Term
|
Definition
Category + Net
Low cat/low net: no repeated interaction, hard to cooperate, hard to know if cooperating
Lowcat/high net: Could have lots of different identities but all connected
High cat/ low net: can get “trigger” that could create high cooperation but ephemeral, quickly goes away |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ppl who try to spread norms, ideas, lead collective action, take positions of power for POLICITAL opportunities…try to achieve brokerage position to increase power |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
leverage, only person able to speak for group
Activate/create identity boundaries |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
makes identity salient
Key development in collective violence |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
make boundaries congruent with social ties
no mixing of groups, cut social ties
Brokers become very important |
|
|
Term
| Levels of analysis for Iraq |
|
Definition
o 4th level – there was Oil in Iraq, general interest in friends in the region
o 3rd level – some say we are just gun-totting cowboys that are bellicose; may be something to our culture…
Resource dependency – need oil
Structure of US government – President more powerful than other democracies
o 2nd level – distribution of power in defense department, agencies
o 1st level – something about these individuals or administrations that made them more prone to war than others |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Framing and Public Opinion,
WMD's in Iraq |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
opposite of band-wagoning,
creating strategic military alliance when gearing up for war—ganging up against the big power—balancing |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
pushing burden onto other countries to form alliances (opposite of chain-ganging)
ex. NATO during cold war—we paid for everything but Germany still benefited |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
States that wouldn;t exist without the benfit of US power
Central America in the 1980's
Pakistan Musharraf |
|
|
Term
Cognitive biases
What are the three types? |
|
Definition
#1 prospect theory
#2 selective hearing
#3 sale at the grocery store vs. sale at the care dealer—in which case does 10cents matter |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
trapped by rhetoric
makes a more credible commitment if everyone has heard it |
|
|
Term
Compellance vs. Deterrance
which is harder, why? |
|
Definition
stop people from doing something they’re already doing
EX. North Korea before was deterrence, now compellence
Compellance harder than deterrence
No lose of face in deterrence; not doing it anyway
But if compellence, already doing and invested political capital would LOSE serious face if he capitulates, backs down. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| how credible is the threat? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
bolsters credibility, heightened threat, no option of return
ancient army literally burned the bridge |
|
|
Term
Counter-Strategies
Salami Tactics? |
|
Definition
each incursion small enough that the other side isn’t going to trigger the response (kid in edging into water)
salami tactic is one type
EX 1982 Israel Lebanon war—Sharon couldn’t get gov’t to commit to war, troops on border, went a little into border |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Theory: within a democracy you aren’t going to get the same type of mass violence than with other types of govt.
Democratics work hard to prevent violence
EX: U.S. ethnic cleansing of native Americans (but didn’t recognize them as citizens, outlier Trail of Tears)
British empire starved India (but also didn’t quite recognize as “part of us”) |
|
|
Term
Democratic Peace
what it is? why is it important? |
|
Definition
What is it?
Democracies don’t go to war with each
o Why does it matter?
American foreign policy has focused on democracy promotion as a means to more peaceful
Less balance of power due to most powers being democratic, |
|
|
Term
The origin of democratic peace theory
(3 factors) |
|
Definition
Kant – “perpetual peace” what would we need to have a world without war? Get it through 3 factors:
1. Spread of trade, market relations….more trade, less incentive …more costly to go to war
2. Republican governments (liberal democracy) – respected rule of law and thus resolve disputes this way
3. Formation of international institutions, confederacies |
|
|
Term
| Liberal Explanations for Democratic Peace (4 explanations?) |
|
Definition
1. TRADE: more trade, less war because costs for going to war would be higher…
2. Institutional Mechanisms: due to checks and balances more costs, must get authorization, get public debate…
3. Credible commitments: democracies do it better
4. Any sort of negotiation must “sink” a lot of political capital into getting it passed and advocating for the treaty |
|
|
Term
| Constructivists Explanations for Democratic Peace |
|
Definition
1. Democratic Norms – fight things out in political arena, go to courts or the ballots not with armed revenge or armed justice (vigilante)
2. Democracies come to see themselves as “in” groups where war is not an option, self-fulfilling prophecy? |
|
|
Term
| Criticisms of Dem Peace Theory |
|
Definition
1. Not a lot of democracies prior to 1945, no record!
2. Might be artifact of the Cold War alliances…
EX: Guatemala 1950 democratic regime nationalizes banana industry - US sends CIA topples democratic regime |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Scramble for Africa; reason why French and English didn’t fight wasn’t due to democratic but due to power-politics, fear of Germany coming in. |
|
|
Term
| Arguments about democratic transitions |
|
Definition
| Snyder – democratic transitions make states more warlike than if weren’t going through |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Tend to win the wars they fight
2. Leaders must generate support for war
3. Ppl more likely to put more effort into the war since it was legitimated by them
BUT
1. What about France – lost WWI
2. What about Vietnam? |
|
|
Term
Deterrence
and the
3 elements of deterrence threat |
|
Definition
threat to inflict punishment on target if it does something you don’t want it to do (military, economic, sanctions…)
1. By putting forces on military readiness can show other states that you are ready to act if things fall out
Three elements:
1. Magnitude – scale of punishment (nuclear > sanctions), how much punishment
2. Certainty – how likely state is to act out a punishment if other state calls its bluff, credibility of threat
3. Celerity (speed) – how fast can punishment come down on aggressor
--Speed with which death penalty work undermines effect, impact |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
used to deflect domestic problems, Maldive islands for Argentina
Wag the Dog |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Unipolarity
Hegemony
--constitutional order (uses const. to excercize order over other states)
framwork where politics of empire are reduced to politics of hegemony
(core with several subagents that control regions so that there is a system that allows the core to unattach certain agents so that they won't be involved in problems. At the same time, keeps control of factions) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
gives local groups signifigant amount of autonomy
can cause principal agent problems and corruption |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Bush's speeches when he directs messages at evangelicals |
|
|
Term
| "Commons" Problem in Environmental Politics |
|
Definition
| free-rider / public action problem things that everyone shares, seas air—who takes care of it, free rider problems, barriers to collective action |
|
|
Term
| Negative externalities in environment |
|
Definition
Negative consequences caused by actions that aren’t associated with the problems external to why something happened in the first place
EX: —pollution increasing asthma—
EX: You drive an SUV, pay lots of money for the car and gas an insurance and you are getting a certain amount of things for it—there are other costs built in..the more you drive the more the road gets worn down—so we collect taxes, any cost that is not part of the market |
|
|
Term
| Market solutions for environment |
|
Definition
| Trading in shares of pollution |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| both sides can demonstrate they will police their own side. |
|
|
Term
| The Role of Identity in Ethnic Conflict |
|
Definition
Conflicts that cling to specific identities (national, religious, etc)
2. Salient identities rise when states lose control over monopoly on violence
3. Insecurity in mixed ethnic groups leads to local security dilemmas (no longer safe if not same ethnic group)
4. Commitment problems follow because can’t trust other groups |
|
|
Term
| Opportunity hoarding in ethnic conflict |
|
Definition
| actors engage in strategies to control resources by setting themselves as Brokers |
|
|
Term
| Economic trends of globalization |
|
Definition
more and more trading relations (dip after WWII)
1. Great increase in FDI from 1970-1990-2000; nothing quite like firm in one country investing in other country (goods produced, composed by several companies
2. Firms take advantage of low labor/capital ratio
3. Int’l organizations (IO) multiply like “bunnies” |
|
|
Term
| State capacity and regime type in ethnic conflict |
|
Definition
how different states are able to deal with ethnic conflict, in a more liberalized state you might have more conflict, if you have a very closed regime then there isn’t room for dissent—if you have an open state you need a regime to maintain it.
1. high capacity open state can maintain order (USA)
2. low capacity closed state (the sudan)
3. warlords who run the country but closed regime that doesn’t have the same democratic freedoms in the middle (pakistan) self
4. open regime with low state capacity--Iraq |
|
|
Term
| Globalization: Regionalism |
|
Definition
NAFTA, fragmenting of worlds into local blocks, EU tariffs for goods produced outside EU—different kind of grouping
Diminished sovereignty
**After bretton woods after WWII you get regional interests evolving—NAFTA, NATO—you get breakdown of states being the most important |
|
|
Term
| Globalization: Problem of accountability |
|
Definition
| problems that affect a lot of countries on a global scale—drug trade, pollution, who do we blame for international problems? People who ship drugs or brokers or those who consume them? Who will really be held accountable? |
|
|
Term
| Globalization: Homogenization |
|
Definition
Everyone to west
hollywood, mcdonalds |
|
|
Term
| Globalization: Modernization |
|
Definition
Global culture – spread unevenly
1. Elite culture – wealthy, politically active/power/influence
2. Two-tiered world – world with internet access/electricity and world without accelerating divisions, distributional struggles |
|
|
Term
| Globalization: Fragmentation |
|
Definition
| globalization intensifies differences, brings diverse people into contact |
|
|
Term
| Globalization: Hybridization |
|
Definition
| fusion of culture, creating new boundaries |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Necessity – only use means necessary to achieving victory, goal
2. Proportionality – can just massacre
3. Discrimination – how and who soldiers can kill
4. Mechanism – certain weapons can’t be use, in antiquity couldn’t fight on holy days |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Self-determination – government in power should represent people
2. Legitimacy – people should recognize government as legitimate
3. Civil rights (liberalism) – protection of individual rights |
|
|
Term
| How to distinguish occupation from empire? |
|
Definition
o Nation-building = building institutions, create democracy
o Occupations = peace keeping, occupy without inferring in political institutions |
|
|
Term
| What makes Occupations succeed or fail? |
|
Definition
Large Troops might aggravate native people more
Money: how much is enough? Open-ended commitment…as many as it takes… o_O
o Exhaustion – people tired of war, don’t have stomach to take up arms
o Cultural similarity: Some sort of homogeneity or connection between occupier and occupyee
o Good intelligence
o Spoilers – groups that don’t like way occupation is unfolding |
|
|
Term
What is a spoiler?
Limited Spoiler?
Total Spoiler? |
|
Definition
Total spoilers – peacekeeping that would NEVER reconcile the peace process
Limited spoilers – don’t like way things are going but have limited aims that are points of compromise |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| MAD – mutually assured destruction in Cold War |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| take out communication and intelligence sites and political leadership; |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
o Strategic arms limitation treaty
o Anti-ballistic missiles
o I. 1970’s
o II 1970’s |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| strategic arms reduction treaty |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty
five world powers, US England, France, Russia and China
o Nuclear proliferation treaty 1968 |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| development of new kinds of weapons |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| spread of already developed weapons |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| some weapons “inappropriate” to use |
|
|
Term
| Diff b/c counterforce and countervalue |
|
Definition
| Counterforce (target military) and Countervalue (nonmilitary) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| people tend to do more to recoup losses than for original gains—go to gamble and be willing to risk more to recoup losses, willing to risk less for gains in the first place—you think that a particular piece of territory belongs to you and you are willing to risk a lot more to get it back—Israel/Palestine—hapsburg empire-willing to make risks to get territory back and not loose territory-wasn’t willing to do the same to get new territory (1st level analysis, how do leaders think) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Discrete violence – discriminate killing
Mass violence – INdiscriminate killing
Suicide terrorism |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Power asymmetries – (Israel vs Hezbollah)
Vulnerability – rational actors may adopt terrorism when don’t have means or may think they may be successful |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Start off political lobbying
2. Over time…abortion still happening
3. some segment radicalizes to get people to stop “killing babies”
4. radicalizes more subgroup of subgroup…
5. terrorism as method |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| emergence of terrorists willing to us WMD |
|
|
Term
| Rwanda Crisis: Levels of Analysis |
|
Definition
level 1-individual-personalities and inter govt politics, congressional elections
level 2-beauracry—how reluctant the US was, militaries within specific countries, Belgian groups didn’t want to move in
level 3-state—political culture-1994 we just won the gulf war we don’t know what to do yet—not another somalia
level 4-international
wasn’t of key strategic importance, (realist perspective) |
|
|
