War: Causes and Prevention POL3: INTRO TO IR War occurs because there is nothing to prevent it. - Kenneth Waltz (1954)
I. War, what is it good for? Different approaches for explanation: Descriptive approach (historian view) Theoretical approach (political scientist view) Neorealists war is permanent feature of IR Anarchy and security dilemma Neoliberals possible to transcend war Rewards of cooperation (facilitated by IOs) will put pressure on periphery states Constructivists identities drive war Security dilemma is driven by identity mechanism (i.e. friend vs. foe) 2
II. War: Consequence of individuals Leaders vary in war proclivity aggressive leaders pursue war Misperceptions and communications failures Use war to extend/consolidate leadership Theodore Roosevelt 3
III. War: Consequence of domestic structures Economic structure (e.g. capitalism, socialism) Lenin s Imperialism Government structure (e.g. democracy, autocracy, theocracy) Democratic Peace: empirical fact that democracies never fight each other Diversionary warfare weak governments use conflict 4
The World of Regime Types Polity IV, 2013 5
Trending Regime Types Polity IV, 2011 6
Rally Around the Flag Nincic, 1999 7
IV. War: Consequence of int l system (im)balance of power determines conflict distributions: multipolar, bipolar, unipolar Power Transition: War occurs when a rival state challenges the dominant state Preventive war dominant state wages war on rising challenger Hegemonic Governance: War occurs when hegemon is absent or declining Alliances: commitments increase opportunities for war This perspective ignores the identity of states 8
Power Transitions: GDP per capita (absolute) 1870-1940 DE (Germany), US (United States), UK (United Kingdom), JP (Japan), BR( Brazil) 9
Power Transitions: Shares of GDP (relative) 1980-2016 10
War: A failure of institutions? Discussion topic Neoliberals may suggest war results from a failure of institutions. If collective security is built upon punishing aggressors, a burden exists to correctly identify aggression. How can we identify an aggressor in international conflicts? How might states differ in their approaches to identification? And is correct identification possible? 11
V. War: Consequence of interests Territorial wars secession, disputed borders, territorial waters, airspace Control of government intervention to change regimes e.g. Czechoslovakia 1968, Iraq 2003 12
Cross-water disputes Disputed islands in 2013 claimed by China, Japan, Taiwan Okinotor Islands claimed by Japan, but China s disputes any EEZ 13
VI. War: Consequence of ideas Nationalism self-determination of a nation e.g. Israel 1948, Palestine, Kurdistan Ethnicity self-determination of an ethno-nation e.g. Kurdistan, Kosovo Religion wars of faith e.g. 30 Years War, Islamist movements *taken from GlobalSecurity.org 14
Islam in Europe (perceived and real) *taken from The Economist, 2015 15
Many ways to arrive at a war Discussion topic As we have seen, there are many explanations of war that depend upon what level of analysis is employed and what variables are deemed important. In groups of 2-3 students, select one war from the list below. Provide at least two explanations to why this war occurred. Mexican-American War (1846-48) Spanish-American War (1898) World War I (1914-18) World War II (1939-45) Korean War (1950-53) Vietnam War (1964-75) Six Day War (1967) Iran-Iraq War (1980-88) 16
VII. Deterrence Deterrence: dissuade enemy from taking an action not yet started Nuclear weapons as deterrent force Mutual deterrence both states are deterred Proportionality, Reciprocity, Credibility e.g. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) Nuclear primacy one state has nuclear advantage e.g. US global primacy, 1945-49 (and again?) Brinkmanship: pushing dangerous events to the brink of disaster in order to achieve the most advantageous outcome 17
Indo-Pakistani Nuclear Capacity *taken from BBC, 2004 18
States with Nuclear Capacity *taken from The Economist, 2010 19
A weapon to end all wars? Discussion topic Some argue the advent of nuclear weapons makes the cost of war prohibitive. If nuclear weapons are the ultimate deterrent, should states be allowed/encouraged to proliferate? Why or why not? 20