2.20-2.22afp

2.20-2.22afp - American Foreign Policy 15:07:00 ← –...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: American Foreign Policy 20/02/2007 15:07:00 ← February 20, 2007 – Cuban Missile Crisis ← ← 1961: Bay of Pigs; Berlin Wall up ← 1962: Cuban Missile Crisis ← 1963: Hotline; Nuclear Test Ban ← 1964: China goes nuclear ← ← INTRO CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS ← Jockeying for position ← Problem: what happens when nuclear powers go toe-to-toe? ← What are Americas responses? • Assertive • ExCom (Executive Committee): America makes smart responses and learns quickly from mistakes • Hotline and Nuclear Test Ban Treaty are smart policies ← Why does Cuban Missile Crisis matter so much (to spend a whole class on it)? • Great lesson in proliferation and what happens when nuclear states go head-to-head • Important question: why didn’t we get war in this situation? • Also, helps to examine why we didn’t get nuclear war CONCEPTS Concept 1 = counterfactuals : good reasoning exercise Concept 2 = Tom Schelling • Comes up with manipulation of risk • If someone is willing to take more risk and ‘rock the boat,’ you need to be the one to steady the boat • Tests of determination and resolve: if someone asks you to play chicken, you say yes • Schelling strategy: gradual escalation (e.g. “had enough? How about now?”) o Flip side of gradual escalation is gradual cooperation ← Concept 3 = Wohlstetter • Question of where should we put our nuclear weapons/bombers? o Some think answer is to put it as close as possible to your opponents’ borders/ your borders o Wohlstetter says this is wrong – get your bombers as far away from border was possible, b/c if close to border they are easier to hit ← Concept 4 = Graham Allison • Allison has three models for decision-making o 1) rational actor model (realism ) o 2) bureaucratic politics and organizational model boils down to principal-agent problems two key problems with principal-agent issues 1) how do you detect when someone screws up? 2) when someone messes up, how do you corral them? Oversight difficult because everyone is the expert Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) = organizational routine E.g. “Every Tuesday, you should do X” This gets a lot of moving parts to cooperate towards a particular goal o 3) Bargaining model bargaining among the people with a seat at the table • how do Allison’s models stack up against 1/2/3-image models? o Model 1 is 3 rd image o Models 2 and 3 are 1 st and 2 nd image Actor(s) Goal(s) Policy process Key concepts Rational Actor The state National interest Maximize utility Goals Options Consequence Choose Organizational Process (choosing POLI 211) Top decision makers and organizations Organizational goals “Satisficing” presented w/ options and take first that seems acceptable-Blunt instruments-Standard operating procedure-change incrementally-sequential attention to goals Bureaucratic Process (going to pub) Individual decision makers Individual goals Bargaining putting together coalitions...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/08/2008 for the course POLS W3631 taught by Professor Parent during the Spring '08 term at Columbia.

Page1 / 18

2.20-2.22afp - American Foreign Policy 15:07:00 ← –...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

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