contrast the "Traditional" approach with the "Human Security" approach.

 Traditional (Realism): Referent object is the State. Goal is sovereignty/integrity via military power.

• Human Security: Referent object is the Individual. Goal is "freedom from want" and "freedom from fear" (UN 1994 Report: 7 elements).

What is the "Post-Westphalian Approach"?

Moving away from state sovereignty as the supreme rule of global politics in favor of individual/global needs.

 Define Securitization (Copenhagen School).

A social construct where an issue (like climate change) is labeled a "security" issue to justify extraordinary emergency measures.

Categorize the five methods of Arms Control.

1. Numeric: Limit numbers (START I & II). 2. Categorical: Eliminate a class (INF Treaty/Landmines). 3. Development: Stop testing (NPT/CTBT). 4. Geographic: Ban in areas (Space/Antarctica). 5. Transfer: Limit movement (NPT pledge)

What is the "Iron Triangle" (Military-Industrial Complex)?

The mutually reinforcing relationship between Legislators, Defense Bureaucracies, and Interest Groups that keeps military spending high.

: Contrast Peacekeeping vs. Peace Enforcement.

 Peacekeeping (Ch VI.5): Reactive; requires consent, impartiality, and force only in self-defense.

Peace Enforcement (Ch VII): Conserts to impose peace; no consent required; robust rules of engagement.

t: Distinguish between Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello.

 Jus ad Bellum: The right to go to war (Self-defense/UN authorization).

• Jus in Bello: Conduct during war (Principle of Distinction between civilians/combatants and Proportionality).

 What are the Three Pillars of R2P?

. State responsibility to protect its people. 2. International community assistance. 3. Timely/decisive collective action if the state fails (e.g., Libya 2011).

 Define Non-Refoulement.

 International law forbidding the return of asylum seekers to a country where they are in danger.

Essay Argument Summary (The "Points to Hit")

• War Trajectory: Pre-1990 saw a 3x increase (Cold War/Colonialism); Post-Cold War has seen a steep decline in interstate war.

• Modern Conflicts: Mostly intrastate (civil wars) that are "internationalized" by PMCs (Wagner Group) or external states.

• The North Korea Case Study: Perfect for tying it all together—Traditional Security (nukes) vs. Human Insecurity (famine).

• Global Health: Securitization of pandemics (COVID-19) proves military power can't address all security threats.

The "Chicken-and-Egg" Debate: Does arms control lead to political trust, or does trust lead to arms control?

Define Game Theory in the context of International Relations.

 A tool for analyzing strategic interactions where the outcome depends on the choices of all actors involved. It assumes actors are rational and have ranked preferences (payoffs)

Explain the Bargaining Range.

The set of possible deals that both states prefer to war. Because war is costly (blood and treasure), there is always a range of outcomes that would leave both sides better off than fighting.

 What are the three primary reasons why states fail to reach a deal and go to war instead?

1. Incomplete Information: States hide their true capabilities or resolve (bluffing) to get a better deal. 2. Commitment Problems: A state cannot credibly promise not to use force in the future (especially if power is shifting). 3. Indivisibility: The good in dispute (e.g., a sacred religious site) cannot be divided.

: Contrast Cooperation vs. Bargaining.

* Cooperation: Strategic interaction where actors have a common interest and work together to achieve a mutual gain.

• Bargaining: A "zero-sum" interaction where one side's gain is the other's loss (e.g., dividing territory).

How does the Bargaining Model view the relationship between war and politics?

 It sees war as "politics all the way down." War is not the failure of diplomacy, but a continuation of bargaining by other means. States use both "war and words" to achieve their goals.

 What is the "Rationalist Explanation" for war?

 Based on Fearon (1995), war occurs when rational actors cannot reach a deal despite its costs. The three barriers are Incomplete Information, Commitment Problems, and Indivisibility

 Explain the "Information Problem" during the Prosecution of war.

War provides a "reality check." As battles occur, they reveal true military capabilities and resolve, narrowing the information gap and eventually making a settlement possible.

What is a "Commitment Problem" in the context of war termination?

Even if a deal is reached, a state may fear the other side will grow stronger and break the deal later. This leads to Absolute War (fighting until one side is totally defeated) because the loser cannot be trusted to keep a promise of peace.

How does Domestic Politics complicate the Bargaining Model?

 Leaders may fight not for the "national interest," but for political survival. If losing a war means being ousted or killed (punishment), a leader may "gamble for resurrection" by continuing a losing fight.

What are the "Cognitive/Psychological" critiques of the model?

Humans are not always rational calculators. Overconfidence, "sunk cost" fallacies, and biased processing of information can lead states to ignore the "bargaining range" entirely.

Theme 1: Why does war end?

• The Learning Model: War is a process of information discovery. Combat reveals who is actually stronger, which eventually allows both sides to agree on where the "bargaining range" actually lies.

The Principle of Convergence: As the two sides’ expectations of the war's outcome get closer together, the likelihood of a settlement increases.

Theme 2: Absolute War vs. Limited War

• Limited War: Ends when the information gap is closed and a deal is made.

Absolute War: Occurs when there is a Commitment Problem. If you believe the enemy is an existential threat that will never stop trying to destroy you (e.g., WWII), you cannot bargain; you must remove their ability to fight entirely.

Theme 3: The "Costs" are not just Material

Reiter notes that Audience Costs (domestic political pressure) and Reputational Costs change the math. A leader might choose the "expensive" option of war to avoid the "expensive" political cost of looking weak at home.