Exam I Review Notes
Exam Logistics
Midterm evaluation available until 4/30
Exam I Date/Time: May 1, 11:30am-12:50pm
Exam Format:
10 True/false questions - 20 pts
5 multiple choice questions - 20 pts
6 short answer questions (one sentence responses) - 20 pts
One essay question - 40 pts
Total points available: 100
Blue book will be provided for the exam.
Key Themes
Key Assumptions
Three Levels of Analysis in International Relations (IR)
Anarchy and Three Schools of Thought
Bargaining Theory of War
Democracy and War
The Role of Leaders in War
Key Assumptions
Anarchy:
No central authority governs the international system.
Rationality:
All actors pursue their interests strategically; no actor behaves irrationally.
No Harmony:
Actors’ interests do not match perfectly; conflicts arise.
Importance of the State in IR
States are the primary actors in the international system.
Concepts associated with the state:
Sovereignty: The authority of a state to govern itself.
Monopoly of Violence: The state's control over the legitimate use of force.
State Interests:
Power/Security, Economic/material welfare, and Ideological goals.
Interactions among states include:
Bargaining and cooperation (coordination & collaboration).
Three Levels of Analysis in IR
Individual Level: Actions and decisions of individual leaders.
Nation-State Level: Characteristics and actions of countries.
International System Level: Interactions among various states in a global context.
Polarity in the International System
Polarity: Refers to the distribution of power in the international system.
Types:
Unipolar: One dominant state, considered stable. more stable than multipolar systems due to its ability to maintain order and deter aggression from potential challengers.
Bipolar: Two dominant states, relates to balance of power theory.
Multipolar: Multiple significant states, tends to be unstable.
Anarchy & Major Theoretical Schools
Anarchy Defined:
Absence of a central governing authority.
Theoretical Perspectives:
Realism: Anarchy is the foundational principle; highlights survival and self-help.
Liberalism: Focus on common interests, economic cooperation, and repeated interactions.
Constructivism: Emphasizes social constructions and shared meanings of anarchy.
Bargaining Theory of War
States would benefit from a settlement to avoid the high costs of war.
Reasons for failure in bargaining:
Incomplete information and incentives to misrepresent.
Commitment problems related to bargaining power and preventive war.
Indivisible issues complicating negotiations.
Democracy and War
Democratic Peace Theory: Democracies rarely engage in war with one another; however, they may frequently go to war with non-democracies.
Potential confounding factors include:
Economic development, shared strategic interests, and racialized peace.
Institutional explanations:
Accountability and the complex nature of democratic processes lead to more caution in warfare.
Normative reasons: Internal democratic values influence foreign policy.
Leaders and Their Role in War
The impact of individual leaders is more pronounced in authoritarian regimes than in stable democracies.
Individual Leaders:
Leaders with military backgrounds may act differently based on their combat experiences.
Older and female leaders may show varying levels of engagement in international conflicts.
Next Week's Focus
Prepare for discussed readings. Chapter 3 pp. 114-120 from FLS.
Fearon (1997): "Signaling foreign policy interests: Tying hands versus sinking costs."