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;
49 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
realism on war
|
realism: war is a necessary condition of interstate politics and can be managed but never eradicated
neorealists say war will be a permanent feature of interstate politics so long as anarchy remains (war might be ridden if one state has power to defeat all other states) security dilemma: states with no hostile intentions are driven by their insecurity into a risky arms race. -it results in a permanent condition of tension and power conflicts among states even when none actually seek conquest and war |
|
|
liberalism on war
|
transcending war is possible but it will take generations to achieve
acknowledges the constrains of anarchy and state insecurity but says that states seeking power will be led by self interest into cooperation with other states which will be institutionalized and increase the cost and risks of cheating the rewards that comes with good states will create pressures and incentives on bad states to change democratic peace: no two democracies have gone to war against each other |
|
|
radicalism on war
|
possibility that war will end but only when the state end which will happen after worldwide socialism
system of exploitation and repression creates the forces that will destroy the state and lead to a workers revolution and communism self interest isn't natural but socially constructed and it can be corrected by re education |
|
|
constructavism on war
|
war is not necessary or natural or inevitable feature of interstate politics
-instead actors have been socialized to understand key features of interstate politics like anarchy as threatening - so if we are socialized differently the possibility of cooperation or nonviolent competition would be sufficient to reduce war |
|
|
defining war
|
-organized and deliberate political act by an established political authority
-must cause over 1000 deaths in a year -requires at least 2 actors capable of harming each other |
|
|
causes of war
|
individual (first image): aggressive characteristics of leaders, misperceptions by leaders, communication failures
-realists and liberals state/society (second image): liberal capitalist states according to radicals, non-liberal/nondemocratic states according to liberals, domestic politics and scapegoating, struggle between groups for economic resources, ethonational challengers international system (third image): anarchy, power transitions, aggressiveness of the international capitalist class -realists and radicals |
|
|
interstate vs intrastate
|
interstate: wars between states; characterized by rapid loss of life and destruction of property; after ww2 they decreased dramatically and were replaced with intrastate wars
intrastate: civil wars-include between factions within a state over control of territory; establishment of a government for control of a failed state; ethnonationalist movements seeking greater autonomy or succession; or wars between ethnic, clan, or religious groups for control of the state |
|
|
total vs limited wars
|
total war: armed conflicts involving massive loss of life and widespread destruction with many participants and major powers
-reasons include: conquer and occupy enemy territory or to take over the government and or control the economic resources of an opponent; fought over conflicts of ideas (shiite vs sunni etc) -decision makers utilize all available national resources (labor, weapons, economic, diplomatic, and natural) to force the surrender of their opponent limited war: often initiated over less than critical issues and tend to involve less than total national resources -ex Korean and gulf wars -aims of war are relatively modest and nuclear weapons are never deployed |
|
|
conventional warefare
|
weapons can be limited in time and space precise targeting; easily available
-problems: chemical weapons and indiscriminate weapons (weapons that cant be limited in space and time) -wmd non conventional: ignores conventions of war -guerrilla warfare: civilians risk their lives to protect the soldiers who hide among them and cant be distinguished from civilians when not fighting asymmetric conflict: advanced states pitted against nonstate actors or weak states -terrorism: type of asymmetric conflict; the perps are nonstate actors, its political in nature on intent, and it involves the deliberate harm of civilians, |
|
|
just conditions for going to war (jus ad bellum)
|
•Just cause: self-defense; defense of others; massive violation of human rights
•Declaration of intent by appropriate authority •Have intentions of ending abuses and establishing a just peace •Must have exhausted all other alternatives •Forces must be removed quickly after objectives are achieved. |
|
|
just conduct in war (jus in bellum)
|
•Distinguish between combatants and noncombatants
•Noncombatants protected from harm •Violence proportionate to ends •Undue human suffering avoided •Individual responsibility for actions taken |
|
|
realist approach to managing insecurity
|
-reliance on force or threat of force to manage power -deterrence -balance of power |
|
|
balance of power
|
states make decisions to increase their own capabilities and undermine those of others •Use of alliances to balance power both internationally and regionally (external balancing) •Increase military and economic capabilities to counter potential threats (internal balancing) •Emphasis on relative versus absolute gains •Most important technique for realists problems with balance of power •The balance of power favors the status quo •When fundamental change occurs, the appropriate response may provide balance. •When power transitions are occurring, balance of power is problematic |
|
|
deterrence
|
•Goal: Prevent the outbreak of war by credible a threat of the use of force.
•Assumptions -Decision makers are rational. -The threat of destruction from nuclear warfare is too great. -Alternatives to war are available •States must build arsenals for a credible threat. -Ifan alliance is part of that threat, the alliance must prove its cohesion. •Information about the threat must be communicated. •Leaders must be able to make rational decisions. |
|
|
liberal approach to managing insecurity
|
-international institutions coordinate actions to manage power
-collective security; arms control and disarmament |
|
|
collective security
|
Assumptions
-Wars are caused by aggressive states -Aggressors must be stopped, are easily identified, and are always morally wrong -Aggressors know ahead of time that theinternational community will act againstthem weakness •There is lack of commitment by some nations to act in concert. •Neverworks against permanent members of UN Security Council due to veto power •Difficulty of identifying aggressor •It’s difficult to determine whether the aggressor is always wrong |
|
|
arms control and disarmament
|
Assumptions
•Fewer weapons means greater security .•Regulate arms proliferation (arms control) or reduce amount of arms and types of weapons(disarmament) •Costs of security dilemma are reduced. •Major agreements include bilateral, regional, and global treaties covering conventional, nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. |
|
|
nuclear nonproliferation treaty
|
•Signed in 1968; in force since 1970; 189 signatories
•States without nuclear weapons agree not to acquire or develop them. •States with nuclear weapons promise not to transfer technology to non-nuclear states and to eventually dismantle their own. •International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is “guardian” of the NPT, by means such asinspection teams and information gathering limitations: •Cuba,India, Israel, Pakistan are nuclear states not in the treaty •Inspections can be difficult to conduct and inspectors have been asked to leave •States can pull out of the treaty: North Korea •Liberals acknowledge complete disarmament of all types of weapons is unlikely (due to cheaters), but pursue incremental disarmament. |
|
|
human security
|
»Economicand social well-being
»Literacy »Adequate health care »Clean environment »General personal safety |
|
|
mercantilism or statism (economic realism)
|
humans are aggressive and have conflictual tendencies
goal is to increase state power achieved by regulating economic life; economics is subordinate to state interests international economy is conflictual; insecurity of anarchy breeds competition; state defends itself |
|
|
economic liberalism
|
individuals act in rational ways to maximize their self interest
when individuals act rationally markets are created to produce, distribute, and consume goods; markets function best when free of government intervention international wealth is maximized with free exchange of goods and services; on the basis of comparative advantage international economy gains |
|
|
radicalism/marxism
|
naturally cooperative as individuals; conflictual in groups
competition occurs among groups and particularly between owners of wealth and laborers; group relations are conflictual and exploitative conflictual relationships because of inherent expansion of capitalism; seeks radical change in international economic system |
|
|
comparative advantage
|
•Each state produces and exports that which it can produce relatively more efficiently
•States import goods other what other states can produce relatively more efficiently •Trade and international wealth are maximized •Each state gains by specialization •Productionoriented toward international market |
|
|
mncs
|
roles:
•Direct importing and exporting •Make significant investments in foreign countries •Buy and sell licenses in foreign markets •Engage in contract manufacturing, which permits local manufacturers in foreign countries to produce products •Open manufacturing facilities and assembly operations in foreign countries why they participate in international market: •Seek to avoid tariff and import barriers •Seek to reduce transportation costs by moving facilities closer to consumer markets •Sometimes able to obtain incentives from host governments that cut production costs and increase profits •Meet competition and customers •Capitalizeon cheap labor markets •Obtain services of foreign technical personnel |
|
|
liberal economic order and peace
|
•Norman Angell
-Enhanced trade in all states’ economic self-interests -National differences diminish in international market -Interdependence lead to economic well-being and eventually to world peace; war becomes anachronism -National competition is healthy and leads to more peaceful interactions |
|
|
imperfections of the liberal economy
|
•States put restrictions on free trade to achieve other objectives:
-Full employment, national security, protect home producers •States may not allow currencies to float in order to achieve other objectives |
|
|
imf missions
|
•Established for short-term loans to countries with temporary balance of payments problems
•From fixed exchange rates to floating rates •Move to structuring adjustment programs •Help states making transition tomarket economies |
|
|
general agreement on tariffs and trade (gatt)
|
-support of trade liberalization because trade is the engine of growth and economic development
-nondiscrimination in trade (state agree to give the same treatment to all trading partners part of gatt) -preferential access in developed markets to products from the south in order to stimulate development in the south -support for national treatment for foreign enterprises (treating them as domestic firms) |
|
|
international finance
|
international capital moves in 2 ways: -Portfolio investment (example: bonds, stocks) •New financial instruments: -Derivatives: options against future including loans and mortgages) -Sovereign wealth funds (state owned investment funds composed of financial assets including stocks, bonds, precious metal, and property) -Offshore financial centers like the cayman islands, bermuda, and the British virgin islands are used because of low taxation and little no to no regulation |
|
|
critics of a international economic liberalism
|
•Mercantilists/Statists say
-Economic policy should be subservient to state interests -Some industries should get special tax advantages -Promoting exports over imports encourages educational and technological innovation that increase international competitiveness -multinationalcorporations (MNCs) should serve the state; can deny market entry to some, usetaxes to repatriate profits, impose currency controls -International system is dominated by states competing for power |
|
|
imf and world bank reforms
|
•Alterweighted voting systems to allow greater LDC representation •Hiring more diverse bureaucrats to bring innovation •Liberals: IMFand World Bank (WB) tasks too diverse; aid and loans should be allocated bycompetition and should aid market •Radicals: morelocal input; less promotion of private capital interests |
|
|
oil
|
economics of oil •Oil supply is inelastic in the short term •Oil deposits are unevenly distributed around the world •Demand is not very responsive to price opec: •Founded in 1960 by oil-exporting states of Venezuela and Middle East •Twelve members produce 40 percent of world’s oil •Some key producers are not members: United States, Norway, Mexico, Angola, Azerbaijan, Russia shocks: arab oil embargo (73-74), instability in iran and iraq in the late 70s, 1991 gulf war effects of increased oil demands: scramble for alternative energy, oil is used as a strategic weapon, and oil states are immune to pressures forreform of repressive domestic practices because of the massive revenue increase |
|
|
nafta
|
•Phased elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers
•Protectionof MNCs in investing country •Ideadriven by MNCs seeking larger market shares than Japanese or Europeancompetitors •Comprises one dominant and two non-dominant economies; combined economic strength of Mexico and Canada is one tenth of U.S. level positive impacts: Tradeamong countries expanded; agricultural markets more integrated; tariffs onmanufactured products almost eliminated; growth of sub-regional groups negative impacts: Manufacturingjobs lost in United States; environment degraded in Mexico; Canada’ssovereignty threatened |
|
|
challenges to economic globalization
|
•Localand national public protests against globalization
•Asianfinancial crisis and dissatisfaction with international response (late 1990s)•Developmentof full-fledged anti-globalization social movement •Movementof labor—illegalaliens and human trafficking •Riseof illicit markets |
|
|
saps and the Washington consensus
|
Washington consensus:
a version of liberal economic ideology whose adherents say that only with certain economic policies (privatization, liberalization of trade, foreign direct investment, government deregulation in favor of open competition and broad tax reform) will development occur saps: -economic reforms: limiting money and economic growth, forcing currency devaluation, reforming the financial sector, introducing user fees, and eliminating substances -trade liberalization reforms: removing tariffs, rehabilitation of export infrastructure -gov reforms: privatizing public enterprises -private sector policies: ending gov monopolies
|
|
|
suggested reform of economic crisis's
|
•GivingChina greater role in IMF to help better manage currency reserves
•Strengthenglobal financial architecture•ReorganizeG-7 nations by inviting China •Morepower to G-20, but is it too big and unwieldy? •Coordinatemeaningful reform between quasi-private governance arrangements such as bond-and credit-rating agencies |
|
|
evaluation of crisis by theory
|
•Mercantilists/statists:return to state-level policies to protect state and its citizens
•Radicals:crisis as a critical juncture from which major reforms and a more just systemcan emerge •Constructivists:contestation over ideas about the economy as an ever-evolving process •Liberals: canpreserve system through modest reforms that give more transparency to markettransactions |
|
|
first, second, and third generation human rights |
political and civil rights -freedom of speech, religion, press socioeconomic rights -education, housing, standard of living rights for marginalized people and collective rights for all -disabled, gay, and indigenous people -collective rights for all: the right to development and clean environment |
|
|
waves of womens rights |
FirstWave: started late 1700s with rising prominence from late 1800s throughWorld Wars: emphasis on political/ civil rights, especially suffrage.
SecondWave: 1960s-70s: concern for economic rights, emergence of radicalist and postcolonial feminism, and evolution of WID movement. 3rd wave: 1970s through present, increasing globalconferences on women; 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination Against Women (CEDAW; US not ratified), emphasison cultural diversity of feminisms viena conference 1993 (womens rights are human rights) |
|
|
states as abusers of human rights (why) |
economic conditions -poor states more willing to repress rights to maintain authority culture and history -if there's a long history of mobilizing ideologies, violence, and hatred then its more likely that human rights will be abused -high degrees separation among ethnic, religious, and ideological lines state security -state security usually prevails over individual rights -heads of state may revoke rights/liberties when national security is threatened |
|
|
human rights actvies of igos, ngos, and the un |
un sets human rights standards with treaties and ngos push hard for them un and European commission on human rights monitor state behavior and investigate violations -ngos also contribute like amnesty international who is the most effective human rights monitor igos and ngos take measures to promote human rights and improve levels of state compliance -un provides electoral assistance in countries to ensure fair elections soft law: international action to protect individuals is acceptable |
|
|
environmental principals |
•Nosignificant harm: states cant enact policies that cause environmental damages to other other states
•Goodneighbor principle of cooperation •Polluterpays •Precautionaryprinciple: actions should be taken from scientific warning before there is real harm •Preventiveaction: states take action in their own jurisdiction •Newerprinciples: -Sustainabledevelopment (don't damage environment of deplete resources) -Intergenerationalequity |
|
|
pollution and development/natural resources/population issues |
natural resources: biggest issue is fresh water - 3% of earths water is fresh - Agriculture uses two thirds;industry uses one quarter; humans use less than one tenth •Historicfear of Malthusian dilemma: population increase outstrips food supply |
|
|
5 ngos roles in environmental issues |
acts as international critics using media to show their dissatisfaction and to get issues onto state and international agendas they may function through igos working to change the organization from within can aid in monitoring and enforcing environmental regulations by pointing out problems or carrying out inspections may functions as part of transnational communities of experts with igos and state agencies to try to change practices and procedures on an issue can attempt to influence state environmental policy directly providing information about policy options sometimes initiating legal proceedings, and lobbying directly to a states legislature or bureaucracy |
|
|
perspectives of theories on environment |
realism: emphasis on state power which requires self sufficiency in food and a dependable supply of natural resources -making the cost of resources or pollution too high diminishes the ability of a state to make independent decisions radicalism: concerned with economic costs of environmental issues -costs borne disproportionately in the poorer south than the more developed north -Marxism says capitalism will place commercial interests above state interests especially in poor weak states liberalism: see environmental and human rights as key international issues -welcome interdependence and the ingenuity of individuals to solve resources problem constructavism: comfortable with environmental issues in international action because they bring out discourse on environmentalism and sustainability. |
|
|
perspectives of theories on world health
|
liberalism: concerns about spreading of diseases are no more or less important than threats or preventive action -focus on international responsibility for dealing with health issues realism: reduce health issues to either responding to the outbreak of disease or preparing against the possibility of the use of bioweapons -basically reducing the issue to dealing with a threat so the state can defend itself radicalism: challenges to the world health stems from capitalists concentrating wealth -they force many into poverty compromising the healthcare systems in developing worlds constructavism: how we think we know what world health means and how that meaning came to be established |
|
|
transnational crime |
narcotrafficking: transportation of large quantities of of narcotics (heroin, cocain) across state borders -narcoterrorism: links between terrorism as a strategy and narcotrafficking as a method of funding terrorists cyber crime: cyber vandalism (hacking) and cyber theft |
|
|
effects of transnational issues on international relations |
international bargaining: leads to more policy trade offs (quid pro quo) and greater complexity international conflict: may increase at the international and substate levels state sovereignty: traditional notion challenged; need for re conceptualization international relations: jeopardize the core assumptions of the theories which are forced to broaden and modify |
|
|
theories on transnational issues |
realism: the state is not in jeopardy and that competitive centers of power do not necessarily lead to the elimination of state power -state security is no less important and the decreasing threat of nuclear and interstate war has forced a broadening of security to encompass numerous aspects like health and well being, human rights, the environment liberalism: these issues are just as important as physical security an they embrace other firms of security like health, the environment, and human rights radicalism: want a transnational revolution that would take away the state and without the state there would be a pronounced emphasis on economics over security allowing them to combat transnational issues |
