Intro to International Security - Exam #1

Physical (military) security

the protection against external forces

Economic security

the access to resources, finances, and markets

Human security

protection against disease, poverty, environmental threats, protection of culture

Security

an objective condition of relative safety from harm (not about urgency or mere survival)

What is security NOT?

security is not threats or values

Prime value approach

states that only care or spend resources on security, security is the most important thing, (no one actually does this in practice)

Core value approach

only cares about core values, a state must decide it’s core values

Marginal value approach

means security has diminishing returns that vary by country and context

Fukyuama’s main point

there is no cohesive challenge ti liberalism as a social - political model

Huntington’s main point

he argues against cultural conformation, claims civilian fault lines lead to future conflict, historically inaccurate

Newman and Farrell’s main idea

modern economic interdependence is creating new vulnerabilities

War

armed conflicts between states or 2 parties within a state

What does Clausewitz say about war?

“war is an act of force to compel the enemy to do one’s will”

Horizontal war

who controls what territory

Vertical war

who controls within a territory

Peace

reflects agreements about who rules

Strategy

the science of planning and directing large scale military operations (tactics are lower level to strategy)

What’re the (most common) costs of war?

fatalities, property destruction, opportunity cost ($$ spent on one thing cannot be spent on another)

The spectrum of war :

War = good (facism) war can be rational war = abomination (pacifism)

Background on Clausewitz

“not a proponent of violence” , wrote “On War” , absolute war = his ideal type, war involves passion, “war is the continuation of policy by other means” , strategy has a cost - benefits system , the fog of war slows down fighting

Characteristics of absolute war

very rare, never an isolated act, never final (you’d have to completely wipe out your opponent), a state cannot concentrate all it’s resources on war

Fussell

not a pacifist but close, discusses the horror of war, people who experience war don’t comment on it due to being poor or uneducated, “you can’t understand war unless you’ve been it it”

Behavioral economics (when considering war)

explains why people deviate from the rational baseline, includes extreme risk and uncertainty

Culture (when considering war)

people have certain ways of doing things, even under extreme stress (values and assumptions shape people)

Emotion (when considering war)

it’s hard to process things without knowing how you feel

The “Just War” theory (Walzer)

states that self defense is the only just reason to engage in war, aggression is unjust

Jus ad Bellum

the principles that determine when it’s morally acceptable to start a war

Jus in Bello

how a war is fought once it’s begun

What constitutes as aggression ?

anticipations, interventions, supreme emergencies, prevention

Differences in prevention and pre - emption

Pre - emption is when you attack in response to immediate or imminent potential for danger (relative power matters in pre - emption) , prevention is stopping a threat before it becomes immediate or certain (“They might attack” vs. “They’re about to attack”)

Interventions

the international actions that occur on behalf of civil war combatants, secessionists, or for humanitarian purposes ; can be justified but has a very big burden of proof ; alters another country’s domestic arrangements

What’re the 4 categories of war?

pre - emption, prevention , intervention , extreme circumstance

Atrocities are violations of war (the spectrum)

In cold blood (Ex. Holocaust)

They grey area (Ex. WW2 Bombing)

“Crimes of Passion” (My Lei)

Absolutist

means principles over expediency, echoes of pacifism, unrealistic

Utilitarian

means “for the good of the country” , depends on context, choose the lesser of the 2 evils, can be critiqued as moral realism

How does Valentino define mass killing ?

the intentional killing of many non - combatants , distinguishes between intention and coincidence , mass killing is strategic, used by leaders to accomplish their most important goals, NOT genocide

Mearsheimer’s main point

countries try to get what they can, bipolarity leads to international stability

Farrell and Newman’s main point

economic and national security are tightly linked, economic interdependence leads to new security threats

Permissive vs. efficient (notions of causality)

anarchy vs. immediate grievance

Necessary vs. sufficient (notions of causality)

example : oxygen is necessary but not sufficient to live

Underlying vs. proximate (notions of causality)

example : it was going to happen eventually vs. how it happened

The 1st image

describes human nature and who we are as individuals ; “war comes from the urge for aggression” ; has psychological , evolutionary, and physiological roots

Waltz’s objection to the 1st image

if war isn’t constant how can human nature explain it ?

The 2nd image

refers to the state (domestic policy) , war is a function of state’s internal social and political organization, war creates internal unity, claims democracies don’t fight other democracies

Waltz’s objection to the 2nd image

if all kinds of states fight wars, can we attribute causality to what’s going on inside them?

The 3rd image

the international environment, anarchy always leads to war, there’s nothing that can prevent war

Security dilemma

the means by which a state tries to increase it’s security will decrease the security of other states, explains why cooperation is so difficult, most state behavior is driven by fear of exploitation

Stag hunt

hunters are all hunting a stag, each hunter doesn’t know what the other will do (chase stag or chase rabbit)

Outcomes of the stag hunt (in preference order)

1) All cooperate and get the stag (disarmament treaty)

2) Chase rabbit while others get nothing

3) All chase rabbits

4) You do nothing while they chase rabbits

Prisoner dilemma outcomes

Cell CD = the cost of being exploited (top right)

Cell CC = the gains of cooperation (mutual benefits) (top left)

Cell DD = costs of breakdown (likely leads to war) (bottom right)

Cell DC = gains from exploitation (bottom left)

How can a state affect another’s strategy by effecting payoffs?

raising costs of deadlock, increasing cooperation gains, decreasing cooperation gains if the first state defects

Offense - Defense theory

refers to how much a weapon will help a certain state , technology is the core of this theory

(attack, seize, hold territory - Offense)

(Prevent what’s above - Defense)

Differences when defense has advantage vs. offense

when defense has the advantage it’s easier to prevent attacking and prevent citizens, when offense has advantage it’s easier to attack

Mobility and firepower (ODT)

mobility favors offense while firepower favors defense

Power

the ability of a country to shape world politics in line with it’s interests

How can we measure power ?

economic + military

actual vs. potential

resource vs. output

absolute vs. relative

How are litigation and war similar?

they’re both expensive, have uncertain outcomes, and can potentially leave both parties worse off

Global governance

created to promote cooperation. and address transnational challenges, includes : rules, norms, institutions, and the processes that regulate international affairs

Relationship between power and strategy

good strategy has to account for different dimensions of power, but there’s tradeoffs between short and long terms priorities

Polarity

refers to the distribution of power across countries

Unipolarty

means one dominant power, Walzer claims this isn’t stable, but if it does last it’ll promote peace

Bipolarity

2 dominant powers, stability derives from rough equality between the 2 dominants, stability doesn't equal peace

Multipolarity

means there’s several powerful actors, makes it hard to know if someone’s a little or a lot stronger than you, traditional explanation for WWI

Potential causes of peace

replace anarchy with a world government, mitigate anarchy using cooperative institutions

Types of international order

collective security, regime theory

Why DIDN’T the UN fail?

It was designed as a group of great powers, not a collective security organization

Regime theory (AKA : Neo - institutionalism)

argues that states can create shared rules and expectations that influence state behavior

The concert of Europe

a system of dispute resolution used by major European powers to maintain a balance of power and prevent widespread war

Alliances

written legal documents stating that states will assist one another during war

NATO

is a defense pact (a specific type of alliance)

How do alliances benefit stronger states ?

provides stability, concessions from weaker states, allows stronger states a seat at the bargaining table

How do alliances benefit weaker states ?

provides protection, status, and influence with stronger countries

What are the costs of an alliance?

expensive to start (states must give up sovereignty) but cheap to maintain