Polisci Intro to Internation Relations Exam 1

Mercentilism

an economic policy focused on maximizing exports and accumulating wealth

Economic system of the major trading nations during the 16th, 17th, and 18th cent., based on the premise that national wealth and power were best served by increasing exports and collecting precious metals in return.

Imperial governments used military power to enrich themselves

Established state-backed monopolies in trade

Required colonies to buy and sell only with colonial power Reduced prices they paid for products and increased sale prices

Imperialism

Transferred political authority from local rulers to imperialist home country

The extent to which local institutions were suppressed or incorporated depended on many factors

Lack of self rule gave rise to demands for independence Economic and military dominance from Europe

Peace of Westphalia

1648

ended 30 Year's War (the French, Dutch, and other allies sealed the decline of Spain)

stabilized the borders of the belligerents and attempted to resolve some of the religious conflicts that had complicated their relations

modern state system

respect sovereignty

sovereignty

Ability of a state to govern its territory free from control of its internal affairs by other states.

states have ultimate authority within borders

hegemony

leadership or dominance, especially by one country or social group over others.

French Revolution

After the French Revolution (1789-99), the emphasis shifts from defeating each other to defeating democratic revolutionaries

asserting that the will of the people and the nation should determine state borders and governance

Concert of Europe

commitment to consultation of other major powers on diplomatic affairs

common interest of the European rulers in suppressing revolution helped them overcome their political difference

Pax Britannica

1815-1914

British hegemony = stabilizing force, prevents supremacy of others

After the French Revolution (1789-99), the emphasis shifts from defeating each other to defeating democratic revolutionaries

Also focused on getting rich and maintaining colonies

Concert of Europe: commitment to consultation of other major powers on diplomatic affairs

free trade, gold standard

Britain tried to prevent the supremacy of any one country on the European continent, acting to maintain a balance of power. If one country or coalition seemed too strong, Britain would ally itself with an opposing country or coalition. This rough balance, which was the general goal of British foreign policy throughout the century, helped deter military conflict among the European powers.

gold standard

1870-1914

countries tie currencies to gold at legally fixed price

Hegemonic Stability Theory

a global hegemon will benefit all, as they provide public goods: stability, commerce, gold standard, punish defectors

incentive to invest in public goods - benefit from an stable international order

Age of exploration

World becomes more closely connected

1500

innovation: magnetic compass, astrolab, Gutenberg printing press

reformation: Martin Luther challenges Catholic Church - separation from Church

War making = gunpowder

Why so much focus on Europe?

dominated trade

acute competitions between European countries --> adopt innovations quickly

nation states

property rights --> states effective at fighting wars bc ppl willing to lend to govt

protestant work ethic

science, medicine, consumerism

fought each other

Realism

1. World is anarchic

2. Actors are countries or 'states'

3. States try to maximize power

4. Relative power matters - anything that makes one country more powerful, makes others less powerful (security dilemma)

5. We see smaller states balancing the power of larger states

International politics is primarily about bargaining, in which coercion always remains a possibility.

Asia (6th - 19th century)

Organizing principle in Asia was hierarchy and relationships were maintained through tribute

1. Investiture - diplomatic recognition and granting of titles 2. Missions - diplomatic exchanges of envoys and trading

3. Core - autonomy in exchange for deference: China (center), Korea, Japan and Vietnam

4. Opposition - suppress border skirmishes and domestic dissent

Constructivism: actors, interactions, institutions

Culture, identity and ideas matter

Actors tend to do what is believed to be right and proper

Socialization is important to regulate behavior

Institutions can help identify what behavior is appropriate

Westphalian system of nation states is one order

Hierarchy and tribute is another order

Many types of actors are important. Actors' interests are influenced by culture, identity, and prevailing ideas. Actors' choices often reflect norms of appropriate behavior rather than interests.

Interactions socialize actors to hold particular interests, but transformations in patterns of interaction can occur as actors come to understand their interests differently.

International institutions define identities and shape action through the norms of just and appropriate behavior that they prescribe.

How did the system of state sovereignty spread

First Opium War (1839-1842)

The Opium Wars shattered China's traditional tributary world order and forcibly integrated the Qing Empire into the European Westphalian system of sovereign, equal nation-states

1. Britain refuses to accept tribute system

2. China accepts payment for goods in silver

3. British East India company turns to smuggling (opium)

4. Chinese destroy smuggled opium and Britain attacks

Power shifts before WW1/Thirty Years' crisis

1. Decline of Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires

2. Russian expansion

3. Crimean War (1853-56) and Russian defeat

4. Prussia (kingdom in German empire) consolidates empire in Central Europe --> Germany more powerful

5. France tries to balance in Franco-Prussian War (1870-71) and fails

6. Growth of Germany, Japan, and US

7. Germany left behind in colonial race and seeks expansion into neighboring countries. Realist ideas are self-fulfilling

Bretton Wood System:

The economic order negotiated among allied nations at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, in 1944, which led to a series of cooperative arrangements involving a commitment to relatively low barriers to international trade and investment.

Power transition theory

expects war to be more likely when one country's international influence is waning and another is ascending

WWI

(1914-1918)

Europe divides into two alliances: 1. Central powers: German, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman 2. Allied powers: France, Britain, Russia, US (enters 1917)

Treaty of Versailles - ended WWI 1. imposed reparation payments on Germany (resentment) 2. did not resolve territorial dispute between Germany and France League of Nations fails

countries dismantled post WW1 --> nation state model (realism)

Hyper-inflation and the Great Depression

1929

1. Stock market crash; policies (tariffs) deepen crisis --> crisis spread internationally as global trade halts.

2. Alienated citizens from new democratic systems --> Support for far-right (Fascists and Nazis) and far-left (Communists - government ownership of means of production); nationalist; anti-trade

WWII

(1939-1945)

Two alliances: 1. Axis powers: Germany, Italy, Japan 2. Allied powers: France, US, Britain, Soviet Union

Timeline: Germany annex Austria --> Germany occupied Czechoslovakia and attacked Poland (Britain and France declare war to protect ally) --> Germany attacks France --> Germany invades USSR, Japan attacks Pearl Harbor and US declares war --> Germany surrenders unconditionally; US drops nuclear weapons on Japan and they surrender

US and USSR emerge as only powers who can project force abroad

Charter of the UN

maintain international peace and security

friendly relations

formalization of sovereign state system (realism)

Cold War

Discord between US and USSR - democracy versus autocracy; free market versus planned economy; bipolar system (power most important thing, competition)

1. WEST - $14 billion Marshall Plan, NATO alliance and Bretton Woods economic system (GATT, Gold Standard and IMF, World Bank); combined social welfare systems (unemployment, healthcare, pensions, etc) with economic integration

2. EAST - Central Europe to China, North Korea, and North Vietnam; communist; central control of economy; different nations specialize in different products through the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, Warsaw Pact

By 1954 - US and USSR have nuclear weapons (atomic and hydrogen) - mutually assured destruction

fights for influence - Korea, Vietnam

Marshall Plan

A United States program of economic aid for the reconstruction of Europe (1948-1952)

decolonization

During war and interwar years, Africa, Asia, and Latin America cut off from colonial powers --> Self-sufficiency, nationalism, and anti-imperialism --> Create nonaligned movement --> Formed cartels to elevate commodity prices

Decolonization examples

Post WWII: India peaceful but others were very violent; US supported decolonization - wants market access, fear that anti-imperialists would turn to communist bloc

independence from British rule on August 15, 1947

WWII severely drained British financial and military resources

European union

An international organization of European countries formed after World War II to reduce trade barriers and increase cooperation among its members.

Pax Americana

US-supported international institutions thrive

Dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 --> Creation of a liberal order in the West --> Countries seek prosperity and can have interests in commo: They can build international institutions to facilitate cooperation --> WTO, IMF, NATO

Chips in the hegemony (not always sucessful): Overreach - Somalia, Rwanda, Afghanistan, Second Iraq War, NAFTA, global financial crisis, China joins WTO - blowback to economic integration, populism

Liberalism: actors, conflict, institutions

Many types of actors are important, and no single interest dominates. Wealth is a common goal for many actors. Actors often have common interests, which can serve as the basis for cooperation.

International politics has an extensive scope for cooperation. Conflict is not inevitable but occurs when actors fail to recognize or act on common interests.

International institutions facilitate cooperation by setting out rules, providing information, and creating procedures for collective decision making. Democratic political institutions increase the scope for international politics to reflect the common interests of individuals.

Actors

the basic unit for the analysis of international politics; can be individuals or groups of people with common interests

international: states

domestic: bureaucracies, government officials, interest groups, political parties, ethnic groups, economic classes, etc

Supra-national level: Non-Governmental Organizations, (NGOs) and Inter-Governmental Organizations (IGOs)

Interests

what actors want to achieve through political action; their preferences over the outcomes that might result from their political choices

Frequently seen interests for states (3)

power or security: prerequisite for other interests, national interests (belong to the state itself)

economic or material welfare: high standard of living, prosperity

ideological goals: human rights, religion, nationalism

Nationalism

political ideology

prioritizes attachment to one's nation (group with common origin, ethnicity, language, or cultural ties)

Anarchy

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

defining feature of international relations

Applying framework

need to know issue/issue area, then actors, then interactions (status quo, included, possible provisions), then possible outcomes (associated with benefits), then interests, then institutions, then predictions

Interactions

ways in which choices of 2+ actors combine to produce political outcomes

Reversion outcome

the outcome that occurs when no bargain is reached

strategic interactions

strategy depends on anticipated strategies of others

cooperation

2+ actors adopt policies that make at least 1 better off relative to status quo without making others worse off

coordination and collaboration

coordination

type of cooperative interaction in which actors benefit from all making the same choices

no incentive not to comply/to defect

collaboration

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

collective action problems

obstacles to cooperation that occur when actors have incentives to collaborate but each acts in anticipation that others will pay the costs of cooperation

public goods

nonexcludable (all can enjoy) and nonrival (quantity available not diminished if one enjoys)

ex., national defense, climate change, etc.

hegemon: individual benefit large, so incentive to contribute

free ride = issue

free ride

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

no international authority to force countries to contribute

What facilitates cooperation? (4)

small numbers of actors

iteration

linkage

information (knowing if someone defected)

iteration

repeated interactions with the same partners

linkage

the linking of cooperation on one issue to interactions on a second issue

Bargaining

2+ actors must decide how to distribute something of value

increasing 1 actor's share decreases the share available to others

cost/benefit analysis

coercion

imposing/threatening to impose costs on other actors in order to induce a change in their behavior

power

ability to get other side to make concessions to avoid having to make concessions oneself

outside options

the alternatives to bargaining with a specific actor

leverage to get a better bargain

Commitment Problem

a situation in which people cannot achieve their goals because of an inability to make credible threats or promises

would like to coordinate but cannot commit

individual incentive to defect

state cannot make promise in a credible manner (ie. may use force to revise a settlement later)

prisoner's dilemma

prisoner's dilemma

a game in which pursuing dominant strategies results in noncooperation that leaves everyone worse off

prisoner's dilemma criteria

1. both players have a dominant strategy to defect: always best response to all of the other players' strategies

2. both players prefer cooperate-cooperate box over the nash

prisoners' dilemma example

two self-interested nations choose to compete or build up arms rather than cooperate, resulting in a worse outcome for both

nuclear arms race during the Cold War

stag hunt

A game that is a metaphor for problems of coordination. It resembles the problem of setting international standards. The primary barrier to cooperation is a lack of trust. Best outcome is for both to cooperate and the worst is to cooperate while the other defects.

assurance game

stag hunt/assurance game criteria

1. 2 nash equilibria

2. one nash is better for both

3. the worse nash is associated with lower risk if there is uncertainity about other player following through

stag hunt example

global climate change mitigation, where countries must choose between the high collective reward of cutting carbon emissions (hunting the "stag") or pursuing short-term independent economic growth (hunting the "hare").

chicken game

a version of the battle of the sexes game that results in disaster if each player plays his or her tough strategy; players want to play opposing strategies. So Player 1 wants to play cooperate if she thinks Player 2 wants to play defect, but Player 1 will play defect if she thinks Player 2 will play cooperate.

chicken game criteria

1. 2 nash

2. each player prefers a different nash

3. one "off equilibrium" is worse for both

4. the other "off equilibrium" is better for the loser

chicken game example

Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, where the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in nuclear brinkmanship

the Soviet Union secretly placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, just 90 miles from U.S. soil. U.S. President John F. Kennedy responded with a naval quarantine (blockade) of Cuba rather than an immediate airstrike, forcing Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev to decide whether to push Soviet ships through the blockade

U.S. president John F. Kennedy took steps toward nuclear war—for example, putting missile crews on alert—in order to pressure the Soviets to dismantle nuclear missile sites in Cuba.

Information problem

they do not know what the other actor's interests are

Describe how the assurance game and the prisoner's dilemma (commitment problem) differ?

The assurance game is a coordination problem where cooperation is safe if you trust the other person, while the prisoner's dilemma is a temptation problem where betraying the other person always gives you a better individual payoff.

Coordination problem

gains to cooperation, but need assurance

stag hunt

individuals achieve the best outcome by matching their choices, but struggle because there are multiple ways to succeed and no obvious way to agree

Standard types of cooperation problems (4)

commitment, coordination, distribution, information

Distribution problem

they disagree about how coordination should occur ('battle of the sexes')

both players want to cooperate but don't know how

outcome one prefers and an outcome another prefers, but coordination preferred over not coordinating

battle of the sexes game criteria

1. 2 nash

2. players have different favorite nash

3. the off equilibrium outcomes are worse for both than the nash

Distribution problem example

International Telegraph Union (1865): They needed to coordinate telegraph fees 1. Non-European countries want single-word fees 2. European countries want 20-word fees 3. Germany wanted low charges to increase flow (intermediary) 4. Need to reach agreement on size of fees and how to charge 5. There is also an information problem here. They didn't really know demand. Solution was 20-word fees for European traffic; one-word fees for extra-European traffic

Climate change agreements: Who should have to cut emissions? Who should have to pay the cost of adaptation? 1. Developing nations argue rich countries grew without restraint and should carry heavier reduction burdens 2. Rich countries argue that they can't do it alone, and middle income countries are now top emitters

Institutions

sets of rules, known and shared by the community, that structure political interactions in specific ways

How do international institutions encourage cooperation?

setting standards of behavior, verifying compliance, reducing costs of joint decision making, and resolving disputes (mechanisms for reolution)

Actors comply with institutions because

there are sanctions for violating them

there may be broader cooperation with other beneficial rules

since they are already in place, complying with them is cheaper than renegotiation

Policy bias

Institutions reflect past political bargains/interests of strongest actors when institutions are created

Equilibrium behavior

Rationality

acting in best interests to maximize payoffs

anticipating actions of other actors

Best response function

actor's plan, which maximizes interests, considering how they expect others to behave

look at every possible action for each actor, costs, status quo, preference ordering

Nash equilibrium

a situation in which economic participants interacting with one another each choose their best strategy given the strategies that all the others have chosen

stable preduction, both players best responding

Pareto efficiency/optimality

there is no other outcome that is simultaneously more preferred for one player and at least as good for all other players (one player is better off without harming other players)

War

event involving organized use of military force by at least 2 parties that reaches a minimum threshold of severity (ex. 1000 battle deaths)

Are interstate or civil wars more common?

civil

Realism and war

war is inevitable result of international anarchy

states seek to increase power or counter power of others

Proximate cause of war

precondition, war stems from disagreement (ex., territory, policies, regime type)

Goods that underlie most conflicts (3)

territory, policy, regime type

Crisis bargaining

a bargaining interaction in which at least one actor threatens to use force in the event that its demands are not met

coercive diplomacy

bargaining range

a set of deals both prefer over the reversion outcome of war

value of war = share of good - cost of war

compellence

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

deterrence

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

general, extended

Rationalist puzzle of war

bargaining range will always exist because cost for every war

why rational leaders still choose to fight costly wars when a negotiated peace deal would always leave both sides better off than the destruction of conflict

Ultimate causes of war

bargaining failure

Rationalist explanations for war (3)

Incomplete information, commitment problems, and indivisibility.

credible coercion

A will follow through

effective coercion

B will back down

Incomplete information

actors in a strategic interaction lack information about other actors' interests, capabilities, resolve (willingness to endure costs to aquire a good)

Incomplete information example

In face of Putin's demands, it was hard to believe that Putin would pull the trigger given the costs and risks of all-out war (resolve)

Putin clearly believed that the invasion would be quick and easy. - poorly informed about resistance Ukrainians would put up and quick response of Western countries

Non-credible threat example

US joined South Korea to repel North Korean invasion

Chinese diplomats conveyed a message through the Indian ambassador that a move across the 38th parallel would trigger Chinese intervention

Threat ignored

The U.S. operation had been planned and authorized under the assumption that the Chinese would not intervene - not credible

risk-return trade-off

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

credibility

the target believes a credible threat will be carried out

threat is effective if credible

hard to achieve

Ways to make threats credible (4)

brinksmanship

tying hands

paying for power

shows of force

Brinksmanship

A strategy in which adversaries take actions that increase the risk of accidental war, with the hope that the other will "blink," or lose its nerve, first and make concessions.

Brinksmanship example

Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, where the United States and the Soviet Union engaged in nuclear brinkmanship

the Soviet Union secretly placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, just 90 miles from U.S. soil. U.S. President John F. Kennedy responded with a naval quarantine (blockade) of Cuba rather than an immediate airstrike, forcing Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev to decide whether to push Soviet ships through the blockade

U.S. president John F. Kennedy took steps toward nuclear war—for example, putting missile crews on alert—in order to pressure the Soviets to dismantle nuclear missile sites in Cuba.