UW Poli Sci 203 Midterm 1

Sovereignty

Ability of a state to govern its citizens within it geographic borders, while maintaining the monopoly of use of force within those borders. Link to Westphalia.

Anarchy

System where sovereigns interact without any higher authority to sovereigns that can force sovereigns to carry out agreements and respect borders.

Realism

A way to look at international relations. Lens that holds that there is always an uncertainty on behalf of other states. Security is foremost concern.

Liberalism

Another international relations lens that holds that international cooperation is possible, also stipulates that anarchy leads to commitment problems

Constructivism

A movement in IR theory that examines how changing international norms and actors' identities help shape the content of state interests.

Westphalia

Ending 30 years war in Europe, peace conference setting up modern notion of sovereignty. Mutual recognition, equality, territorial integrity.

Nation-State

A community of people who share common heritages unified by a central power which has the power to make and enforce rules/laws.

Nationalism

The idea of citizens to more closely identify with their state.

Major Powers

Have a substantial military power, and their interests are more global, than simply just domestic. Ex China, Japan, Russia, etc..

Hegemonic States

Preponderant level of power, set and make rules for the rest of the world. Only two Hegemonies ever British Empire and the United States

Regional Powers

Large powers in relation to their geographic location, but doesn't necessarily concern itself with world problems.

Minor Powers

States who generally have little influence on the world stage, seats at UN most of the time.

Buffer States

States geographically between two regional powers, leads to high risk of state death due to continuous conflict, like Poland

War

The organized use of force by at least two states that satisfies the minimum severity thresholds, think of COW

Crisis Bargaining

One party issues a threat to another, "do this or else..", will either lead to war or settlement between parties. Think bargaining range.

Correlates of War Project(COW)

Classifies if conflict is a war or not, minimum 1000 battle deaths, Each member must deploy at least 1000 troops

Compellance/Detterence

"Do this or else..." Versus "Don't do this or else..."

Bargaining Model of War

Used to represent potential gains and losses by both sides of a conflict depending on if it escalates to war or a settlement.

Incentives to Misrepresent

Can create situations of misinformation so that one state may have the upper hand in bargaining, worldwide game of poker, bluffing is essential.

Incomplete Information

Can lead to a change in the bargaining range for each party, one state doesn't know the power and force of another

Risk-Return Trade-off

States trying to get a better deal for themselves, while also trying to avoid war/conflict.

Bluffing

States misrepresent their abilities to the other parties so that they may be able to change the bargaining range, lie about how much force they have can get other states to back down.

Credible threat

A threat that the other state will believe and take into account while bargaining. Think Korean War and China's threat to the US

Commitment

Promises are only credible when it is in best interest of state to carry it out. Because of anarchy states can always renege on agreements

Costly Signal

Serves to make threats more legitimate, makes it harder for leaders to back down from threats.

Brinkmanship

Signaling resolve by using costly actions to provoke war, like moving carrier fleets nearer to other party until deal/war.

Audience Costs

Penalty to leaders if they escalate conflicts and then are seen as backing down, can lead to ousting from political office.

Sunk Costs

Pay large upfront costs to show seriousness, like construction of new weapons, and troop movements.

Commitment Problems

Each party cannot fully trust the other because there is no binding authority for each state to follow.

Preventative War

A war in which one state anticipates a power shift, so the fight to stop the other party from gaining too much power.

Pre-emptive War

War fought in anticipation that another is about to attack.

First-Strike Advantage

Greatly increases one states chances of winning conflict because they have the ability to plan and can take down another states defenses.

Offensive vs Defensive Balance

When defense has the advantage on offense it is likely that major war will be avoided.

Security Dilemma

One states securing themselves may drive another state to fear the first state and build their weapons as well, cyclical

Prisoner's Dilemma

The idea of two people being arrested and having the choice to rat the other out, optimal outcome is for both to cooperate. Seen in IR with arms races when more often than not both sides defect.

Issue Indivisibility

When the good fought over cannot be divided it leads to bargaining range practically vanishing, think Jerusalem with Israel and Palestine

Diversionary Theory of War

The idea that leaders when facing conflict at home will start a foreign conflict that will take attention away from domestic unrest.

Rally Effects

When in international conflict and the state/leader is successful, the leader, government, and leader's party all receive boosts in approval rating due to "rallying around the flag", think George Bush and 9/11

Social Identity Theory

Theory that when a group faces struggles against an outside group, the group becomes more cohesive. Link to Robbers Cave Experiment

Robbers Cave Experiment

experiment which showed that even arbitrary group distinctions (camp teams) can cause a bitter rivalry and discrimination, thus demonstrating in-group/out-group biases

Pleikus

Idea that conflicts are lying around waiting to be called upon by leaders for diversionary tactics. Pleiku, Vietnam which was central to Vietnam War

Pavlovian/Prudent Public

Refers to the classical diversionary theory that the public will react instinctively to foreign crises by automatically rallying behind the leader, versus the new idea that the public is actually much more prudent in their rallying efforts and opinions.

Golden Arches Theory of War

"No two countries that both have a McDonald's have ever fought a war against each other" Thomas Friedman, Spurious relation.

Spurious Relationship

Apparent causal relationship between two variables actually due to some other common underlying factor.

Democratic Peace

Democracies rarely fight one another, but Democracies are just as war prone as other states, Democracies more likely to settle for a draw, better able to prevail in crisis bargaining, sometimes execute genocidal acts.

Democracy and Victory

Democracies tend to win every type of war far more than other forms of state. Good at picking fights and Better fighters.

Glorious Revolution

William of Orange took the English throne from James II in 1688 that insured the UK would have a constitutional monarchy that rested most of the power in Parliament.