Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
41 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
liberalists view on the international system |
interdependence among actors, an international order, and neo liberal institutionalism
coordinating behavior through multilateralism
neo liberals see system as anarchic but institutions moderate state behavior and encourage states to get along. cooperation may emerge through institutions
actors: states, igos, multinational corporations, substate actors
constraints: interdependence, institutions
change: low possibiloty of radical change but not impossible. constant incremental change as actors are involved in new relationships |
|
|
realist view on the international system |
system is ararchic actors: state is primary actor constraints: polarity -multipolar, bipolar,unipolar -balance of power
change: slow change when the balance of power shifts or technological change occurs -such as development of nuclear weapons and war |
|
|
radicalist view on the international system |
highly stratified actors: capitalist states vs developing states constraints: capitalism, stratification -economic disparities are built into the i.s and everything is constrained by it -capitalism causes stratification change: radical change desired but limited by the capitalist structure |
|
|
constuctavist view on international system |
i.s exists as a social construct -power matters but the meaning of power changes overtime actors: individuals, no differentiation between international and domestic
constraints: ongoing interactions
change: emphasis on change in social norms and identities
|
|
|
realist view of state |
the state is an autonomous actor constrained by the anarchy of the i.s the state is sovereign and guided by a national interest that is defined in terms of power |
|
|
liberalist view of state |
the state is a reflection of both governmental and societal interests -involves contending interests among many powers the state is the repository of multiple and changing national interests -there's no single/consistent national interest the state is the possessor of interchangeable sources of power
|
|
|
radical view of the state |
instrumental marxists say the state is the executing agent of the upper class and is influenced by pressures of the capitalist system structural Marxists say the state is constrained by the structure of the international capitalist system both -no national interest; behavior reflects economic goals -real sovereignty isn't possible cause the state is constantly reacting to external and internal pressures
|
|
|
constructavist view of the state |
the state is a socially constructed entity that's shaped by international norms that change preferences the state is the repository of national interests that change overtime its influenced by changing national interests that shape an re shape identities socialized by igos and ngos |
|
|
sources of power |
natural: geography, natural resources, population
tangible: industrial development, levels of infrastructure, characteristics of military
intangible (soft power; legitimacy): national image, public support, leadership
smart power: coercion + persuasion (hard + soft power) Joseph nye |
|
|
diplomacy (exercising power) |
traditional diplomacy: negotiating
-public diplomacy: targeting foreign publics and elites in order to create an image that enhances a countries ability to achieve its diplomatic objectives
-celebrity diplomacy: a celebrity uses their access to the media to support a particular cause
|
|
|
economic statecraft (exercising power) |
positive vs negative sanctions -positive offers an incentive to entice the target to act in a certain way while negative (imposed more often) is punishing or threatening to punish
smart sanctions: freezing assets and imposing sanctions on commodities like oil, timber, or diamonds -targeting specific groups and individuals to reduce loopholes and ambiguity and to avoid the humanitarian cost of general sanctions |
|
|
the use of force (exercising power) |
compellance: trying to get another state to undo its actions
deterrence: try to keep an adversary from doing something so threatening to punish them if they do or threatening war |
|
|
rational model (model of foreign policy) |
best used -in a crisis situation when there's not a lot of time to react -when it involves national security issues -when theres Incomplete information about decision making in other state
process: -state as unitary actor; identifies the problem, establishes goals; determines policy alternatives; analyzes costs/benefits of alternatives; selects action that produces best outcome at least cost |
|
|
bureaucratic /organizaional model
(model of foreign policy) |
organizational emphasizes the importance of standard operating procedures and processes within different organizations -decisions depend on precedents -decisions tend to be incremental -major changes unlikely
bureaucratic occurs among members of the bureaucracy representing different interests -decisions determined from the pull and haul of different interests among departments, individuals, an groups -outcomes depend on strength of players -example: trade and environmental policy
used in non security situations
|
|
|
pluralist model (model of foreign policy) |
bargaining among domestic actors -example: public, interest groups, corporations, mass movements
mostly in non crisis economic situations
Time allows mobilization of media and public opinion, lobbying, organizing transnational networks, direct contact with government officials |
|
|
realist view on state power and policy |
nature of state power: power is key concept in IR; geography, national resources, and population important
using state power: coercive techniques (hard power) and use of force if needed
foreign policy: rational model
determinants of foreign policy: mostly external/international |
|
|
liberalist view on state power and policy |
nature of state power: multiple sources of power, tangible and intangible
using state power: broad range of power techniques but prefer soft power and non coercive ways
foreign policy: organizational/bureaucratic and pluralistic model
determinants of foreign policy: mostly domestic |
|
|
radical view on state power and policy |
nature of state power: economic power organized around classes
using state power: weak states don't have many options of power
foreign policy: states have no real choices the decisions are made by economic/capitalist elites
determinants of foreign policy: mostly external; co-opted internal elements |
|
|
constructavist view on state power and policy |
nature of state power: power subject to norm socialization
using state power: power is tool of elites for socializing societies through norms
foreign policy: decisions based on norms
determinants of foreign policy: external in combination with domestic civil society |
|
|
challenges to the state |
globalization: undermines state sovereignty; interferes with state exercise of power -ex: environmental issues, disease, crime, intrusive technology
transnational religious and ideological moments: seek the loyalty and commitment of those beyond the state; want to change behavior on a specific problem/issue -ex: extremists religious groups
ethnonational movements: they seek their own state and attempt to replace the current gov with their own to represent their interests -ex: kashmir, kurds, tibet,
transnational crime: led to movement of drugs, weapons, money, body parts, people, -challenges state authority
failed states: ineffective gov, terrorism, crime, etc -threaten the lives of state's people and international system -ex somalia, congo, sudan, chad, zimbabwe, haiti, yemen, etc |
|
|
individuals: who matters? |
foreign policy elites: key leaders can shape foreign policy -important for liberals and constructavists less influential for realists and radicalists -ex: gorbachev and ceausescu
private persons: dont have an official role -two track diplomacy: private individuals carry out conflict resolution
mass publics: can act without constraint, voice opinions, share characteristics |
|
|
impact of individuals is greatest when |
political institutions are unstable, young, in crisis or collapsing
constitutional constraints are limited
the issue or situation is unusual or ambiguous |
|
|
independent vs participatory |
independent: -high in nationalism, control, power, and distrust of others -low in conceptual complexity (discussion ability)
participatory: -high in need for affiliation and conceptual complexity -low in nationalism, control, and distrust of others |
|
|
role of individuals by theory |
liberalism: individuals matter and make choices that affect outcomes, privates have secondary role, and mass publics may affect decisions
realism: individuals are constrained by anarchic system and national interests
radicalism: individuals are constrained by the international capitalist system, individuals capitalists may be influential, and mass publics are agents of change
constructavism: individuals shape understanding incorporation of events and processes, individual actions are less important than beliefs, and mass publics are agents of change through discourse |
|
|
functionalism (jean monnet) |
•War is caused by economic deprivation •Economic disparity cannot be solved in a system of independent states •New functional units should be created to solve specific economic problems •People will develop habits of cooperation, which will then spill over from economic cooperation to political cooperation •In the long run, economic disparities will lessen and war will be eliminated |
|
|
collective goods/action (gareth hardin) |
•Collective goods are available to all members of the group regardless of individual contributions •Some state activities involve the provision of collective goods •Groups need to devise strategies to overcome problems of collective goods caused by the negative consequences of the actions of others •Solutions include: -Use of coercion -Changing preferences; example: by offering positive incentives to refrain from engaging in an activity -Altering group size to ensure compliance. |
|
|
roles of igos in the international system |
•Contribute to habits of cooperation •Gather information; surveillance •Settle disputes •Conduct operational activities •Arena for bargaining •Lead to creation of international regimes |
|
|
roles of igos for states and individuals |
•For states: -Used by states as instrument of foreign policy: legitimize foreign policy -Enhance available information -Punish or constrain state behavior •For individuals: -Socialization into international norms -Education on similarities and differences |
|
|
3 principles of the u.n |
sovereign equality of states
only international problems fall under u.n jurisdiction
primarily concerned with maintaining international peace and security |
|
|
principle organs of the u.n |
security council general assembly secretariat (security general) economic and social council trusteeship council international court of justice |
|
|
u.n key issues |
decolonization
chapter 6 peacekeeping -traditional: invited in to help, addresses conflict, keeps opposing sides apart complex: invitation not required, addresses multiple fronts, ex: aid, institution building, peacebuilding
chapter 7 enforcement: countering threats to international peace and security
reform
right to protect |
|
|
un organizations |
specialized agencies: world health organization; world bank group, food and agriculture organization
independent organizations: opec, world trade organization, nato,
regional organizations: EU, AU, Arab league
sub regional organizations: European free trade association, gulf cooperation council, economic community of west African states |
|
|
criticisms of un |
over sized bureaucracy
complex network of agencies
lack of accountability
failed operations/ineffective programs |
|
|
non governmental organizations |
•Private, voluntary organizations whose members are individuals or associations that come together to address a common purpose, often oriented to a public good •Not sovereign; lack resources available to states •Some entirely private, and some partially rely on government aid
|
|
|
roles of ngos |
•Advocates for specific policies •Alternative channel for political participation •Mobilize mass publics •Distribute aid and critical assistance •Monitors of norms and state practices |
|
|
ngo strengths and weaknesses |
strengths •Independent from states •Participate at all levels •Links to grassroots groups •Flexibility in administration and programs •Rely on soft power •Versatility
weakness: •Lack material forms of power •Diverse groups, working at cross purposes •Limited economic resources—no consistent source of funds; fierce competition for funds •Legitimacy compromised by lack of accountability
|
|
|
purposes of international law |
-sets expectations -settles disputes -Provides order -Protects status quo -Legitimates use of force -Norms of permissible and impermissible behavior |
|
|
realist perspective on igos, i.l, and ngos |
igos: skeptical of their ability to engage in collective action
international law: states comply only when its in their self interest and that they prefer self help
ngos: power belongs to states, any ngo power is derived from states |
|
|
liberalist perspective on igos, i.l, and ngos |
igos: important actors for collective action
international law: key source of order in the i.s, states comply because law ensures order
ngos: key actors different interests and facilitate collective action |
|
|
radical perspective on igos, i.l, and ngos |
igos: serve the interests of powerful sates and are biased against weak states
international law: skeptical because origins lie in western capitalist traditions
ngos: represent economic interests and is unlikely to effect major change |
|
|
perspective on igos, i.l, and ngos |
igos/ngos: both can socialize and teach states new norms; both may lead to dysfunctional behavior but may also represent new ideas and norms
international law: law reflects changing norms; shapes state expectations and behavior
|
