semesternotes - Mingst ch 6 – the Individual...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Mingst ch 6 – the Individual International Relations – study of the interactions among the various ACTORS Individuals Do Individuals matter in the making of foreign policy? LIBERALS Leaders have impact on the changes in the country’s foreign policy and international relations REALISTS Leaders do not make much of the difference in foreign policy The Impact of Individual ELITES RATIONAL MODEL individuals make decisions to maximize positive outcomes posses PERFECT information examine alternatives and payoffs and chose the OPTIMAL one Many international relations theorist argue that the rational model of decisionmaking does NOT accurately reflect reality because, in actuality, individual decisionmakers: are confronted by information that is IMPERFECT and INCOMPLETE are guided by PERSONAL EXPERIENCE and BELIEFS don’t always choose the optimal solution ------------------- Mingst chapter 8; war and strife Many contend states exist in a state of anarchy; SECURITY DILEMMA This has implications for arms races; arms races are essentially action-reaction processes; as one nation arms to defend it self, another perceives this as an offensive move a vicious cycle begins. .. some examples of arms races: India/Pakistan; Arab/Israeli; US/USSR; Iran/Iraq essentially there are five approaches to managing the security dilemma: 1.(liberal, involving collaboration to manage power) – collective security – all or many states in the system collaborate in stopping an ostensibly illegal action; for it to work, potential aggressors must know of the potential for united opposition key assumptions: a. war should be prevented and will be if all nations exercise restraint b. aggressors should be stopped (problem if the aggressor cannot be identified; e.g., who is aggressor in Middle East or between India and Pakistan?)
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
c. there should be moral clarity; the coalition should be ‘right’ d. the aggressor should know that the intl. community will punish aggression; i.e. deterrence collective security did not work during cold war because of Permanent Security Council vetoes; collective security force may have escalated to world war; Korea was an exception Gulf War was beginning of new day in area of collective security 2 . (liberal) – arms control and disarmament – idea here is that decreasing the numbers of weapons will diminish the security dilemma; there have been important accords signed 1963 – Hot Line agmt. 1968 – Non-proliferation treaty; original agmt. Between superpowers as a result of Cuban Missile Crisis 1972 – Salt I; limits deployment of ABMs; also froze ICBMs and SLBMs until 1980 1979 – SALT II; limited number and type of delivery vehicles; not ratified 1991 – START I; reduced number of warheads 1995 – renewal of NPT NPT is hot topic; the Intl. Atomic Energy Agency (UN) is the guardian of the NPT; this is an international institution – remember liberals place their faith in these Keep in mind that arms control agreements do not eliminate the security dilemma;
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 12

semesternotes - Mingst ch 6 – the Individual...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online