312L short

Politics (definition)

Using authority to allocate scarce resources and settle conflicts within a group

Two components of politics

(1) Authority (2) Allocation of scarce resources

Authority = ? + ?

Coercion + legitimacy

Legitimacy

Recognizing the RIGHT to make a decision, even while disagreeing with it

Political order

Stable patterns of behavior induced by authority and/or coercion

Four parts of a state

Government, bureaucracy, territorial boundaries, monopoly on legitimate violence

Coercion dilemma

Anyone strong enough to enforce order is strong enough to abuse it for their own gain

International version of the coercion dilemma

The security dilemma

Two things that made US power acceptable after WWII

Soviet threat + the US binding its own power

Ikenberry's argument

The US bound its power via democracy at home and institutions (NATO) abroad

Ikenberry on the 2003 Iraq War

US broke its self-imposed limits (allies and UN said no) = "America unbound"

Three ways war changes states (16.3)

Strengthens governments; shifts territory/population; triggers revolution/regime change

Britain's two problems after the Seven Years' War

War debt (137M pounds) + defending a bigger frontier (10,000 troops)

Four correlates of war (OGS 9.4)

Proximity (raises risk); trade, alliances, democracy (associated with peace)

Fundamental puzzle of war

War is costly, so a deal both prefer should exist; why do states fail to reach it?

Two sources of bargaining failure

Private information + commitment problems

Divide-the-dollar game

Two people split $100 or both get nothing; models bargaining with war as the outside option

Four attributes of war from divide-the-dollar

Preceded by bargaining; triggered by conflict of interest; a choice; costly to both

Three components of any explanation of war (8.2)

Political conflict; bargaining (compromise vs. war); peace or bargaining failure

Do states strictly prefer peace in the model?

No; they care about their share and will risk war

Expected utility for war

Probability-weighted value of fighting minus the costs of war

Home's expected utility for war

p − cHOME

Foreign's cut point (most Home can demand)

p + cFOREIGN

Bargaining range

All deals between p − cHOME and p + cFOREIGN; both prefer them to war

Home's first offer (complete info)

Demand p + cFOREIGN, or just below it

Home gets stronger (p up) → offer?

Home demands more

Foreign's war costs rise → offer?

Home demands more

Foreign more resolved (costs fall) → offer?

Home demands less

Does a known shift in power make war more likely?

No; it changes the deal. Only differing beliefs cause war

Private information

Knowledge of capabilities, costs, or resolve held by only one side

How private info causes war

A side overestimates its leverage, demands too much, concedes too little

Costly signal

A message that costs the sender; bluffers won't pay, so it reveals truth

Sunk costs vs. audience costs

Sunk: paid up front (troop moves). Audience: paid only if you back down

Gulf War phase 1 failure

Kuwait underestimated Saddam's resolve (Saddam told Mubarak he was bluffing)

Gulf War phase 2 failure

Saddam underestimated US resolve; thought US couldn't accept casualties (Vietnam)

Commitment problem

Bargaining failure from inability to contract over time; doubt a deal will be honored later

Main cause of a commitment problem

A rapid, large shift in the distribution of power

Three steps (Fig 9-3)

Power shift → commitment problem → preventive war

Preventive war

War a declining state fights now to avoid future concessions

Who launches preventive war?

The DECLINING state

Do costly signals fix commitment problems?

No; they fix private information only

WWI preventive-war launchers

Austria-Hungary (vs. Serbia) and Germany (vs. Russia)

Two German moves that brought US into WWI

Unrestricted submarine warfare (Jan 1917) + Zimmermann Telegram

Why Germany gambled in 1917

Saw balance shifting against it; struck before US troops arrived

WWII Germany's new demands

Austria, Czechoslovakia, then Poland

Who launched the preventive war in 1939 (textbook)?

Britain and France, to defend Poland

Why Hitler couldn't commit

Each concession made Germany stronger and led to new demands

Great power

State with disproportionate economic, military, political resources to influence others

Four traits of great powers

Large size/GDP; superior military; global interests; disproportionate influence

Five channels of postwar settlements

Membership, regime type, military power, collective security orgs, territory/basing

Versailles (1919) pillars

Strip German land/colonies, reparations, army cap, new states, League of Nations

Wilson's influence in 1919

Self-determination, democracy promotion, international organizations (League)

Post-1945 US order elements

Rebuild Germany/Japan, Marshall Plan, NATO, Bretton Woods, UN

Polarity

Distribution of capabilities, measured by number of great powers

Unipolar

One dominant power (US 1991–~2008); stable

Bipolar

Two powers (US/USSR); stable, low abandonment risk

Multipolar

3+/4+ powers (pre-1914 Europe); least stable, fluid alliances

Bipolarity's effects on the Cold War

Tight blocs, divided Europe, proxy wars, nuclear deterrence, contest of systems

Three reasons no great power war since 1945

Globalization, nuclear deterrence, unipolarity

What Russia "lost" in the Cold War

Territory (15 states), superpower status, Eastern European empire

What the West "won"

Military, economic, ideological hegemony + unipolarity

Alliance (11.3)

Contract specifying when states jointly deploy militaries for each other

Abandonment

Ally stays out or switches sides

Entrapment

Ally drags partners into an unwanted war

Pro-NATO-expansion argument

Keep Russia out, US in, Germany down; widen Europe's zone of peace

Anti-NATO-expansion argument

Mission over; treating Russia as an enemy makes it one

How NATO expansion affected Russia

Saw renewed containment, lost buffer → security dilemma, resentment

How NATO expansion affected Ukraine

Left outside NATO, exposed to Russian pressure

Why Russia intervened in 2014

Stop Ukraine (its buffer) from turning to the EU/NATO

Run-up to 2022

Late 2021 troop buildup; Putin demands neutrality, no NATO

Putin's three escalating goals

(1) Keep Ukraine out of NATO (2) sphere of influence (3) "Greater Russia"

Three reasons West backs Ukraine

Contain Russia; defend democracy/border norm; deter China over Taiwan

Why Russia performed badly

Ukrainian resistance, poor Russian military/logistics, Western unity, Western aid

Ukraine's two major problems

Delayed/uncertain US aid + shortage of soldiers

Feb 2025 Trump moves

Called Putin; Rubio-Lavrov in Riyadh without Ukraine; US voted with Russia at UN

Feb 28, 2025

Oval Office blow-up: Trump/Vance vs. Zelensky ("You don't have the cards")

Mar 11, 2025

Ukraine accepts 30-day ceasefire; aid resumes; Putin balks

Power transition theory

Rapid power shifts between great powers can trigger war that alters the order

Commitment problem in power transition

Rising state can't commit to restraint → declining hegemon wants preventive war

China's South China Sea claim

Nine-dash line, ~90% of the sea; artificial islands in the Spratlys

How the Ukraine war drew China and Russia together

Russia shifted oil to China; joint outreach to Saudi/Iran

Commitment problem in civil war

Rising side can't commit to honor a settlement in the future

Three sources of power shifts in civil wars

Patron withdrawal, democratization, new movement/party

Third-party guarantee (Walter)

Outsider enforces peace during disarmament

Three conditions for a third-party guarantee

Self-interest, willingness to use force, signal resolve to stay

Moral hazard

Expected rescue encourages combatants to take risks and prolong war

Responsibility to Protect (R2P)

States must protect people from atrocities; if not, the world may intervene

R2P vs. sovereignty

Redefines sovereignty as responsibility, making it conditional

Northern power shift before 1861

85–90% of industry; population grew 40% vs. South's 27%

Commitment problem behind the Civil War

Rising North couldn't commit to protect slavery → declining South seceded

Why Lincoln escalated in mid-1861

Win fast before Britain could recognize the Confederacy

What British recognition would do

Shift power: hurt Northern resolve, make secession permanent

Three ways nukes shaped US foreign policy

Defense → deterrence; nonproliferation; avoid direct war with nuclear rivals

Nuclear revolution

Changes nukes brought to warfare and military strategy

Three ways nukes differ from conventional weapons

Catastrophic damage fast; hit civilians directly; change meaning of victory

Defense

Physically blocking an attack (action-based)

Deterrence

Discouraging attack by threat of retaliation (threat-based, psychological)

General deterrence

Long-term forces to deter a surprise first strike

Immediate deterrence

Specific threats during a crisis (Cuban Missile Crisis)

Extended deterrence

Threatening retaliation to protect allies