UCSB PS121 Midterm

realist approach

theory of international relations that claims state behavior is guided by states desire to gain/keep power

4 characteristics of political realism

1. power is the central variable explaining state behavior

2. political actors are unitary and rational

3. pessimistic view of human nature

4. states are self sufficient

security dilemma

as states increase their power it leads other states to also increase their own power, making everyone worse off

power transition theory

rising and falling powers go to war as they reach equal strength

balance of power theory

states go to war to re-establish a balance of power in the system, either through internal or external balancing

offense-defense theory

war emerges whenever offensive weapons have an advantage over defensive weapons, problem is its hard to distinguish between the two

realist solutions to war

1. work together; common causes and common enemies

2. hegemony

3. institute hierarchy

Hobbes

life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short

conflict emerges from competition, diffidence, and glory

only fear of death prevents conflict

need a leviathan

Levy

introduced power transition theory and balance of power theory

different levels of analysis to explain state behavior (systemic, societal, individual levels)

balance of power theory vs hegemonic stability theory

mearsheimer

states are power maximizers and their ultimate goal to become the hegemon

states are ultimately self-interested and have no commitment to world peace

5 conditions of the international system according to mearsheimer

1. states fear each other

2. states of an offensive military capacity

3. states are uncertain about other's intentions

4. a state's main incentive is survival

5. great powers are rational

constructivist criticism of realism

1. omitted important non-political actors

2. wrong definition of power

3. hierarchy exists within anarchy

4. usage of gendered language

5. societal pressures select the participants

constuctivism

theory of international relations that states that decision making is influenced by the world around us and what is appropriate at the time

constructivist characteristics

1. state identity: alter and ego can cooperate in the state of nature

2. systemic norms define international system

prisoners dilemma

realists use this to explain state behavior where both states are self-interested and therefore both are going to defect, relative gains

stag hunt

constructivist response to the prisoner's dilemma where the payoff is a collective good

free-riding

enjoying the benefits of some good or action while letting others bear the costs which is a trigger for violence

constructivist theories of peace

1. repeated interaction/reciprocity leads to peace (tit-for-tat and shadow of the future)

2. hegemonic stability

3. collective security

bourke

there is a "war culture" that glamorizes war through film, storytelling, literature, toys. companies commercialized war and ultimately profited off of war. this culture makes it easier for states to justify the use of violence.

goldstein

gender shapes war and war shapes gender. gender roles persist on and off battlefield, and even though women historically have been involved in combat, they primarily only occupy caregiving roles in the modern era; culture influences how men and women are perceived and how they perform in war time

wendt

the international system is anarchic but that doesn't inherently explain state behavior. states can and will cooperate, create alliances, etc.. this interaction shapes state behavior/interests and identities

anthropological approach to IR

study war (not necessarily a condition of statehood), anarchy, culture, and material constraints; states go to war because of cultural triggers; culture and war evolve together because culture is a force multiplier that gives meaning to action an strengthens groups

cultural triggers that lead to war

1. social complexity (development of warrior class reduces material constraints)

2. technology (fewer material and cultural constraints)

3. status/vengeance/cultural myths (incentive to go after 'the bad guy')

horowitz

examines source of 150 outbreaks of violence from 50 countries. violence had 4 stages:

a. rumors/false statements

b. lull

c. warfare

d. aftermath;

gives reasoning and descriptions for why there is group conflict, groups have to be distinctive to be considered a group, group members have to feel like they are better than other groups

kantian tripod

1. internal restraints

2. economic interdependence

3. international mediation (shared culture of restraint)

fry

anthropologist who spoke about early non-warring societies. didn't say that societies didn't practice warfare, but claimed that war is a modern phenomenon created after state formation

snyder

sociological approach to international relations

war occurs whenever bargain between state and society is corrupted; state is more than just the national level, also includes territory, government, people, society; war evolved with society; war evolves the state and resets the bargain

evolution of the state

state has two roles: to protect and to extort; cities turned into city-states turned into states turned into nation states; cities could increase their economic power or their military power; states and society developed in concert

eras of war

1. religious wars (1648 - 1789) fighting for religion

2. nationalist wars (1792 - 1815) defending nation/people/identity

3. collectivist wars (1815 - ww2) defending citizen/society from the state

4. kleptocratic wars (now) fighting for groups, not society

internal security dilemma

attempts at securing leadership against opponents only encourages insecurity; two effects: 1. increases chance of internal war 2. encourages predators

why do states die from self inflicted wounds (overextension)?

bargain between state and society disappeared

coalition log-rolling

1. imperial coalitions

2. propaganda and instruments of power

characteristics of internal war

1. doesn't destroy states

2. resource extraction is inefficient

3. nationalism is rare/lacking

4. difficult to mobilize armies

trends in statehood

a. increased modernization

b. increase politicization

herbst

european states evolved and strengthened with war but that doesnt mean the same for modern african states; wont work because 1. lack efficient taxation 2. lack nationalism 3. loser states didn't face significant losses, actually allowed to rebuild and redraw borders 4. military mobilization was too difficult

tilly

states transitioned from from cities to city states to nation states through bargains between state and financer which funded investments in war in exchange for market goods

states roles are to protect and to extort, and war occurs when state and financers cannot agree on terms of market access and military financing

believed military creation drove state creation

porter

warfare and military rivalry played a fundamental role in the origin and development of modern european states; there are formative, disintegrating, and reformative effects of war

the (individual) psychological approach

individuals in power drive state behavior; war is not an accident, it is a conscious decision to fight; ultimately it doesnt matter what the actual balance of power is, only the other states perceptions of the balance of power

4 conditions when individuals matter

1. strategic location (position of influence)

2. ambiguity (a choice must exist)

3. absence of coalitions (reduced impact of domestic politics)

4. uniqueness

information-processing approach

humans at their core are sorting machines, human behavior is a product of interpreting and defining world around us but culture gives us the filter to sort the world

misperceptions

discrepancy between psychological environment and reality; driven by what we want to be which means all international politics is tied to a biased interpretation of the world

3 categories of common misperceptions

1. adversary's capabilities

2. adversary's intentions

3. third actors

types of images

1. ally (other states are similar, chance to cooperate)

2. colony (states trying to expand, exploit)

3. imperial (view culture as sophisticated)

4. enemy

the rogue image

developed organically from change in international systems; states that are perceived as a (future) threat to international security that justifies preemption

the role of anger in international relations

1. judgement cue

2. common emotional state

3. heuristic (cognitive aid)

anger as a heuristic

makes humans more certain/confident, makes humans more optimistic, encourages automaticity and limits vigilance

o'reilly

analyzed the usage of the term "rogue" in US foriegn policy; rogue states are typically characterized by the pursuit of WMDs and being a state sponsor of power but thats not the end-all-be-all; rogue states usually have opposing ideologies (nondemocratic), WMDs are only dangerous in the hands of the enemy

lerner

anger is one of the most common emotions and therefore has an effect on politics; emotions guide our decision making processes and anger makes us overconfident in our choices, impulsive, blameful of others, but also hopeful

appraisal tendency framework

specific emotions give rise to specific cognitive and motivational properties, both at the biological and behavioral level

the (social) psychological approach

our sense of self is guided by group identity and our decisions are defined by people around us; violence and conflict are a result of an imbalance between identities

stages of the robbers cave experiment

1. in-group formation

2. friction phase

3. integration phase

results of the robbers cave experiment

groups formed easily

in group identities persisted

contact amplified conflict

superordinate goals mediated conflict

creation of a larger group

identity theory

our sense of self consists of social constructs society gives us; individuals fill roles in society so identities are top-down and not equitable

social identity theory

we create identities to feel good, identity is a process of self-categorization and therefore identities are bottom-up

4 sources of social identity

1. personal-based

2. relational

3. group-based

4. collective identity

solution to identity imbalance

change personal identity or create a more encompassing identity

5 reasons why conflict emerged in rwanda

1. fear of impending war

2. prejudice

3. revenge

4. opportunism

5. obedience

why conflict didnt emerge in south africa

lack of intolerant viewpoints, group identity and national identity were correlated, strong in group identities in south africa produced neither political nor interracial violence

the bargaining model of war (fearon/walter)

it is in the interest of both sides to avoid conflict but neither want to give in; war is ultimately a breakdown of communication and violence is what happens when states reject diplomacy

blainey

relations between diplomats are the same as relationships between merchants, states are just paying the price for peace; war happens when states disagree about who is stronger, and state self interest incentivizes lying and bluffing about who is stronger;

it's no longer a balance of power but instead a balance of terror, the real balance of power is irrelevant anyways, it's only the perception that matters

assumptions of the economic approach

assumption of rationality (actors 1. have complete information, 2. comprehend this information, 3. choose the option that minimizes costs and maximizes benefits)

expected utility theory

choosing the best means to gain a predetermined set of ends

causes of war/when do bargains fail

1. private information 2. credibility problems 3. indivisible goods

irrational compellence

sometimes it's rational to be irrational, but you have to follow through on your threats

brewer

everyone has to sacrifice a certain level of self-distinctiveness to join a group; need for reindividualization within the group; need for distinctiveness in intergroup relations

sherif

robbers cave experiment, what if life is not a zero sum game, conflict resolved through superordinate goals

walter

war arises because of:

1. lack of information/uncertaintly (systematic problem or government intentionally withholding info)

2. lack of credibility (commitment issue, no enforcement mechanism to make sure that states are following through on their agreements)

3. indivisible resources