IR 271 Final

Card Set Information

Author:
Anonymous
ID:
273268
Filename:
IR 271 Final
Updated:
2014-05-06 12:32:08
Tags:
ir 271
Folders:

Description:
ir 271 whole semester
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user Anonymous on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Why Terror Fails
    • Terror doesn't work because it relies on social support which evaporates after
    • barbarism (e.g. Beslan, 2004); Correspondent
    • inference theory: killing noncombatants signals
    • maximalist intentions (people know if they ever got in charge it would be
    • awful & why turn against them); Sometimes
    • it does work though—jewish terrorist groups that got British out of Israeli state
    • and
  2. Terrorism and Survival
    Deathstar v. Rebel; Domino logic, again; Terrorism:“The threat or use of seemingly random violence against innocents for political ends by a non-state actor”;  Terrorism is not yet a [material] existential threat: our reactions to terror may prove a bigger threat than terror
  3. Faith and Preparation (Terrorism)
    • Radicals of every religion, and many of them perpetrate acts of violence; radical Islamic terror: its common goal is the replacement of the states system with a Caliphate (civilization), which can only happen if Muslims stop sinning
    • (Salafism)
  4. Demographics, religion, and international politics
    • Sex ratios: too many males?;   
    • Age: who’s paying in? who’s consuming resources?; Group issues: what are the political
    • implications of group birthrates in democracies?; The rise of religion: the good, the bad, the ugly
  5. Surplus Males
    • Asia (India, China, Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
    • Bhutan, Brunei, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Tawain) the worst offender:
    • 68+ million surplus males in China and India alone; China
    • has changed a lot since this was published however, and has been more lenient
    • on that law… not quite as indicted; Too many [unattached] males leads to violence; Internal
    • order threatened (gangs, crime); Authoritarianism; External
    • order threatened (war a common use for surplus males); Marriage and having kids affects testosterone
    • levels
  6. Grey Dawn?
    • No pension plans can cover the aging problem;
    • and not enough young people to pay;    
    • If immigrants vote their differences, continue
    • to increase relative to established groups, and majority rule holds, expect
    • political interventions;  
    • What if the elderly refuse to “retire?”
  7. Israel's Two Front War
  8. Birthing over bullets (“wombfare”)?
    • Idea of winning by having more babies than the other; Iraq example: Shi’a v. Sunni and majority rule in “democratic” Iraq; Israel’s
    • dilemma: to keep occupied territories it will have to give up either 1)democracy or 2) Jewish majority; Solutions: Abandon occupied territories OR Incentive non-Ultraorthodox women to bear children (good luck!)
  9. Religion in Global Politics
    • An issue of distribution or salience?; Not just numbers increasing, but proportions;     
    • Modernization was made possible by religion, and modernization helped religion; The freedom-intolerance-aggregation problem; The good news? Help for the starving and poor AND Peace, peace, peace
  10. Human Rights?
    • “rights” discourse?    
    • Extending to all humans; Five
    • exceptions, three generations:   
    • Prince can boss subjects; Slavery, medical treatment in war,  TKTKTK; Three generatons Locke’s national rights, Karl Marx’s/Engels minimal material rights, and women/minority groups are the three generations

    • VNI:
    • HR as VNI or HR vs. VNI (vital national interest… human rights);  Universal
    • human rights; States
    • as primary enforcers of HR; Women’s
    • rights (CEDAW) convention for the eliminataion of all forms discrimination
    • against women
  11. Transnational Issues and Responses
    • Terror, organized crime, “failed” states;     
    • Global government for global problems?;  If
    • the problem of “government” is a balance of authority and responsibility: will
    • giving the UN responsibility be sufficient to effect positive change?;  Among the most important issues in international
    • relations: who are we, what do we hope to be?; Transnational religion: a force for ill and good?;    
    • State power has been enhanced and diminished by the plummeting costs of communications;    
    • Health, human rights, and the environment:  Linked
    • in complex ways (non-linearity); Conflict
    • and cooperation potentials both high
  12. Terrorism: The Anarchists
    • The Anarchitsts (1895-1905);    
    • The “idea” as hero;  
    • Anti-state;    
    • Leaderless resistance
  13. Globalization and Terrorism
    • Terrorism defined; Political; Non-state
    • actor;  Deliberate
    • targeting of “innocents”  (non-combatants);  Unpredictable; 

    FLAVORS:   Leftist, rightist, ethnonationalist, sacred, or religious.   Key point: pay attention to non-military power to demobilize support for extremists
  14. Global Salafi Jihad
    • Salafism: idea of collective responsibility for
    • status of Islamic world; Fatwa (Arabic term; if you’re going to have an ancient text to serve as guide some things won’t be included; ruling by
    • religious scholar to address this issue;); Osama
    • bin Laden ruled Fatwa about Westerner’s leaving;  As
    • long as threat was imminent, “infidels” could occupy Saudi soil (sacred areas);  
    • Salafi jihad: near-enemy;  Local
    • leaders who claim to represent Islam (Bin Laden etc) but are very wealthy, drink,
    • etc. and do things that are considered sins in Islam; Global Salafi jihad: far-enemy;  
    • Idea that people couldn’t topple leaders w/o
    • violence, etc;     
    • Arab Spring? =  Coordinating
    • through social media, etc.
  15. Terror Fails
    • Terror doesn’t work because it relies on social support which evaporates after barbarism (Beslan= terrorist group in Chechnya,
    • 2004); Correspondent interference theory: killing noncombatants signals of maximalist intentions
  16. The U.S. In Vietnam
    • The Cold War is dead, long live the Cold War?  
    • What realism predicts; What liberalism predicts  Who wins?   
    • But: is violence history?

    • II.            
    • The Tonkin Gulf Resolution    
    • 2 August, 1964:
    • USS Maddox attacked in international waters
    • Attackers driven off, no one killed   
    • Unprovoked?  No (OPPLAN 34a, DeSoto)
    •   No retaliation
    •  New patrol moves further out, adds C. Turner Joy    
    • 4 August, 1964: attacked again! (no)
    •  Politics (Goldwater)
    •  An announcement
    •  Pierce Arrow
    • Why the blank check? (no longer needed to go to congress w/hat in hand…easy to
    • pass) ---very important for that
  17. interests in Vietnam
    • DRV= get rid of foreigners (capitalists) [also indigenous people who are on the wrong
    • side]; Vietnamese supporters of either are “enemies of the people” =    Sought Vietnam GVN,  Unite South under Diems rule, Unite
    • Vietnam under Vietnamese rule; United states= Preserve security/independence of GVN
    • Thereby, contain communism (preserve US security); Domino logic
  18. Vietnam Escalation: 1963
    • Battle of Ap Bac;  Diem assassinated;  16k
    • U.S. “advisory” troops
  19. Vietnam Escalation: 1965
    • Da nang (coastal city; fairly large US based airforce; stuff getting attacked so Pres. Sends battalion marines to protect, but seen by North Vietnamese as serious escalation); la
    • Drang; 125k U.S. troops
  20. Vietnam Escalation: 1966
    Thieu “elected” president, arrests opposition leader; 400k U.S. troops
  21. Vietnam Escalation: 1967
    “The enemy’s hopes are bankrupt” (Westmoreland);  500k U.S. troops
  22. Vietnam Escalation: 1968, Tet
    • 31 January: DRV forces launch simultaneous
    • assaults across South Vietnam. U.S. embassy in Saigon briefly occupied. Attacks quickly repulsed, attackers suffer irreplaceable losses;
    • Tet was disaster for north in military sense;     
    • March: US
    • public opinion turns dramatically against war, LBJ announces he will not seek Democratic nomination; My Lai massacre; April: US-DRV peace talks begin in Paris; June: US GEN Creighton Abrams replaces Westmoreland as commander of US forces in Vietnam;     
    • November: Operation ROLLING THUNDER ends;
  23. Vietnam Escalation: 1969-73
    • 69: Nixon sworn in;   
    • Abrams changes US strategy (DRV militarily
    • defeated); My Lai massacre story breaks (even though happened in 68); Draft lottery begins;    
    • 70: Nixon announces 150k troops will leave; US
    • forces move into Cambodia; Kent State massacre;    
    • 72: “Peace is at hand”; Easter offensives
  24. Vietnam Aftermath
    • Military toll: US is 58k killed and 153k
    • wounded; DRV 1.25 million killed; ARVN at 250k killed;; Civilian toll: 843k North and South; 643k from 75-84 (“consolidation”);;     
    • Econmoic costs US = 150 billion
  25. Vietnam Legacies
    • Loss of faith in leadership; Dominoes; PTSD; “360
    • degree” war; a “stab in the back”
  26. Vietnam Conclusions
    • US learning in Vietname came too late; Two opposite sets of lessons; How
    • to fight insurgents effectively (barbarism v. “hearts and minds”);  How
    • to avoid fighting insurgencies (Weinberger/Powell Doctrines)
  27. Post-Cold War
    • Clash of IR theories (realism v liberal
    • institutionalism); Mearsheimer: expect a return to war in Europe; Hoffman, et. Al: Mearsheimer’s flawed logic; Voeten: sources of UN SC legitimacy; Ikenberry: liberal institutionalism explains what realism can’t
  28. Mearsheimer: Interwar
    • Causes of peace = Bipolarity
    • (symmetry); Nuclear
    • deterrence; Peace wont last;; Relative v. absolute gains; Liberal
    • arguments rely on how everyone is better off and therefore want peace; Challenges to Mueller= If fear of conventional harm I sufficient to explain peace, how did WWII happen?  If war can go out of fashion, it can also come back into fashion
  29. Critique of Mearsheimer Interwar
    • Bipolarity may have been peaceful, but maybe not a sound generalization (too few cases); Trading states (Japan): who says states must compete militarily?;      
    • Keohane: institutional inertia   
    • Bismarck analogy? (US after Cold War= Germany
    • 1890)
  30. Ikenberry: Liberal Institutionalism Works
    • Roots of post-war order predate actors’
    • understanding of bipolarity;     Two orders; Containment
    • (e.g. NATO); Commerce
    • (e.g. World Bank, GATT, IMF);     
    • “Benevolent” hegemony?
  31. Pinkner's Challenge: Trends
    • An empirical argument: ALL sorts of violence
    • have declined; Trends: The pacification process (Hobbes); The
    • humanitarian revolution (Enlightenment); The
    • new peace (follows the long peace; The
    • rights revolution (women’s rights); Causes: Explaining
    • the decline= Rise of the novel (empathy; mass literacy), Moral “Flynn effect” (scores, since
    • administered, significantly risen since first given); Are
    • the trends unidirectional? (what keeps them going in the same direction?)  If
    • they are, is violence the only way to harm us?
    • If they are, is the amount of harm that can
    • punctuate the trend catastrophic?
  32. Film Review: Judgment at Nuremberg
    • Rolf’s defense: 1) we didn’t know; 2) taken in context, the judges interventions saved
    • lives; 3) guilt must be shared (cf. Versailles);  Haywood’s
    • summation: let justice be done no matter what
  33. Film Review: Apocalypse Now
    • “up the river” (“never get off the boat”): Isn’t context everything?;  Both films summarize key themes in a main character monologue near the end. AN argues that war is necessarily amoral, while J@N argues that we can never abandon our principles even under the most
    • extreme duress. Agree with Kurtz, Haywood, or both?
  34. Indochina: 1946-1954; First Indochina War
    Colonial war; China, Korea, and containment;  Viet minh resistance: nationalist or socialist?; Dien Bien Phu (March-May 1954)
  35. France in Indochina
    France formally incorporates “Indochina” in 1887; In WWII, Japan attacks “French Indochina” and uses local French administration to govern; Japan surrenders in August of 1945, Ho Chi Minh declares democratic republic in September
  36. France V. Viet Minh
    • France wants Indochina back (priority on
    • Vietnam);National pride (humiliation from WWII); Resources for reconstruction;  
    • French forces mostly made up of Legionnaires,
    • heavily supported by the United States;     
    • Body blows: PRC (1949) and border outposts
    • destroyed (1950)
  37. Dien Bien Phu Situation: Forces
    • French (De Castries): 16k soldiers, including some allied troops (e.g. Thai’s);
    •  Viet Minh (Giap): 50k combat troops, 55k support troops
  38. Dien Bien Phu Situation: Ground
    French entrenched on a series of hills in a valley; Viet Minh command high ground
  39. Dien Bien Phu Situation: The Fight
    • 12 March= 1) massive artillery barrage (direct fire); 2) Beatrice and Gabrielle fall (french fortified positions); 3) Viet Minh lose at least 2,500 killed; April: 1) sallies and combat engineers; 2) the noose tightens;;
    •  1 May= Giap launches massive coordinated attacks; Domnique, Huguette, and Elaine
    • overrun; French ammunition, food, and water dwindling (pretty much gone);  7
    • May= 1) final assault (25k Viet Minh v. 3k French); 2) 5:30 p.m., De Castries
    • surrenders; 3) Isabelle holds out for another 24 hours; Losses= 1) France= 2,200 killed; 10k prisoners; 2) Viet Minh= 8k killed, 15k wounded
  40. Aftermath Vietnam
    • Viet Minh expect to gain unified Vietnam;
    • instead gain North Vietnam (17th parallel) pending national elections, July 1956 (betrayed by China); Massive refugee flows (communists north, Catholics south). North abides by treaty agreement, South does not;; Government of both North and South a disaster from 1954-1964;;  Revolutionaries suck at government!!!
  41. The US in Vietnam
    • 1955-65: 1) Korea, again? 2) a free South by
    • Proxy 3) the trouble with Diem;     
    • 1964= the Tonkin Gulf Resolution;    
    • 1965-68= 1) tactical victory, strategic
    • defeat; 2) Tet; 
    • 1969-75= 1) strategic victory, the US
    • withdraws (1973); 2) the fall of Saigon (1975); 3) a bitter end
  42. Tonkin Gulf Resolution
    • 2 August 1964: 1) USS Maddox attacked in
    • international waters; 2) attackers driven off, no one killed
  43. Middle East as Model
    • Bush and Sharon: terrorism as a vital national interest (survival threat?); attack of Islamic “Right” empowers Christian and Jewish “Right”?
    •  Democracy problems: Hamas wins Palestinian Authority elections of 2006; We can’t assume democratic [middle eastern] states will be strategic partners (democratic peace?)
  44. Middle East Conclusions
    • Early Arab-Israeli wars marked by atrocities on
    • both sides, but the strong always judged more harshly than the weak;
    • The Obama Administration has tried and failed to persuade the current Israeli government to change its settlement policies. Threat to Israel goes up; 
    • Threat has supply and demand side to it. Assume that the demand is constant (hate because of Jewish, not policies).
    •    
    • Issues    
    • US security and prosperity hostage to Israeli
    • policy?   
    • Domestic constraints on rational policy:
    • Israel lobby (diaspora conservatism)
    • Petroleum dependence
  45. Mid East Review/Terrorism
    • Terrorism: aided Palestinian Jews in their
    • struggle to win a state; some Palestinian Arabs still hope to do the same; Yom Kippur War= Limited aims, Israeli blind spot, Military
    • defeat makes political victory (cf. Vietnam), Moderates beware (both sides have lost leaders; Peace demands= Recognition
    • of what counts as harm on both sides, Compromise on Jerusalem (Jews) and ’48 refugees (Arabs)
  46. Globalizing Issues
    Health and plague; The global environment; Human rights;Transnational terror and crime; Global environment?
  47. Priority of the State
    • Railroad, container ship, etc change things; 
    • States still rule, but rule differently;  
    • Plummetting communications costs have had
    • unintended consequences (both good and bad);   
    • Quantity and pace of new information has
    • complicated state decision-making more than it has facilitated it
  48. Health and Plague
    • Greater threat to human existence than nuclear
    • war;  World Health Organization (WHO);
    • Religious conservatism and world health (many
    • have trouble with two sides of the world: science and health); HIV/AIDS;Moral hazard
  49. The Global Environment
    • Linkage makes for complexity and non-linearity; Look up pacific gyre; Golden rules underline weaknesses of some states
    • vis-à-vis MNCs; 
    • Overall population growth declining (social
    • utility of ‘degradation’ narratives?)

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview