Pols 225 CH3

War: A Complex Phenomenon

• War is puzzling as actors have options to avoid it.

• The number of wars has decreased over time, with spikes during WWI and WWII.

• War is not the default behavior as realists suggest; countries engage in fewer wars against each other, focusing instead on internal conflicts.

• States prefer to avoid war due to its significant costs, referring to them as "blood and treasure."

• The statement, “In war, the aggressor is always peace-loving; he would prefer to take over our country unopposed,” highlights the complexities of war's motivations.

Purpose of War

• The primary purpose of war often revolves around territorial disputes, with over half of conflicts in the last 300 years linked to territory such as oil or farmland.

• Wars may also have strategic purposes. An example is the ongoing conflict in Syria.

Specific Causes of War

• Historical conflicts, such as the India-Pakistan dispute over Kashmir, demonstrate that ethnic and historical significance can drive wars.

• Additionally, wars can stem from disagreements over national policy, regime types, and ethnic or religious divisions.

• Economic interests often underpin these causes, with religion sometimes used to justify actions or rally support.

• Conflicts may arise from future anticipated grievances, leading to multiple causes operating simultaneously.

War as an Outcome of Failed Bargains

• Wars often stem from failed negotiations between involved parties.

• Anarchy in the international system leads to misperception and domestic political pressures pushing nations towards war.

• Key dynamics that lead to war include:

  • Preventive Motive: Stopping a rising power.

  • Security Dilemma: States may arm themselves out of fear of others, creating a cycle of mistrust.

Dynamics of Bargaining

• Bargaining involves resolving disputes over resources like territory or policy.

• Crisis Bargaining occurs when one party threatens force if demands are not met.

• Coercive Diplomacy is when one state employs threats to influence another state's decisions.

• The Model of War framework describes the correlation between the net value of fighting and the bounds of the bargaining range.

Negotiated Settlements and War Costs

• If war is costly and disputes are divisible, a negotiated settlement beneficial to both parties should exist, making war unnecessary.

• Compellent Threats aim to coerce opposition to change their status, while Deterrent Threats seek to maintain the status quo by dissuading actions through threats of cost.

• Crisis bargaining may fail to yield peaceful resolutions due to:

  • Incomplete Information: Misjudgments lead to states either conceding too little or demanding too much.

Incentives to Misrepresent

• States may misrepresent their strength or weaknesses to gain a negotiation advantage.

• Strategies include:

  • Brinkmanship: Engaging in high-stakes situations to display power (e.g., Cuban Missile Crisis).

  • Tying Hands: Public declarations to solidify resolve and raise costs of backing down.

  • Paying for Power: Demonstrating military readiness to back threats.

War from Commitment Problems

• Commitment issues arise when states doubt each other’s intentions or commitment to agreements, undermining trust.

• Validating settlements within the bargaining range is difficult without trustworthy adversaries.

Future Bargaining

• Bargaining often involves negotiating over future gains like nuclear proliferation, exemplified by situations with North Korea and Iran, which may spark preventive or preemptive wars.

• Preventive Wars aim to stop an adversary from gaining power. In contrast, Preemptive Wars target imminent threats.

Indivisibility of Conflict

• Conflicts over indivisible goods complicate resolution, as parties seek outcomes that cannot be easily shared or divided.

• The notion of indivisibility can be socially constructed, and claims of indivisibility may serve strategic purposes.

Has War Become Obsolete?

• Since 1945, there has been a decline in territorial wars, attributed to:

  • Changing Interests: Technological advancements and globalization diminish the value of territory.

  • Changing Interactions: There are high costs associated with war, with nuclear capabilities dissuading conflicts.

Factors Reducing War Probability

• Increase the costs associated with war through:

  • Nuclear Deterrence: Mutual assured destruction heightens the stakes.

  • International Trade: Economic interdependence reduces incentives for war.

  • Transparency Measures: Satellite surveillance increases awareness and accountability.

  • Outside Enforcement: Preventative measures to address disputes before they escalate.

  • Sovereignty Solidification: Establishing clear territorial rights reduces the likelihood of conflict.