IR midterm

Readings:

Thucydides: Melian Dialogue REALISM

• Negotiation between athens and sparta 

• Realpolitik: power >>> ideals 

  • State centered 

• Might makes right 

• Hope and justice 

• REALISM IN IR, emphasize power over ethics 

• Dangers of misplaced hope and moral idealism  

Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan REALISM

• State of nature: humans live without government or authority 

• Social contract theory 

• Absolute sovereign power; leviathan 

• POWERFUL CENTRALIZED STATE

• Political realism 

Immanuel Kant: Perpetual Peace: Classical Liberalism

• First two definite articles 

• Republican constitutions 

  • Governments should be based on the rule of law, representations, and separation of powers ensuring leaders are accountable and war is not easily declared

• Federation of free states 

  • Independent nations should form a voluntary league, not a world government

  • Promote peace through cooperation 

  • UN

Woodrow Wilson: 14 points: Utopian liberalism 

• idealism/liberal internationalism 

• Democratic peace theory: democracies are less likely to go to war with one another

• Collective security 

• Morals and cooperation >>> 

• Isolationism is not the answer, but very utopic, 

• Points 

  • Open diplomacy 

  • Freedom of the seas

  • Free trade

  • Arms reduction 

  • Fair colonial policies

  • Self determination and national sovereignty 

  • League of nations: maintain peace and prevent future conflicts 

Francis Fukuyama: the end of history: liberalism and liberal internationalism  

• “End of History” means that there will be no longer viable ideological evolutions or alternatives to liberal democracy 

• Free market capitalism

• End of ideological struggle with the fall of the Soviet union

• Liberal democracy as the “final form”

• End of ideological evolution 

• Took inspiration from hegel 

Huntington: clash of civilizations and remaking of the world order: cultural realism 

• State interest shifts from power politics to civilizational identity as the key driver of conflict 

• Rejects  

• Future global conflicts will not be based on ideology, economics, etc, but on cultural and civilizational differences

• Not development but culture: West, islamic, hindu, latin america, africa, japanese, sinic (china and east asia)

• Conflict will occur at “fault lines” between civilizations 

  • West v. islam 

    • Cultural tensions, foreshadowing post 9/11 conflicts 

  • West v. china 

    • Compete for global dominance 

  • india/pakistan 

• Culturally split counties 

• Could use this in the essay to discuss china and US relations

Ikenberry: crisis of Post Cold War liberal order: liberal institutionalism  

• Liberal international relations theory 

• Liberal order is under stress and it is resilient and adaptable rather than collapsing 

• LO is facing a crisis; democracy, free trade, alliances, etc is being challenge by rising powers, nationalism, and international democratic backsliding 

• Liberalism remains embedded, but integrate and reconfigure to accommodate shifting power dynamics 

Morgenthau: 

• realist theory of international politics

  • Governed by objective laws rooted in human nature, driven by the pursuit of power

  • Critiques wilsonian liberalism 

  • Human nature is unchanging, states pursue power for survival and interest 

  • National interest 

  • Anarchy of international system 

    • Anarchic, no higher authority to regulate states actions 

    • Leads to self help behavior 

• The balance of power 

  • States act to prevent any one state from becoming too dominant 

• Security dilemma 

  • States attempt to increase security is perceived by other states as a threat, leading them to increase their own military capabilities, escalating tensions, and possibility of conflict 

Mearsheimer: realism, offensive realism  

• anarchy and the struggle for power

  • International system is anarchic 

  • Self help system 

  • Agrees with Morgenthau

  • Struggle for power

    • Offensive realism: 

      • Great powers are offensively minded and seek to maximize their own power to ensure survival and to achieve regional or global dominance 

    • Defensive realism: 

      • States only seek power to secure their survival  

  • Great power politics and rivalries 

  • Hegemony and global power  

• False promise of IOs

  • THEY DO NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF IR

  • II created and manipulated by power states primarily to serve their interests 

  • Not the need for security and power

  • Cannot alter the self interested behavior of states 

  • Reflect power politics not peace or cooperation 

Alexander Wendt: anarchy is what states make of it CONSTRUCTIVISM 

• Challenges realism and the notion that anarchy leads to conflict and power competition 

• Rather than viewing it as static, predetermined condition, agues that it is socially constructed; shaped by the beliefs, actions, and interactions of states 

• States perceptions and behavior are not solely dictated by their anarchic system but are4 also influenced by social context that they create through heir interactions

• Discusses three types of anarchy 

Keohane: from hegemony: neoliberal institutionalism 

• Global governance and cooperation can emerge from interdependence and institutionalization of IR 

• Challenges the hegemonic stability theory: a dominant power is not necessary to maintain international order and cooperation 

• Emphasizes the role of international institutions, rules, and norms 

• States have long term interests when it comes to cooperation 

• Role of IOs

  • Provide info 

  • Establish norms and rules

  • Facilitate negos 

• States are not forced to cooperate through power institutions, IOs encourage it without coercion 

• Yes the system is anarchic, but institutions might help mitigate the effects of anarchy by creating predictability, trust, and reciprocity 

• Power matters, but IOs can play a role in stability 

• Create conditions for durable cooperation even in a world without dominant power

Jervis: security dilemma: defensive realism; states seek security rather than power for its own sake  

• Anarchic nature of IR leads states into a security dilemma 

• States cannot fully trust one another 

• If a state increases military strength for defensive reasons, it could be interpreted as a threat creating a spiral of tensions and arms races 

• There must thus be an offensive-defensive balance 

  • If offense is dominant, then states are more likely to attack 

  • If defense is dominant states feel more secure 

• Tech and geo play key roles 

  • Deterrence 

• Misunderstandings between nations can exacerbate the dilemma, defensive buildup is misinterpreted it may escalate tensions 

• Communication, signaling, and diplomacy is key 

• Ways to address the dilemma:

  • Arms control agrements 

  • Transparency and diplomacy 

  • IOs

• Game theory 

  • Coase theorem: laundry example 

    • If transactioin costs are too high, private negotiations might fail an require government intervention 

Giplin: nature of the IPE

• IPE: economic and political forces wre entwined
  Economic power is often used to achieve political objectives 

• Economic decisions are shaped by poliical powerand vice versa 

• Trade, regs, monetary politics, influenced by government 

• Political stability and state behavior 

• 3 theoretical perspectives on IPE

  • Mercatilism 

    • Realism in IPE, state is a central role,, economic nationalism, protectionism, state interveton to maintain power 

    • ie; china v. US

  • Liberalism 

    • Economic freedom, free markets, limited gov intervention, 

    • Comparative advantage, free trade, and economic interdependence 

  • Marxism 

    • Class struggle 

    • Dependency theory
      
      

Rodrik: why does globalism fuel populism 

• Globalism trilemma  

• Globalization fuels populism by undermining national sovereignty, increasing inequality, and leaving certain groups behind 

• Cannot achieve national sovereignty, democracy, and hyper globalization 

  • Democracy + National Sovereignty (No Hyper-Globalization)

  • Democracy + Hyper-Globalization (No National Sovereignty)

  • National Sovereignty + Hyper-Globalization (No Democracy)

Higher probability 

Anarchy OR State of “war”: Hobbes 

• A state of society without governing authority or structured government. It is the assumed state of the international system, where no one power is above all other powers. 

• Hobbes describes this as a state of war, where there is constant conflict or threat of conflict conflict due to the absence of central authority to enforce rules and resolve disputes

Classical Realism: Hobbes, Thucydides, Mearshimer 

• Human nature is the root of politis: self interest and acting in pursuit of power and survival 

• The anarchical international system: no central authority 

• Power and national interest: national interest >> morality

• Balance of power: prevent any one state from being too dominant, other states will form alliances to take countermeasures to maintain stability  

Classical Liberalism: Wilson, Kant

• Individual freedom; unalienable rights 

• Limited government intervention; focusing on protecting rights 

• Free markets and economic liberalism 

• Rule of law 

• Democracy and representation 

Democratic Peace Theory, Kant 

• Democratic states are less likely to go to war with one another compared to non-democratic states 

  • Institutional constraints, shared interests, economic interdependence, transparency 

• Kant: republican states are more peaceful, collective security as a result, ILaw and IOs

• Federation of free states to resolve conflicts 

Balance of power 

• Global stability is maintained when power is distributed evenly among states

• Must prevent any one state from becoming too dominant 

• If one state gains excessive power, others will counterbalance it in order to maintain equilibrium 

• Power distribution, alliances, arms races, 

• Multi-polarity: power is among multiple states; 19th century europe 

• Bi-polarity: two major powers dominate; US and USSR

Security dilemma: Jervis 

• When states misinterpret defensive military actions as offensive, so they may escalate tensions as a result 

• Arms race during the cold war 

• Perception and misperception (as related to the balance of power): Jervis 

• How states respond to shifts in power 

• Not based on objective reality, but how they perceive the actions of a state

• Can lead to failures of balance power 

• States might see their own actions as defensive but others might see them as aggressive 

• preconceived biases 

Self-help system: Waltz and neorealism; structural realism  

• Realist theory 

• States must rely on themselves for security and survival because the system is anarchical 

• Anarchy and lack of global authority 

• Survival is primary goal 

• Power accumulation 

• Security dilemma

• Alliances are temporary 

Utopian liberalism: Wilson  

• Peaceful, cooperative global relations through democracy, ILaw, and IOs

  • Human nature is good: humans want to seek progress, and moral improvement  

  • DPT: global stability  

  • International Law and Orgs matter: UN, League of Nations, ICC

  • Economic interdependence reduces conflict 

  • Collective security >>> self-help 

“14 points” 

• Wilson’s vision for a just and lasting peace after WW1

• Self determination, free trade, democracy, and Int’l cooperation, League of Nations 

• No secret treaties

• Freedom of the seas 

• Free trade

• Disarmament 

• Adjustment of colonial claims 

• Self determination

• Creating the league of nations 

Prisoners’ dilemma: Waltz and Mearshiemer  

• Game theory that illustrates why two rational individuals will act in their own self interest nd might not cooperate even if it is in their best interest to do so

• Explain why states might not cooperate due to mistrust, fear of exploitation, or concerns about relative gains 

• Can either cooperate and stay silent or defect and betray the other 

• If they both defect they will get a modern sentence

• If both defect, they will both receive a severe sentence 

• If one defects and the other cooperates, the defector goes free and the cooperator gets a harsh sentence 

• Nuclear arms race is a great example 

Stag Hunt 

• Concept in game theory that says states or individuals face a choice between cooperating for a mutual benefit or defecting for lesser gain 

• Two hunters in a difficult hunt 

• If they hunt a rabbit on their own it is easier to catch but is a smaller reward 

• If they cooperate and hunt the stag together they can 

• If one defects and hunts rabbit one gets small and the other fails 

• Mutual benefit from cooperation 

Offensive vs. Defensive weapons 

The Treaty of Westphalia 

• Ended the thirty years war, series of agreements 

• Created a sovereignty of states; state sovereignty 

  • No longer subject to interference from religious authorities 

• Territorial changes 

• Religious tolerance 

• End of religious wars 

• Diplomatic precedents 

• Formulated the modern state system yay

• Balance of power 

Deterrence 

• The use of nuclear weapons to prevent nuclear or conventional attacks by threatening mass retaliation 

Neoliberalism: reaction to Keynes

• Theory in IR and IPE that emphasizes the role of markets, free trade, and individual liberty in promoting prosperity and cooperation 

• Economic policies, minimal state intervention 

• Free markets 

• Primacy of markets and free trade 

• Minimal government intervention 

• Economic interdependence 

  • Globalization 

  • IMF and World bank 

• Individualism and liberty  

  • Choice 

  • Collectivist 

Neorealism 

• Structural realism 

• Places a strong emphasis the structure of an international system as the primary factor of shaping state behavior 

• Developed by Waltz

• To explain the patterns of state interaction through global structural forces rather than human nature 

• Anarchy is the Int’l system 

• The structure of the system is the distribution of power among states 

• States as rational actors: self interest  

• Security dilemma 

• Power and survival 

Liberal institutionalism: Keohane after hegemony, regimes and institutions play a crucial role in maintaining order  

• Emphasizes the role of institutions in fostering cooperation among states 

• Challenges realism, and says that IOs help mitigate anarchy by providing rules and mechanisms for resolving disputes 

• States as rational actors: yes they seek to maximize their interests but they recognize that cooperation can lead to mutual benefits 

• Anarchy can be managed, it is not unchangeable and does allow for cooperation 

• Facilitates cooperation 

• Absolute gains matter more than relative gains

• Cooperation can exist without a hegemon 

• Regimes shape state behavior; WTO

• Aren't perfect BUT they matter 

Complex interdependence: Keohane  

• States and societies are connected through multiple channels beyond just military and security concerns 

• Multiple channels of interaction 

• No hierarchy of issues 

• Increased cooperation 

• Vulnerable 

• Rise of IOs like UN, WTO, and WHO

  • ie COVID

Containment: Kennan 

• A US foreign policy strategy during the Cold War meant to stop the spread of communism 

• Long Telegram but also Truman Doctrine 1947, promised to support greece and turkey 

• Marshall plan: aid program to rebuild western europe and prevent spread of communism in 1948 

• Military alliances and commitments 

• Nuclear deterrence

• Espionage 

Bipolarity vs. Multipolarity 

• Distribution of power in the global system; shapes how states interact and how conflicts arise 

• Bipolarity: two dominant states hold majority of global influence, and other states align on either side 

  • Cold war 

  • Stable but competitive, fixed alliances, limited major wars, clear rules of engagement 

  • Risk of total war 

• Multipolarity 

  • Three or more states hold significant global power 

  • Pre-world war 1 era 

  • More complex diplomacy 

  • Greater balance of power and cooperation is essential 

  • More opps for conflict and miscalculations 

  • Economic and political interdependence 

  • No clear world leader; global governance decentralized 

• Realists like biolarity better bc it is more stable 

• Liberals like multipolarity 

“The end of history” 

“The clash of civilizations” 

Constructivism: Wendt 

• Global politics is shaped not just by material power, but also through ideas, identities, norms, and interactions 

• Challenges the materialistic aspects of realism and liberalism 

• Ideas and identities shape state behavior, interests are socially constructed and evolve based on historical experiences, culture, and interactions etc

• Anarchy is what states make of it

  • States interact determined on whetheR anarchy leads to cooperation or conflict 

• Norms and social structures influence

• Intereses are not fixed but evolve

Externalities 

• A cost or benefit from an economic activity that affects third parties who are nto involved in the transaction 

• Negative; costs externally, ie. pollution, traffic, loud noise 

• Positive: education, vaccines, public parks

• Negative externalities lead to overproduction of harmful goods (e.g., too much pollution).

• Positive externalities lead to underproduction of beneficial goods (e.g., not enough vaccinations).

Coase theorem 

• Rights are well defined and transaction costs are low, then parties can negotiate solutions without government intervention 

• Factory pollution and residents 

• 
  

International Political Economy 

• Relationship between policits and economics at he global level 

• How political isntutions, IOs, states, and non-state actors shape and are shapped by economic processes 

• Power, wealth, competition for resources re distributed and how these distributions impact political and economical outcomes 

• Role of states 

• Globalization 

• International trade and financial flows 

• Dolarization 

• FTAs

• Development and inequality 

• WTO, IMF, World Bank, Bretton woods 

• 3 theories 

  • Liberalism 

  • Mercantilism 

  • Marxism 

Mercantilism 

• Protectionist policies to intervene in a states economy to increase wealth and power 

• Focus on accumulating wealth

• Nationalist, national security 

• Zero sum game 

• Wealth and power 

• State intervention, favorable balance of trade 

• Self sufficiency 

Economic liberalism 

• Free markers

• Freedoms

• Minimal government intervetion 

• Open compettion and free trade 

• Self regulating and contribution 

• Invisible hand 

• Property rights 

• Promotyes globalization 

• Comparative advantage 

• Opportunity costs 

Globalization 

• Movement of goods, services, and capital, tech, ideas, and people across border

• Global trade and economic integraino 

• TAs and IOs

• Capital flows and investment, FDI

• Tech and communication advancements 

• Culture diffusion 

• Inequality  

Populism 

• Seeks to represent ordinary people, framing itself as a challenge to the elite or establishment 

• Portray corruption in system 

• Left and right 

• Pure people and corrupt elite 

• Direct democracy and the will of the people 

• against establishments 

• Nationalism and sovereignty

• Charismatic 

• Anti Immigration, secessionist movements like brexit 

• Trump 

The trilemma of economic globalization 

• Economic Integration (Global Capital Mobility)

• National Sovereignty over Economic Policy

• Monetary Policy Autonomy (Control over Domestic Monetary Policy)

Lower probability 

Market for lemons 

• Information asymmetry and how it undermines cooperation/trust, often leading to suboptimal policies or failures in IAs

• Used to describe situations where states, IOs, or actors face information asymmetries… 

  • Lemon is a defective or low quality product

  • Can lead to adverse selection 

  • Inefficiencies and market failure 

• Arms control and non-proliferation 

• Humanitarian aid and development 

• International trade and investment 

• Diplomatic agreements and trust deficits 

• Asylum and refugee policy 

• Creates mistrust, instability, and lack of credible info 

  • Policy paralysis 

Moral hazard: Rodrik 

• States or individuals will engage in riskier behavior because they do not bear full consequences of their actions 

• Insurance so you drive more recklessly 

• Internations and military alliances 

• Financial bailouts and economic policy: IMF or World Bank 

• Humanitarian aid and refugee policy 

• Climate change 

Adverse selection: Jervis, explains how states might miscalculate threats and alliances due to asymmetric info; security dilemma   

• When one part in a transaction has better private info than the other, thus leading to imbalance or inefficient outcomes 

• In IR this applies when states enter agreements or policies without full info and negative consequences follow 

• Alliances and security measures 

  • Powerful states might attract weaker states who will seek protection but not truly contribute to the alliance 

  • International Aid and development: donors struggle to distinguish between effective and corrupt recipients 

  • FDI

Offshore balancing 

• Major powers avoid military engagement in foreign regions unless a major threat emerges towards them and shifts interests 

• Avoid direct military engagement 

• Support regional powers 

• prevent hegemony 

• Selective intervention 

Regional hegemony vs. global hegemony 

• Regional hegemon is a state that dominates it geographical region without serious challenges 

• Global hegemon is a state that dominates the entire international system without serious challengers

• Mearshimer; global hegemon is impossible 

  • States should pursue regional hegemony and block others from becoming regional hegemons 

• US blocks China 

• Gilpin and his HST

  • Global hegemon creates stability 

Defensive realism 

• States seek security, but not unlimited power 

• Waltz argues that states prioritize survival over expansion 

• Balance against powerful or aggressive states rather than constantly seeking more power 

• Anarchy = insecurity 

• Too much power is dangerous 

• Maintain balance of power 

• Containment during Cold War

Offensive realism 

• Mearshimer 

• States seek maximum power because security is only guaranteed by dominance

• Tragedy of greta power politics 

• Never satisfied with status quo, seek more power 

• Forces states to act aggressively 

Relative versus absolute power

• Relative power: states focus on their power in comparison to others 

• Not concerned with overall gains, just weather it is gaining more or less power than its competitors 

• Mearshimer 

• Absolute power: states only care about increasing their own power and wealth, regardless of others 

• Concerned with its own economic and military growth and doesn't worry if others also gain 

• Keohane: absolute gains, zero sum game 

• Liberalism and institutionalism