Preview Extract
Chapter 2: Interpreting Power: A Levels-of-Analysis Approach Classroom Analytical Activities And Discussion Questions Although the following activities focus on classroom activities, they also can serve as outside assignments with slight modifications. 1. Select a current international crisis between two or more countries. Ask students to consider how they would handle that situation if: • the UN was a powerful world government. • a regional organization such as the EU had exten¬sive powers in that region. • one of the states involved was part of an extensive alliance network. • the issue was one involving an international regime such as air travel or whaling. • an intergovernmental organization such as the IMF was concerned about this issue. • a nongovernmental organization such as the Red Cross had significant power to address this issue. Debrief by asking students what these different scenarios suggest about how different types of actors with different amounts of power can influence international political processes. Let's consider a current international crisis between two or more countries. One relevant example could be the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. We'll analyze how different types of actors with varying degrees of power could handle this situation. 1. UN as a powerful world government: If the UN were a powerful world government, it might intervene more directly in the conflict, possibly imposing sanctions or deploying peacekeeping forces to the region. It could also facilitate diplomatic negotiations and enforce international law to resolve the crisis. 2. Regional organization such as the EU: The EU, with extensive powers in the region, could use its influence to mediate the conflict, offer economic incentives for peace, and coordinate humanitarian aid to affected areas. It could also impose sanctions and provide a platform for diplomatic dialogue. 3. State in an extensive alliance network: A state in an extensive alliance network, such as NATO member countries, might provide military support or defense guarantees to the affected state, deterring further aggression and signaling solidarity with the victimized country. 4. Issue involving an international regime: If the crisis involved an international regime, such as air travel or whaling, relevant international agreements and protocols could be invoked to address the specific issue within the broader context of the crisis, ensuring compliance and cooperation among states. 5. Intergovernmental organization such as the IMF: The IMF, concerned about the economic impacts of the crisis, could offer financial assistance to affected countries, stabilize regional economies, and promote economic cooperation as a means to mitigate the crisis's effects. 6. Nongovernmental organization such as the Red Cross: The Red Cross, with significant power to address humanitarian issues, could provide essential aid and support to affected populations, regardless of political considerations, thereby alleviating human suffering and promoting peace efforts. Overall, these different scenarios suggest that actors with varying degrees of power can influence international political processes in diverse ways. While powerful entities like the UN and regional organizations can exert direct influence through diplomatic, economic, and military means, smaller actors such as NGOs can play critical roles in addressing humanitarian aspects of crises and promoting peacebuilding efforts. Understanding these dynamics helps illustrate the complex interplay of power in global politics. 2. Ask students to identify the concerns that theorists who study power and power tran¬sitions at the international level may have. Challenge them to support their positions with historical examples. Theorists who study power and power transitions at the international level may have several key concerns, which can be supported by historical examples: 1. Power Shifts and Balances: One concern is how power shifts and balances among states can lead to stability or instability in the international system. For example, the rise of Germany as a dominant power in Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries upset the balance of power and contributed to the outbreak of World War I. 2. Rise and Fall of Great Powers: Another concern is the rise and fall of great powers and how these transitions can impact global politics. The decline of the British Empire and the rise of the United States as a superpower during and after World War II is a prominent example. 3. War and Conflict: Theorists may also be concerned about how power dynamics can lead to war and conflict. The rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War is a prime example of how power struggles can fuel international tensions. 4. Alliances and Coalitions: The formation of alliances and coalitions to balance power is another area of concern. The formation of NATO in response to Soviet expansionism is a notable example of states coming together to counterbalance a perceived threat. 5. Global Governance: Theorists may also be concerned about the effectiveness of global governance structures in managing power relations. The United Nations' ability to prevent conflicts and promote peace is a subject of ongoing debate and concern among scholars. 6. Economic Power: The role of economic power in international relations is another concern. The rise of China as a major economic power and its implications for the global economy and geopolitics are areas of interest for theorists studying power transitions. Overall, theorists studying power and power transitions at the international level are concerned with understanding how changes in power dynamics impact the stability of the international system, the likelihood of conflict, and the effectiveness of global governance mechanisms. Historical examples provide valuable insights into these complex dynamics and help to illustrate the theoretical concepts at play. 3. Select a current international situation (for instance, a conflict between two countries). Have students work in small groups in class to explain how they could resolve the situations using one of the polar systems. Allow the groups to explain their solutions to the class, including defin¬ing the power status of the countries involved, the rules for the polar system they chose, and why they chose that polar system. Let's consider a current international situation, such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. We'll outline how students could resolve this situation using one of the polar systems, such as the bipolar system during the Cold War. 1. Defining the power status of the countries involved: In the bipolar system, the two primary powers are the United States and the Soviet Union. In the context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Russia would be analogous to the Soviet Union as a major power, and Ukraine would represent a smaller, less powerful state. 2. Rules for the chosen polar system: In a bipolar system, the key rule is maintaining a balance of power between the two dominant states to prevent direct conflict. This often involves alliances, deterrence, and diplomacy. 3. How to resolve the situation: Students could propose a solution where the United States and Russia, as the two major powers, engage in diplomatic negotiations to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict. This could involve the United States acting as a mediator, offering incentives for de-escalation, and ensuring that both sides' interests are taken into account. 4. Why they chose that polar system: Students might choose the bipolar system because it provides a clear framework for managing power dynamics between two major actors. By emphasizing the need for balance and stability, the bipolar system offers a structured approach to conflict resolution. Overall, using the bipolar system as a framework for resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict would involve diplomatic efforts to maintain a balance of power and prevent further escalation. This exercise encourages students to think critically about different theoretical approaches to international relations and how they can be applied to real-world situations. 4. Ask students to write a two-sentence description of their foreign policy views (e.g., aggressive/passive; cooperative/uncooperative). Then set up several Risk boards in a number of different configurations and ask students to discuss the alliances that they would expect. Assign students to play in teams or as individuals, but, before they begin, they must share their foreign policy statements with the other players. Afterward, ask students to discuss how the statements shaped their perceptions of other players and of the security situation. Also, discuss any differences in perception that arise between students who played in teams (democratic structures) and those who played as individuals (authoritarian structures). We can imagine students' foreign policy views and how they might influence their strategic decisions in a game like Risk: 1. Foreign policy views: Students could describe their foreign policy views in two sentences. For example, one student might describe their views as cooperative and passive, preferring diplomacy and avoiding conflict whenever possible. Another student might describe their views as aggressive and uncooperative, prioritizing national interests and willing to use force if necessary. 2. Setting up the game: Several Risk boards are set up in different configurations. Students are assigned to play in teams or as individuals. Before the game begins, each player shares their foreign policy statement with the other players. 3. Playing the game: During the game, players make strategic decisions based on their foreign policy views. Cooperative players might seek alliances and negotiate peace treaties, while aggressive players might focus on expanding their territories through force. 4. Post-game discussion: After the game, students discuss how their foreign policy statements shaped their perceptions of other players and the security situation. Cooperative players may have viewed aggressive players with suspicion, while aggressive players may have seen cooperative players as potential targets or weak opponents. 5. Differences in perception: Students who played in teams (democratic structures) may have had more nuanced and balanced perceptions, as they would have needed to consider the views of their teammates. In contrast, students who played as individuals (authoritarian structures) may have had more rigid and biased perceptions, focusing solely on their own interests and strategies. Overall, this activity encourages students to consider the role of foreign policy in shaping international relations, as well as the impact of different decision-making structures on perceptions and strategic outcomes. 5. Challenge students to describe the international political system of the future. Include types of actors and their relative strength, num¬ber of poles, power distributions among them, the norms of behavior, scope and level of interaction, and the geo¬graphic factors that will exist. To describe the international political system of the future, we can consider several key aspects: 1. Types of actors and their relative strength: The future international political system is likely to include a mix of state and non-state actors, with non-state actors such as multinational corporations, NGOs, and international organizations playing increasingly important roles alongside traditional nation-states. The relative strength of these actors will depend on factors such as economic power, technological capabilities, and influence over global norms and institutions. 2. Number of poles and power distributions: The international system of the future may be characterized by a multipolar or even a nonpolar distribution of power, with several major powers exerting significant influence on global affairs. The distribution of power is likely to be more diffuse than in the past, with emerging powers such as China, India, and Brazil playing increasingly prominent roles alongside established powers like the United States and the European Union. 3. Norms of behavior: The future international system may be shaped by norms that emphasize cooperation, inclusivity, and respect for human rights and international law. However, competing norms, such as those promoting national sovereignty or emphasizing power politics, may also influence behavior in the international arena. 4. Scope and level of interaction: Advances in technology and communication are likely to increase the scope and level of interaction in the future international system. States and non-state actors will be more interconnected than ever before, leading to both increased cooperation and competition across a wide range of issues. 5. Geographic factors: Geographic factors will continue to play a significant role in shaping the international political system, with regions such as Asia, Africa, and Latin America becoming increasingly important centers of economic and political power. Environmental factors, such as climate change and resource scarcity, may also influence the geopolitical landscape. Overall, the international political system of the future is likely to be characterized by complexity, diversity, and rapid change, requiring actors to adapt to new challenges and opportunities in order to effectively navigate the global landscape. 6. In the eighteenth century, Immanuel Kant argued that when citizens have a choice about going to war they are not likely to fight. Ask the class if they agree with Kant. Point out to students that war was the popular reaction in the United States to the terrorist attacks of September 11th, and ask them whether this reaction supports or contradicts their positions? Have students discuss whether U.S. citizens had a choice with respect to engaging in the “war on terror¬ism”? Immanuel Kant's argument that citizens are not likely to fight when they have a choice about going to war raises significant questions about the nature of war and the factors that influence individuals and nations to engage in conflict. The example of the United States' reaction to the terrorist attacks of September 11th provides a compelling case study for considering Kant's argument. On one hand, the immediate response of the United States to the 9/11 attacks was a declaration of a "war on terrorism," indicating a willingness to engage in military action. This initial reaction might suggest that Kant's argument does not hold, as the nation seemed ready to go to war despite having a choice. However, it is essential to consider the context in which this decision was made. The shock and horror of the attacks, combined with a strong sense of national unity and the desire to prevent future attacks, likely influenced the decision to respond militarily. In this light, one could argue that while citizens technically had a choice, the emotional and psychological impact of the attacks made war a more palatable option. Moreover, the political and social environment in the aftermath of 9/11 may have created a perception of limited choices. The government, media, and public discourse emphasized the need for a strong response to terrorism, framing military action as a necessary and justifiable course of action. This framing may have influenced public opinion and policymakers, narrowing the perceived range of options available. In conclusion, while Kant's argument about citizens' choices and war may have some validity, the complexities of individual and collective decision-making in the context of national security and crisis situations suggest that the relationship between choice and war is not straightforward. The example of the U.S. response to 9/11 highlights the importance of considering multiple factors, including emotions, perceptions, and societal pressures, in understanding why nations choose to engage in war. 7. Ask students to consider the claim that democracies are unsafe vehicles for for¬eign policy formation. Ask what arguments they can make opposing or supporting the position. Determine which arguments sides are most persuasive and why? Also, have the students determine evidence that supports the arguments. The claim that democracies are unsafe vehicles for foreign policy formation is a complex and contentious issue that has been debated by scholars and policymakers for decades. Here are some arguments opposing and supporting this position, along with evidence that can be used to support these arguments: Opposing the Claim: 1. Democratic Accountability: Democracies are accountable to their citizens through regular elections, which can lead to more cautious and transparent foreign policy decision-making. This accountability can prevent leaders from engaging in risky or aggressive foreign policies. • Evidence: Examples of democracies changing their foreign policies in response to public opinion or electoral outcomes. 2. Checks and Balances: Many democracies have systems of checks and balances that limit the power of the executive in foreign policy decision-making. This can prevent hasty or ill-considered actions. • Evidence: Examples of democratic legislatures or judiciaries blocking or modifying executive foreign policy decisions. 3. Public Debate: Democracies often have vibrant public debates about foreign policy, which can lead to more informed decision-making and consideration of alternative perspectives. • Evidence: Media coverage, public discussions, and parliamentary debates on foreign policy issues in democracies. Supporting the Claim: 1. Short-Term Focus: Democratic leaders may prioritize short-term electoral gains over long-term foreign policy considerations, leading to inconsistent or reactive policies. • Evidence: Examples of democracies changing foreign policies abruptly due to changes in leadership or electoral cycles. 2. Populist Pressures: Public opinion in democracies can be influenced by populist movements or media, which may push for simplistic or aggressive foreign policy stances. • Evidence: Instances where populist leaders or movements have influenced foreign policy decisions in democracies. 3. Policy Gridlock: Democratic decision-making processes, such as legislative debates or coalition politics, can lead to policy gridlock and indecision in foreign policy. • Evidence: Examples of democracies struggling to reach consensus on foreign policy issues due to internal disagreements. In determining which arguments are most persuasive, students should consider the specific context and examples provided. It is also important to recognize that the effectiveness of democracies in foreign policy formation can vary depending on factors such as institutional design, political culture, and the nature of the international system. 8. Although democracies seem as likely as autocracies to be involved in international conflicts, they do seem less likely to be at war with each other. Ask students how they ac¬count for this pattern. Determine if they can identify examples of this pattern operating today. The pattern of democracies being less likely to be at war with each other, known as the democratic peace theory, is a significant phenomenon in international relations. There are several explanations for this pattern: 1. Norms and Values: Democracies often share common norms and values, such as respect for individual rights, the rule of law, and peaceful conflict resolution. These shared values can reduce the likelihood of conflict between democratic states. • Example: The European Union, composed mainly of democratic states, has maintained peace among its members for several decades. 2. Institutional Constraints: Democracies tend to have institutional mechanisms, such as independent judiciaries, free media, and legislative oversight, that constrain leaders' ability to engage in aggressive foreign policies. This can reduce the risk of conflicts escalating to war. • Example: The United States and Canada have a long history of peaceful relations, in part due to their democratic institutions and shared values. 3. Public Opinion and Accountability: In democracies, leaders are accountable to the public through elections. Public opinion often favors peaceful resolutions to conflicts, making leaders more hesitant to engage in war. • Example: Public opposition to the Iraq War in many democratic countries, such as the UK and Germany, influenced their governments' decisions on military intervention. 4. Trade and Interdependence: Democracies tend to engage in trade and economic cooperation with each other, creating interdependencies that make war less attractive and more costly. • Example: The economic ties between the United States and European democracies have been cited as a factor in maintaining peace among these countries. 5. Democratic Foreign Policy Processes: Democracies often have more transparent and participatory foreign policy processes, which can lead to greater scrutiny and debate before engaging in war, reducing the likelihood of rash decisions. • Example: The debate in the US Congress over military intervention in Syria in 2013 highlighted the role of democratic processes in shaping foreign policy decisions. In contemporary times, examples of this pattern include the peaceful relations between democratic countries in Western Europe, North America, and East Asia. Despite occasional tensions, these regions have largely avoided war among democratic states, supporting the democratic peace theory. 9. Encourage students to consider the ways in which American political culture affects United States foreign policy. Have them identify the aspects of history, its belief system, and its attitude to the rest of the world that they believe have an impact upon the making of United States foreign policy. Using this information, challenge the students to predict elements of United States foreign policy in the post–cold war era. Assign students to follow the news during the semester and determine if any of their predictions seem to emerge. Ad the end of the semesters, have students discuss their findings. American political culture has a significant impact on United States foreign policy, shaping its approach to the rest of the world. Several aspects of American history, belief systems, and attitudes influence the making of U.S. foreign policy: 1. Historical Factors: The history of the United States, including its experiences with colonization, independence, expansionism, and global conflicts like World War II and the Cold War, has shaped its view of its role in the world. This history has led to a belief in American exceptionalism and a sense of duty to promote democracy and freedom globally. 2. Belief System: The belief in democracy, individual liberty, and free-market capitalism is central to American political culture and often guides U.S. foreign policy. There is a belief that spreading these values can lead to a more stable and prosperous world. 3. Attitude Towards the Rest of the World: American political culture often reflects a mix of isolationism and interventionism. The United States has a history of avoiding entangling alliances (as seen in the Monroe Doctrine) but has also intervened in various parts of the world to promote its interests and values. Predicting elements of U.S. foreign policy in the post-Cold War era based on these aspects of American political culture can lead to several possibilities: • Promotion of Democracy: Given the belief in democracy as a core American value, the U.S. may continue to prioritize promoting democratic governance in other countries, even through intervention if necessary. • Focus on Security: The U.S. may maintain a strong focus on national security, especially in the face of new threats such as terrorism and cyber attacks. • Economic Interests: Economic interests may continue to play a significant role in U.S. foreign policy, with a focus on expanding markets and ensuring access to resources. • Multilateral Engagement: While the U.S. has historically been wary of multilateral institutions, there may be increased engagement with international organizations to address global challenges such as climate change and pandemics. Assigning students to follow the news during the semester and track their predictions can provide valuable insights into how American political culture shapes U.S. foreign policy decisions. At the end of the semester, students can discuss their findings and reflect on the complexities of predicting and understanding U.S. foreign policy in the post-Cold War era. 10. Ask the class to identify times they were in a group situation (for example, among friends or in a club) where “groupthink” influenced a decision-making process. Ask them which elements of groupthink are most apparent, and why? Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group's desire for consensus and harmony overrides its ability to critically evaluate alternatives or consider dissenting viewpoints. Students may have experienced groupthink in various group situations, such as among friends, in clubs, or even in academic settings. Here's how students might identify elements of groupthink and why they are apparent: 1. Pressure for Conformity: In group situations, there is often a pressure to conform to the majority opinion or the leader's viewpoint. This pressure can result in individuals suppressing their own doubts or reservations about a decision. • Example: In a group project among friends, there may be pressure to agree with the majority's approach, even if some members have reservations about its effectiveness. 2. Illusion of Invulnerability: Groups may develop a sense of invulnerability, believing that their decisions are infallible and that negative outcomes are unlikely. • Example: A sports team might convince themselves that their strategy is flawless and that they are guaranteed to win, ignoring potential weaknesses or risks. 3. Rationalization: Group members may engage in rationalization to justify their decisions, dismissing or minimizing concerns raised by dissenting voices. • Example: In a club committee meeting, members might rationalize a controversial decision by emphasizing the perceived benefits and downplaying potential drawbacks. 4. Stereotyping of Outsiders: Groupthink can lead to the stereotyping of outsiders or dissenters as being incompetent, irrational, or disloyal. • Example: A group of friends might dismiss a dissenting opinion as being uninformed or out of touch with the group's values, rather than considering its validity. 5. Self-Censorship: Individuals may self-censor their opinions or concerns to avoid conflict or maintain group harmony. • Example: A student might choose not to voice their reservations about a group project's direction to avoid disagreement with their peers. In identifying these elements of groupthink, students can reflect on the dynamics of group decision-making and recognize the importance of fostering an environment that encourages critical thinking, open discussion, and consideration of diverse perspectives. By understanding the pitfalls of groupthink, students can work towards making more informed and effective decisions in group settings. 11. Pose the following question to the class: “Do you think that U.S. foreign policy would be different if we had a woman president and most members of Congress were women?” During class discuss, encourage the students to identify if women have innately different values from men when it comes to foreign policy? Present the idea that the events would force women to pursue similar that were similar to the policies of the men if women occupied positions of power. The question of whether U.S. foreign policy would be different with a woman president and a Congress predominantly made up of women is a complex one that involves considerations of gender, values, and political dynamics. Here are some key points to consider: 1. Gender and Values: Research suggests that women in positions of power may approach foreign policy differently than men, as they may prioritize issues such as human rights, diplomacy, and conflict resolution. This is not to say that all women have the same values or that they are inherently different from men, but rather that gender can influence perspectives and priorities. 2. Political Dynamics: However, it is also important to consider the broader political context in which women leaders operate. Women in positions of power may face similar constraints and pressures as their male counterparts, including the need to respond to national security threats, uphold alliances, and navigate complex geopolitical relationships. 3. Intersectionality: It is crucial to recognize that gender intersects with other identities, such as race, class, and ideology, which can further shape individuals' approaches to foreign policy. A woman president or female-dominated Congress may include diverse perspectives that go beyond a singular "female" approach to foreign policy. 4. Historical Precedents: Looking at historical examples of women in leadership roles, such as former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright or German Chancellor Angela Merkel, we see that their foreign policies were shaped by a combination of personal values, political considerations, and external circumstances. In conclusion, while the gender composition of political leadership can influence foreign policy, it is not the sole determining factor. Women leaders would likely face similar challenges and constraints as their male counterparts, and their policies would likely be shaped by a complex interplay of factors. It is essential to avoid essentializing gender differences and to recognize the diversity of perspectives within any group, including women in positions of power. 12. Present the fact that some scholars suggest that the world’s situation would improve if all inhabitants thought of themselves as citizens of the world. Ask if they agree or disagree, and explore such questions as: • How might U.S. policy toward the less developed coun¬tries be different if the U.S. had pursued global interests rather than national interests? • How would most U.S. citizens respond to this policy? • How would citizens in Germany, Japan, or France respond if their countries pursued a similar policy? The idea that global issues would improve if all inhabitants thought of themselves as citizens of the world is a concept rooted in cosmopolitanism, which emphasizes the importance of global cooperation and a sense of shared humanity. While this idea is idealistic, it raises several important questions about the role of national interests versus global interests in shaping policy and how different populations might respond to such a shift in priorities: 1. U.S. Policy Toward Less Developed Countries: If the U.S. were to prioritize global interests over national interests, its policy toward less developed countries might be more focused on promoting development, reducing poverty, and addressing global challenges such as climate change and pandemics. This could involve increased foreign aid, technology transfer, and support for international institutions. 2. Response of U.S. Citizens: The response of U.S. citizens to such a policy shift would likely be mixed. Some may support the idea of global citizenship and see it as a moral imperative, while others may prioritize national interests and be concerned about the impact on domestic issues such as job security and economic growth. 3. Response of Citizens in Other Countries: Citizens in countries like Germany, Japan, or France might similarly have mixed responses. Some may see the benefits of a more globally oriented policy, especially in terms of addressing shared challenges, while others may be wary of perceived sacrifices in terms of national sovereignty or resources. 4. Challenges of Implementation: Implementing a policy based on global interests rather than national interests would face significant challenges, including reconciling competing priorities among different countries, addressing power imbalances, and overcoming nationalist sentiments. In conclusion, while the idea of global citizenship and cooperation is appealing in theory, the reality of international relations is complex, and any shift toward a more globally oriented policy would require careful consideration of both the benefits and challenges involved. Understanding and balancing national and global interests is a fundamental challenge for policymakers and citizens alike in today's interconnected world. Out-Of-Class Activities 1. Review several sources of news media for the past month. For each international news item found, note the name of the major actor(s) involved, the type(s) of actor(s), the issue at hand, the actions taken, and the outcome. Organize your results into a table. What tentative conclusions might you draw from analyzing this information? How would your table be different if you used news sources from the 1930s? The 1890s? What tentative conclusions might you make about the chang¬ing nature of actors in international politics since 1930? Since 1890? You would first need to review several sources of news media from the past month and compile a list of international news items. For each item, you would note the major actors involved, the types of actors, the issue at hand, the actions taken, and the outcome. You would then organize this information into a table. Here is an example of how your table might look: Tentative conclusions from analyzing this information could include identifying patterns of behavior among different types of actors, such as states, non-state actors, and international organizations, in responding to various issues. For example, states may use economic measures like tariffs to address trade disputes, while non-state actors may use protests to advocate for environmental policies. If you were to use news sources from the 1930s or the 1890s, your table would likely be different in terms of the actors involved and the issues at hand. In the 1930s, for example, you might see major state actors like Germany, Italy, and Japan taking actions related to territorial expansion and militarization, leading to outcomes such as the outbreak of World War II. In the 1890s, you might see colonial powers like Britain and France engaging in imperial expansion, often at the expense of indigenous populations. Analyzing these differences could lead to tentative conclusions about the changing nature of actors in international politics. Since 1930, there has been a significant increase in the number and influence of non-state actors, such as multinational corporations, NGOs, and international organizations, alongside traditional state actors. This trend reflects a more complex and interconnected global system, where power is distributed among a wider array of actors than in previous eras. Similarly, since 1890, there has been a shift from a largely colonial world order to a more diverse and multipolar system, with emerging powers challenging the dominance of traditional Western powers. 2. As the 1991 conflict in the Persian Gulf demonstrates, re-source distribution can be a significant factor in inter¬national politics. Obtain a list of materials regarded as essential for U.S. industry and defense. In a table, list those materials, the sources of them and the percentage of U.S. consumption from each source, the uses of that material, and our strategic reserves. (Hypothetical exam¬ple: Uranium; South Africa, 43%; nuclear weapons and energy; 8 months.) Using this information, identify other world regions or countries where you expect the United States to intervene when threatened by a hostile power. Defend your answer. You would first need to obtain a list of materials regarded as essential for U.S. industry and defense. You would then create a table listing these materials, their sources, the percentage of U.S. consumption from each source, the uses of each material, and the strategic reserves for each. Here is an example of how your table might look: Using this information, you can identify other world regions or countries where you expect the United States to intervene when threatened by a hostile power. For example, if the U.S. is heavily dependent on a particular material sourced from a region where there is political instability or a hostile power, the U.S. may intervene to ensure continued access to that resource. Additionally, if a hostile power controls a significant portion of a critical resource, the U.S. may intervene to protect its interests. In the case of the materials listed above, the U.S. may be more likely to intervene in regions such as the Middle East (for oil), China (for rare earth elements), and South America (for lithium) if its access to these materials is threatened by a hostile power. These interventions could take the form of diplomatic efforts to secure access, economic sanctions, or even military action if deemed necessary to protect U.S. interests. 3. Select a current U.S. foreign policy and study it. Seek to answer the following questions: • What is its goal? • Do you agree with the goal? • What means achieved that goal? • Do you agree with the means? • Are they the most effective means? • What are the costs and benefits of this policy and the means used to achieve them? After reaching an informed conclusion about U.S. policy in this area, express your support for the current policy or try to change it through whatever methods seem most appropriate to you. You would first need to select a current U.S. foreign policy to study. Let's use the U.S. policy towards Iran as an example: 1. Goal: The goal of the U.S. policy towards Iran is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, to curb its support for terrorism, and to address other concerns related to its regional activities. 2. Agreement with the goal: Your personal agreement or disagreement with this goal would depend on your own beliefs and values. Some may argue that preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is crucial for regional stability, while others may believe in a more diplomatic approach. 3. Means to achieve the goal: The means used to achieve this goal include economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, and the threat of military action. 4. Agreement with the means: Your agreement or disagreement with the means used would also depend on your perspective. Some may argue that sanctions and diplomatic pressure are necessary to change Iran's behavior, while others may believe that these measures are too harsh and ineffective. 5. Effectiveness of the means: The effectiveness of the means used is a matter of debate. While sanctions have had a significant impact on Iran's economy, it is unclear if they have been successful in changing Iran's behavior regarding its nuclear program or support for terrorism. 6. Costs and benefits: The costs of this policy include economic hardship for the Iranian people, strained diplomatic relations, and the risk of military conflict. The benefits could include preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and reducing its support for terrorism. Based on your analysis, you can then express your support for the current policy or suggest changes. For example, you might argue for a more diplomatic approach, increased engagement with Iran, or a reevaluation of the effectiveness of sanctions. Your conclusion should be based on a thorough analysis of the policy and its implications. 4. Research any contemporary international issue. Analyze and describe the situation from the perspective of a(n) • Individual-level analyst • State-level analyst • System-level analyst You would first need to select a contemporary international issue to research. Let's use the conflict in Ukraine as an example: 1. Individual-level analysis: An individual-level analyst might focus on the role of key individuals in the conflict, such as Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. They might analyze their personalities, beliefs, and actions to understand how they have influenced the conflict. For example, Putin's desire to restore Russian influence in the region and Zelensky's efforts to assert Ukrainian sovereignty could be seen as driving forces behind the conflict. 2. State-level analysis: A state-level analyst might focus on the actions and interactions of states involved in the conflict, such as Russia, Ukraine, and Western countries. They might analyze the strategic interests of these states, their military capabilities, and their alliances to understand the dynamics of the conflict. For example, Russia's support for separatist groups in eastern Ukraine and NATO's support for Ukraine could be seen as key factors in the conflict. 3. System-level analysis: A system-level analyst might focus on the broader international system and how it has influenced the conflict. They might analyze the role of institutions such as the United Nations and the European Union, as well as broader trends such as globalization and the decline of traditional power structures. For example, the conflict in Ukraine could be seen as a manifestation of broader tensions between Russia and the West, exacerbated by a shifting global order. In analyzing the conflict in Ukraine from these perspectives, you would gain a more comprehensive understanding of the factors driving the conflict and the potential pathways to resolution. Each level of analysis provides a different lens through which to view the issue, highlighting the complexity of international relations. 5. Research current research on gender behaviors related to power and violence. Apply this research to predict the impact on international politics of increasing numbers of women holding elected office around the world. You would first need to research current literature on gender behaviors related to power and violence. This might include studies on gender differences in leadership styles, attitudes towards conflict resolution, and experiences of violence. Based on your research, you could predict the impact on international politics of increasing numbers of women holding elected office around the world. Here are some potential points you could consider: 1. Leadership styles: Research suggests that women in leadership positions often exhibit more collaborative and inclusive leadership styles compared to men. This could lead to a shift towards more cooperative and diplomatic approaches in international relations, potentially reducing conflict and promoting peaceful resolutions. 2. Conflict resolution: Studies indicate that women are more likely to prioritize dialogue and negotiation over the use of force in resolving conflicts. Increased female representation in elected offices could lead to a greater emphasis on peaceful conflict resolution strategies in international politics. 3. Policy priorities: Research shows that women in leadership roles often prioritize issues such as healthcare, education, and social welfare. As more women hold elected office, there may be a greater focus on these issues in international politics, potentially leading to more equitable and sustainable global policies. 4. Representation and diversity: Increasing the number of women in elected office can lead to more diverse perspectives and experiences being represented in decision-making processes. This could result in more inclusive and representative international policies that take into account a wider range of viewpoints. Overall, the research suggests that increasing numbers of women holding elected office around the world could have a positive impact on international politics, leading to more peaceful, inclusive, and effective governance. 6. Gather information about the personality types (e.g., active-passive, positive-negative) of world leaders. After analyzing the leaders, explain past behaviors and predict future ones. How accurately does your analysis explain or predict? You would first need to gather information about the personality types of world leaders. This might include assessing their behavior in public speeches, interactions with other leaders, decision-making processes, and policy approaches. You could then categorize them based on various personality dimensions, such as active-passive and positive-negative. For example, you might categorize a leader as active if they are proactive in pursuing their goals and assertive in their decision-making. On the other hand, a passive leader might be more reactive and hesitant in their approach. Similarly, a positive leader might be optimistic, charismatic, and open to new ideas, while a negative leader might be pessimistic, authoritarian, and resistant to change. Once you have analyzed the leaders' personality types, you can explain their past behaviors based on these traits. For example, an active-positive leader might have been more inclined to engage in diplomacy and seek peaceful resolutions to conflicts, while an active-negative leader might have been more confrontational and prone to military intervention. Predicting future behaviors based on personality types is more challenging but can provide some insights. For instance, an active-positive leader might continue to prioritize diplomacy and cooperation in their foreign policy, while an active-negative leader might escalate tensions with other countries. However, it's essential to note that personality is just one factor influencing a leader's behavior, and other factors such as geopolitical context, domestic politics, and economic conditions also play significant roles. Therefore, while analyzing leaders' personality types can provide some insights into their behavior, it may not always accurately predict future actions due to the complexity of international relations. Suggestions for Further Reading Allison, Graham T. and Philip Zelikow. 1999. Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. New York: Longman. Analyzes the Cuban missile crisis from three different perspectives. Demonstrates the importance of understanding bureaucratic politics as an element of decision making even during a for¬eign policy crisis. Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books. Explains how cooperation can emerge despite the pursuit of self-interested goals, applying a game theory framework to interactions among states, businesses, and individuals. Barber, James David. 1992. The Presidential Character, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. The latest of Bar-ber’s studies of presidential behavior based upon the use of psychological profiles. Chan, Steve 1997. “In Search of Democratic Peace: Problems and Promise.” Mershon International Studies Review 41(1): 59-91. A detailed review of literature and ideas both for and against democratic peace theory. Enloe, Cynthia. 1989. Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Controversial in¬terpretation that details the effects of the structural position of women, both individually and as a group, on the interna¬tional system of diplomacy. George, Alexander, and Juliette George. 1956. Woodrow Wil¬son and Colonel House: A Personality Study. New York: J. Day. A careful study of Woodrow Wilson and how his childhood experiences may have influenced his style of governance and his successes and failures in office. Gilpin, Robert. 1981. War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. An explica¬tion of the theory of hegemonic stability, which argues that the dominance of world politics by one overwhelmingly powerful state will lead to the maintenance of international stability. Ikenberry, G. John, ed. 1989. American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Edited volume with essays presenting different approaches to understanding the forces that affect U.S. foreign policy making Jackson, Robert. 2000. The Global Covenant: Human Con¬duct in a World of States. New York: Oxford University Press. A comprehensive system-level analysis of the inter¬national community that looks at the plethora of issues that influence the system. Janis, Irving. 1982. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions, 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. An analysis of the ways in which peer pressure within groups can distort decision-making and produce bad or irrational results, even in foreign policy. Jervis, Robert. 1976. Perception and Misperception in In¬ternational Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. The author explores the patterns of divergence between per¬ception and reality of foreign policy decision makers. Lenin, V. I. 1975. Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capi¬talism. Moscow: Progress Publishers. Lenin builds on the writings of Karl Marx to explain imperialism and war as an outcome of capitalist rivalry that will incorporate all regions of the world into one world capitalist system. Neustadt, Richard E., and Ernest R. May. 1986. Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for Decision Makers. New York: The Free Press. An argument that policy makers should make better use of historical cases to inform their decision-making, including practical suggestions on how they can do so effectively. Nincic, Miroslav. 1992. Democracy and Foreign Policy: The Fallacy of Political Realism. New York: Columbia Univer¬sity Press. A comprehensive analysis of the links between the democratic form of government and foreign policy de-cision-making. Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 1993. Understanding International Con¬flicts: An Introduction to Theory and History. New York: HarperCollins. A concise, well-written, and thoughtful overview of the logic underlying the study of conflict in world affairs, incorporating both history and theory. Olson, Mancur. 1982. The Rise and Decline of Nations. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. The author argues that there is a tendency for interest groups to become entrenched in domestic politics when there is no war or crisis; without disruption, the state becomes paralyzed and sclerotic and ultimately loses power relative to other states. Organski, A.F.K., and Jacek Kugler. 1980. The War Ledger. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Presents and empir¬ically tests the “power transition” theory that war is most likely to occur when one state is overtaking another in power, thus explaining war as a result of changes in the structure of the international system. Singer, Max, and Aaron Wildavsky. 1993. The Real World Order: Zones of Peace, Zones of Turmoil. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House. The authors divide the world into demo¬cratic zones of peace and nondemocratic zones of turmoil, and present an argument for multilateral efforts to promote democratic regimes in order to broaden the realm of peace Sklair, Leslie. 1991. The Sociology of the Global System. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press. A sociologist analyzes the global system as a single unit in which there exist common transnational practices that link seemingly distinctive societies. Starr, Harvey 1992. “Democracy and War: Choice, Learning and Security Communities” Journal of Peace Research. 29(2): 207–213. An application of rational utility maximization theory to democratic peace. Sylvester, Christine. 1994. Feminist Theory and International Relations in a Postmodern Era. New York: Cambridge Uni¬versity Press. An interesting look at international relations from a constructionist-feminist perspective. Waltz, Kenneth. 1954. Man, the State, and War. New York: Columbia University Press. A careful and well-written text on the different levels at which one can understand and an¬alyze international politics. Waltz, Kenneth. 1979. Theory of World Politics. Read¬ing, MA: Addison-Wesley. A modern classic in which the author attempts to develop a system-level theory of interna¬tional politics based on microeconomic models of interstate behavior. Solution Manual for Global Politics: Engaging a Complex World Mark Boyer, Natalie Hudson, Michael Butler 9780078024818, 978125914648
