International Security Exam 3 Critical Facts

What 2 key criteria does MAD rely on? 

Assured Annihilation & Secure Second Strike

What is assured annihilation?

Both sides have sufficient nuclear weapons to impose devastatingly unacceptable costs on the other

ex) State A & State B can annihilate the other using nuclear weapons

What is secure second strike?

Each side must have a credible second-strike capability, meaning they can retaliate with a devastatingly unacceptable attack even after absorbing a first strike by the other 

ex) State A & State B have the ability to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike against the other 

Why is the logic of MAD considered stable (peace-inducing)?

• If both criteria are present (secure second strike & assured annihilation), then the relationship is stable because neither side has an incentive to use a nuclear weapon first 

• Why? Because attacking with a nuclear weapon first results in an annihilating retaliatory strike launched by the other state 

What is First Strike Advantage? 

The possibility that one side in a MAD relationship develops the technological ability to disarm an opponent, preventing the opponent from launching a retaliatory strike (they lose a secure second-strike capability)

—> Relationship between states becomes destabilized if one of the sides develops the capability to deny the other secure second-strike capability. This first strike capability results in both states having an incentive to attack first. 

Under MAD, neither side has an incentive to strike first, but if someone develops a first strike advantage, that changes the incentive structure to make both want to strike first 

What drives nuclear arms racing?

The fear of an opponent acquiring First Strike Advantage

—> This fear is rooted in the significant risk aversion associated with nuclear balancing - States fear that new technologies will destabilize MAD, creating a First Strike Advantage

Why is first strike advantage destabilizing to MAD?

Nuclear first strike is destabilizing to MAD because it shifts nuclear actors’ incentive from attacking only after being attacked to striking when they suspect an attack is imminent, which makes the MAD relationship escalatory 

What do academics say about the logic of MAD? 

• argue to STOP 

• The logic of MAD means that first strike fears are not politically realistic, so no need for an arms race 

What does the national security community say about the logic of MAD?

• Maybe academic argument seems logical, but we can’t take the chance when it comes to a nuclear war

  • We are extremely risk averse & cost of being wrong is too high

  • We must ensure the robustness of MAD

  • We must arms race to guarantee assured annihilation & secure second strike capabilities

What are the political effects of US Nuclear Primacy? Which author talks about this?

Lieber & Press

• Age of MAD is waning, today US stands on verge of attaining nuclear primacy (this is bc the strategic nuclear balance has shifted profoundly within the past 15 years) 

Effects: 

• Will reignite a nuclear arms race among the great powers 

• During a crisis, US primacy might trigger a pre-emptive attack (China might initiate a regional nuclear war because it fears a disarming US first strike)

• US policymakers might be tempted to use nuclear weapons during a crisis or if military operations go unexpectedly bad 

Which authors talk about the current nuclear arms race & its implications for the future? What do they say about it?

Lieber & Press:

• AI tech & new sensor tech will make it increasingly easy to target an enemy’s strategic nuclear forces inside their country

• Rich states will respond to these new computing & sensing capabilities by investing in countermeasures. MAD will remain stable among RICH nuclear powers.

• Poorer nuclear states may not have the money/tech to develop countermeasures. MAD will become destabilized in poorer countries. RICH nuclear states will have first strike capability against poorer nuclear states.

What is the national interest, according to Morgenthau?

The survival of a state’s physical, political, & cultural identity. Sovereignty is meaningless if a government cannot preserve the state’s physical, political, & cultural identity from foreign interference. 

What is Wolfer’s critique of Morgenthau’s ideas on the national interest?

• Agrees with Morgenthau’s definition, but has critique → human rights, international institutions, & international law do matter 

• Argues that the national interest is the preservation of territorial integrity, political, & cultural identity of the state, BUT how to defend the political/cultural identity of the state is not clear & based on domestic values & foreign policy ideologies 

• Morgenthau & Wolfers disagree on how to apply the definition of national interest 

According to Brodie, what determines if something is in the national interest?

• The threat is close & direct 

• When not addressing the threat may impose significant costs on the state 

• When a particular policy (intervening) is unlikely to result in significant relative costs given the nature of threat & state resources

OR

• Is the threat immediate & direct? Yes = in national interest

• How much will it cost if I ignore the threat? If significant costs to ignore = in national interest

• How much will it cost if I do something about it? If inexpensive to intervene = in national interest 

What were the 3 primary goals of the US during the Cold War?

1. Containment of the Soviet Union & Communism 

2. Open the international economy to capitalism & promote democracy

3. Prevent the spread of nuclear weapons 

Who talks about strategies of inhibition (US nuclear nonproliferation strategy)? and Grand Strategy?

Gavin

What are the goals of Inhibition Strategy?

1. Prevent the deliberate or accidental use of nuclear weapons against the US

2. Prevent 3rd parties from drawing the US into war through the use of nuclear weapons

3. Prevent nuclear proliferation tipping points

4. Prevent states from using nuclear weapons to deter the US

5. Prevent allies from using nuclear weapons to gain greater independence from the US

6. Prevent revisionist states from using nuclear weapons as a shield

7. Keep nuclear weapons in the hands of the great powers to ensure a stable MAD 

Who talks about banning the bomb? What do they say? 

• Krepon says that it is in our interest to ban the bomb

• He says that security concerns arising from the great powers’ nuclear arsenals and the spread of weapons to other states is driving nuclear proliferation 

• proliferation feeds proliferation 

Who says that banning the bomb is unlikely? What do they say about it?

• Joffe & Davis say that banning the bomb is unlikely

• Rather than proliferation being driven by other states’ nuclear arsenals, they say that proliferation is driven by the desire to:

  • offset adversaries conventional capabilities

  • ensure absolute security from invasion or massive attacks

  • extract concessions from rivals

  • intimidate neighbors & achieve hegemoney

IF banning the bomb is possible, this non-nuclear world would actually be more dangerous.

• great power war would be less dangerous & therefore more likely

• states with more conventional power would take advantage of smaller states

• states would worry about secret nuke problems & therefore wouldn’t stop their own

What is the gray zone? Who talks about this?

Chambers

• The “space” between peace & war on the spectrum of conflict. An operational environment “churning w/ political, economic, & security competitions that require constant attention.” 

What are the characteristics of the gray zone?

1. Ambiguity

2. Exploitation of an adversary’s weaknesses through DIME (diplomatic, information, military, economic)

3. Attacks in five domains (land, air, space, sea, cyber) 

4. Use of criminal organizations and networks 

5. Using laws and cultural norms as weapons system 

What do Paul & Matthews talk about? 

• Russian Disinformation & “the firehose of falsehood” Propaganda Model 

What are the characteristics of the Russian propaganda model?

1) high numbers of channels & messages

2) lacks commitment to objective reality

3) rapid, continuous, repetitive

4) lacks commitment to consistency

• “World’s biggest troll” —> there is no storyboard, no structure to the info that Russian’s are spreading. They are not engaging in formalized info campaigns, since they are opportunists who are trying to spread chaos no matter what.

Who talks about the next phase of Russian Information warfare?

Giles

• says the next phase is the Hybrid War Model

• Aim is to control information in whatever form it takes

• Destabilizes people’s certainty about what is happening in world affairs AND undermines the very fundamentals of information & credibility that informed debate are supposed to rest on

What is the rise of strategic corruption?

• Russia uses covert intelligence agents & businesspeople to financially entice key political or business leaders in another state 

• Does this by using cash payments, business opportunities, & other forms of reward

• Goal is to encourage positive image of Russia & its policies 

  • Uses these operations to help corrupt politicians & leaders gain prominence in society to eventually undermine popular support for democratic institutions 

• Targets for these operations often have no idea that they have been interacting w/ Russian government operatives or helping with Russian operations against democracy

Critical Facts for Ballistic Missiles 

• Flies very high altitudes & flies very fast

• Parabolic/ballistic flight path (upside down U – predictable ballistic flight path)

• NOT hiding, you see it coming

• NOT maneuvering

• Hard to intercept because flying high and flying fast makes a difficult physics challenge to take down. 

• The harder/faster they go, the higher & farther it will travel 

• growing cheaper

T/F: Ballistic missiles are considered hypersonic weapons

FALSE

Critical Facts for Cruise Missiles 

• Flies very low to the ground 

• Hides in radar shadows

• Maneuvers

• Hard to intercept because hard to see/detect → use curvature of earth & radar shadows cast by terrain, vegetation, & buildings to avoid detection 

• Generally they fly just below hypersonic speed 

→ Cruise missile tech is decreasing in cost & becoming more in tech/financial reach of a growing # of states

Critical Facts for Hypersonic Missiles

• Two types (1) boost glide (2) hypersonic cruise. 

• Flies very high altitude

• Flies at extreme speeds 

• NOT hiding, BUT maneuvering – Non-predictable flight path 

• Hard to intercept because flying high, flying fast, AND maneuvering (harder to intercept than ballistic missiles) 

• complicate deterrent decision making

→ cutting edge of missile tech & extremely expensive 

Who talks about Battles of Precise Mass? What do they say?

Horowitz

• Cheap, precise, mass (defined by unmanned robots) will dominate future battlefields

• Large numbers of AI equipped weapons & sensors 

• These weapons will be cheap, which means there will be a lot of them 

• RMA style warfare will be on overdrive and mostly driven & conducted by AI autonomous systems 

• We are entering an era of precise mass, like the battlefield in Ukraine, there are going to be drones everywhere in all different forms

Who talks about Hypersonic Weapons & Strategic Stability? What do they say? 

Wilkening 

• Hypersonic weapons may create fears of first strike advantage, destabilizing MAD

• Fast flight times give governments little time to assess an attack & respond in kind, likely resulting in a default tendency to escalate 

• Adversaries may have difficulty distinguishing between an attack by conventionally armed hypersonic weapons or nuclear armed weapons 

• The maneuverability of hypersonics also make it difficult to determine their targets— for example, are the hypersonics attacking nuclear forces or conventional forces

• Hypersonic weapons may reignite the great power nuclear & missile arms race as each party tries to convince others that a disarming first strike is not possible 

Who talks about ballistic & cruise missile proliferation? What do they say?

Metrick

• Ballistic missiles & cruise missiles are proliferating globally.

• Ballistic missiles & cruise missiles provide actors with the ability to cheaply & easily attack targets at great distance

• States & groups are using these missiles to engage in punishment-based coercion by imposing costs overtime – these operations are not speedy, so these attacks are spread over long periods of time to disrupt normal routines for target states

• Need to find a way to mitigate the threat of this proliferation

What are the two approaches to Ballistic Missile Defense?

• mid-course intercept

• boost-phase intercept

What are the 3 benefits of Ballistic Missile Defense?

1) gives states a limited means of blocking a BM attack

2) increases difficulty for adversaries of developing an effective ballistic missile capability because they now have to develop countermeasures

3) Facilitates creating coalition of the willing to reverse international aggression by providing a limited form of a “bullet proof" vest when dealing with an aggressor that has WMD-armed ballistic missiles 

What does Barbara Walter talk about?

How Civil War Starts

What does Walter say are the causes of civil war?

Anocracy —> Elite driven factionalism —> loss of social/economic status for certain groups —> they lose faith in peaceful political process —> growing violence between groups catalyzes to civil war

What is anocracy?

Middle ground of authoritarianism and democracy

• think popular voting, but without strong checks & balances

How does elite driven factionalism work?

• Elites using identity politics to divide society for political & economic gain 

• Existence of a political entrepreneur who tries to come into power by using rhetoric and fearmongering that capitalizes on factions/divisions 

  • Trying to polarize society so much that even believing the other side is a betrayal of your community in an existential struggle

How do interactions between factionalism and anocracy lead to civil war?

• In an anocracy w/ weak checks & balances, institution are perceived as weak and they are unable to handle challenges of the moment, therefore allowing elites to spread dangerous rhetoric.

• This rhetoric uses identity politics to fear monger & divide society into factions, convincing people of something about an existing/certain faction, therefore polarizing society

• This polarization causes a certain group to perceive they are losing power, so they feel “downgraded” & worry about their future. (loss of social/econ status)

• This perceived loss of social/econ status by a particular group causes large numbers of people in that group to lose faith in the peaceful political process, so that eventually they believe non-democratic means/violence are the only way to ensure a future for them.

  • Things become so polarized that you’d rather support an authoritarian to support your way of life than otherwise

What does Byman discuss?

• Lessons from the failure of Reconstruction after the Civil War

What are civil wars driven by? How do they end?

• Driven by elites and a logic of power

• Civil wars end when one side outright wins, absolutely crushing the other side and the other side’s elite.

According to Byman, what are the lessons from the failure of Reconstruction in the US?

1. Losing elites do not surrender privilege easily → if possible, they will try to figure out new ways to maintain it under the new government. They will use pre-existing identity cleavages & violence to mobilize supporters. 

• In democracies: they will use violence to suppress votes to gain control of institutions. 
  

2. Winners of civil war/international community must anticipate resistance post-civil wars → need to provide resources to support democratic rule. If possible, they should use existing identity cleavages to bolster support for the new political order. They should support elites that are in favor of the new political order. 

3. Political compromises meant to ensure local stability and lessen violence may have lasting costs for domestic groups and the state. 

What are the two approaches to counterinsurgency?

• Hearts & Minds

• Brute Force

What are the key elements of the hearts & minds approach?

Maoi-st insurgency & Mao-ist counterinsurgency use same methods of politically organize/win people & their minds over.

—> speak to locals directly to figure out what they are mad about, what they want changed, help them solve these issues

Insurgency vs. Counterinsurgency: Think 2 different grassroots competing for love/attention of locals

What was Mao-ist insurgency focused on & how did it work?

MAO INSURGENCY

• MAO: Insurgency → the way you take over a country is a strategy of hearts & minds → by winning over minds & by winning over people 

• The way you do that is by figuring out what they're mad about, and then you give them hope for solving these issues or actually make the change yourself 

—> International community & US recognized this Maoist method of Insurgency was dangerous & effective 

• Mao has a point, so the US & International community decided they will use Mao's ideas against him w Mao-ist counterinsurgency

What was Mao-ist counterinsurgency focused on & how did it work?

MAO COUNTERINSURGENCY

• Enter counterinsurgency → “Green Barrets” acted as political organizers and warrior diplomats 

• Doing same thing insurgents are doing & organizing locals to fight insurgents 

• Figure out what locals are mad about, give them hope for solving these issues or actually make the change IN ORDER TO —> build up legitimacy of the government in the eyes of locals through protecting and giving them services, making them happy (work against insurgents) 

What are the phases of the hearts & minds approach?

1) strategic defense

2) strategic stalemate

3) strategic offense

Who talks about the core components of counterinsurgency?

COHEN

What are the core components of counterinsurgency?

• emphasizing government legitimacy as the main objective of operations — counterinsurgents need to help establish/restore a legitimate government in order to succeed

• unity of effort

• political objectives must retain primacy

• intelligence is the driver of operations, need to know human terrain

• isolate insurgents from their cause & support — redressing/remedy grievances that fuel insurgency

• security under the rule of law

• long-term commitment

• manage information & expectations

• used measured force

• empower lowest locals

• learn & adapt

• support & build up the host nation’s capability

Who talks about the paradoxes of counterinsurgency?

COHEN

What are the paradoxes of counterinsurgency?

• the more you protect your force, the less secure you are

• the more force you use the less effective you are

• the best weapons for counterinsurgency do not fire bullets

• them doing something poorly is sometimes better than us doing it well

• if a tactic works this week, it will not work next week, and if it works in this province, it will not work in the next

• tactical success guarantees nothing

Who discusses the limits of counterinsurgency in Afghanistan?

Eikenberry

What assumptions did the intervention in Afghanistan rest on/why did counterinsurgency fail?

1) Unclear what population needed to be protected from

2) US aid further corrupted government practices & didn’t increase Afghan government legitimacy

3) US COIN approach was not in line w/ desires of Afghan government

Who discusses the problem with the hearts & minds approach?

Hazelton

What does Hazelton’s article do?

• She is testing the hearts & minds approach vs. brute force

• She is providing an analysis

What is Hazelton’s analysis?

• Hearts & Minds is so heavily political, it makes it really hard for militaries & democratic/intervening democracies to pull off

• It is hard, has mostly failed in the past, and if you do it you need to know what you’re doing

• Successful counterinsurgencies were successful because they were based on brute force & co-opted elites through benefits & used force to separate insurgents from populous

• NOT ARGUING FOR BRUTE FORCE OR PROVIDING A SOLUTION/OPTION — just giving an analysis

Where will the future of operating environments for counterinsurgency be?

urban “no-go” zones in megacities

Who talks about Russia’s perpetual geopolitics & the drivers of Russian foreign policy?

Kotkin

What are the 4 historic drivers of Russian foreign policy?

1) Russia’s economic & military backwardness

• cycles of industrial growth to stagnation

• results in Russia actually having a weak economy

2) Combined with a sense of religious & political mission

• contributed to lack of formal alliances

3) No natural borders, so always worried about invasion

• security based on moving outward

4) Elites want a strong state

• they think this is necessary to prevent a national threat

• however, economic backwardness means there is a lot of poor people, so they are worried about domestic revolution —> they relate this to an international threat

• efforts to build strong state have led to undermined institutions & personalistic rule

Who talks about Putin’s current regime, domestic repression, and his foreign policy? (Putin Unbound)

Treisman

What does Treisman say about Putin?

Early Regime:

• Early Putin Regime: Team was working to integrate w/ West & show a commitment to law to attract investors 

• Current Putin Regime: Russia is brutally repressive state w/ harsh domestic & foreign policies  

  • Convinced West is conspiring to undermine Russia 

  • Working with people who see Russia as besieged by foreign forces & the only way to protect it is with hard power/social controls 

  • War abroad supports repression at home, repression at home supports war abroad 

    • War helps justify domestic repression, & fear of Western influence at home helps justify war  

Embrace of Repression at Home

• It is getting harder to control political opposition in Russia w/ sophisticated methods because Russia has continued to modernize 

→ Putin’s sense of effectively repressing domestic opposition has empowered him to engage in aggressive foreign policy. 

What does Reid’s article discuss?

Given Russia’s geopolitics and Russian nationalism, Russian nationalists do not think Ukraine is a real country 

• Any slav who doesnt accept russia leadership is trader to slav nation 

→ Russia has a sphere of Slav influence, only way to protect this is to keep pushing their power out 

Views the West is inherently hostile – viewed nato and EU expansion as a form of European colonialism into traditional Russian areas 

• They are never going to look at the west as not hostile 

• Going to see EU expansion as a european power play to exploit russia 

• Putin really believes what happened in Eastern Europe w/ NATO & EU expansion as an imperial & colonizing event of Europe 

What does Blanchett talk about?

Xi’s Gamble