Comparative Theories Flashcards
What is realism?
Based off power and security.
Autonomy as states don’t want to trust one another.
Dangerous world, never know who is the enemy.
Can never have enough power.
See the world in tragedy and evil.
Only just war promotes national interest.
Hobbesian world of all against all- state of nature.
No world government.
What is liberalism?
Organisations can be mutually beneficial.
More actors in the international system than just states.
Conflict and force is the last option but is an option.
Global institutions stem from liberal thought.
Lots of opportunities for both good and bad.
Make the best of what there is because you’re stuck in world order/ global politics.
What is structured realism?
Domestic politics are not very important.
States live in an anarchic system- no higher authority.
States can never be certain they won’t be next to a powerful state with bad influence.
If you are powerful then nobody can hurt you.
Driven by the architecture of system.
Nothing more powerful than states- no nightwatchman.
What was the 2003 Iraq war?
The Iraq war was protracted armed conflict from 2003-2011 that was sparked by the US invasion of Iraq
The US based its rationale on claims that Iraq had ‘weapons of mass destruction’, and also the false grounds that Saddam Hussein was harbouring and supporting Al Qaeda
An estimated 151,000 people were killed
The US launched military action without a clear UNSC Resolution authorising the use of force.
How is the 2003 Iraq war evidence for realism?
America thought that Iraq still owned and was prepared to use weapons of mass destruction, the aim was to disarm Iraq by using force to protect itself.
The US was prepared to ‘go in alone’ without wider international agreement and support. An ‘every man for themselves’ approach in the best interests of their own country.
The war was legally questionable - UK concluded in 2016 that the war was ‘unjustified’, and was not agreed with cooperation and talking before forceful action
US and allies were acting in what they perceived to be their national interest. The UK government believed that WMDs were a threat to the middle east and that they could cause future problems for the US, UK and Allies. So wanted to protect itself and go against liberal organisations like the UN to do so.
How does the 2003 Iraq war provide evidence for liberalism?
It was not in the US’s national interest to invade
They invaded for the benefit of their allies who were also under threat, not just their own national interest
It was part of a post cold war liberal expansion that led to more military intervention due to ambitious goals of democracy and regime change
What was China’s ‘Belt and Road’ initiative which started in 2013?
The project was spread across 70 countries and could cost as much as $4 trillion in direct investments and other projects.
It aims to improve and secure infrastructure connectivity, energy supplies and key maritime shipping routes.
The network stretches from China’s borders as far as western Europe and East Africa.
How was the ‘Belt and Road’ initiative evidence for realism?
It clearly seems to be China seeking to maximise its power; by creating new markets for their goods, they can bring more countries under their sphere of influence. China is acting purely in their own self-interests, and they do not care about the future economies or debt situations of countries that they help (they have debt-trapped several weaker states).
The wider ambition is to build China’s global economic power in its race to overtake the US as the world’s largest economy.
Obama attempted a ‘pivot to Asia’ where he tried to reassert US investment and military power in the South Asia region.
It is a direct threat to US economic dominance; economic warfare as opposed to military warfare.
The BRI can be seen as a potential network through which growing Chinese military power could eventually be deployed; many have seen the project as a form of neo-colonialism.
How was the ‘Belt and Road’ initiative evidence for liberalism?
It aims to project economic value across the globe; they are aiming to improve the economic conditions of other states.
More than 130 countries have issued endorsements of the project; it is clearly a project that the world wants and the world believes is in their interests.
The World Bank has estimated that BRI can boost trade flows in 149 participating countries by 4.1 percent, as well as cutting the cost of global trade by 1-2%.
It could grow the GDP of East Asian and Pacific developing countries by an average of 2.6-3.9%.
What was the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea?
In 2014, Russian backed militia entered the Crimea region in Ukraine, and within a few days, it was declared independence.
A referendum vote led to them becoming a part of Russia.
Ukraine, formerly a part of the Soviet Union, had long been torn between the west and the east.
Russia did not invade Ukraine with conventional military forces, but with the presence of uniforms without any identifying insignia.
How did the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea provide evidence for realism?
Focused entirely on gaining control and dominance
Put military forces into Ukraine unilaterally - didn’t discuss with IGO’s or gain justification through international law
The fact that the primary objective was to regain territory from Crimea means that they were acting in realist fashion. The need for power is arguably acting selfish and in their own self interest and for national interest - States are motivated to survive and Russia argued this was an effective way to shut down Ukraine moving closer to Western ties as they wanted to protect a majority, ethically Russian population.
Russia argued that it was acting in its national interest - they argued that there was worrying signs that Ukraine might be tilting decisively towards closer ties with the west (in particular the EU and NATO) and Moscow judged this as a threat to national interest (declaring the joining of Ukraine and Georgia in 2008 a ‘hostile act’)
In July 2014 an international passenger was shot down over Ukraine with 298 lives lost. A UNSC resolution trying to establish an international tribunal into the incident which was vetoed by Russia, highlighting the challenge of holding states accountable.
How did the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea provide evidence for liberalism?
The attempt to establish an international tribunal could be seen as a more ‘liberal’ attempt at cooperation (although it was ultimately vetoed by Russia)
Russia offered Ukraine favourable gas prices, and, since the break-up of the soviet union, an agreement allowed Russia to continue to operate from the Sevastopol port - this can be seen as an example of cooperation although this too could be argued, as being done only for national self interest.
What was the 2011- Syrian War?
The Syrian war is an ongoing multi-sided civil conflict between the Syrian Arab Republic and various domestic and foreign forces that oppose both the Syrian government and each other.
Unrest began on the 15th March 2011 as part of the wider 2011 Arab Spring protests out of discontent with the Syrian government.
The peak of the war was around 2015; violence in the country has since diminished, but the situation remains a crisis
The war is fought by several factions including the Syrian armed force, a loose alliance of Sunni opposition rebel groups, Syrian Democratic forces, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)
How does the Syrian War provide evidence for realism?
David Cameron passed a vote through parliament on whether to get involved in the Syrian war via airstrikes. Parliament voted not to get involved … This is Britain demonstrating an isolationist approach.
Russia and Turkey trying to have influence and power over the surrounding area.
How does the Syrian war provide evidence for liberalism?
A number of foreign countries such as Iran, Russia, Turkey and the US have either directly involved themselves in the conflict or provided support to one or another faction
Iran and Russia support the Syrian Arab Republic and the Syrian Armed Forced militarily, with Russia conducting airstrikes and other military operations since September 2015
The US led international coalition, established in 2014 has conducted airstrikes primarily against ISIL as well as some against government and pro-government targets
The Syrian opposition receives financial, logistical, political and in some cases military support from major Sunni states in the middle east allied with the US for example Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.
The US is the leading donor of humanitarian aid for Syria, providing more than $14 billion throughout Syria since the start of the crisis.
What was the 2001-2021 Afghanistan war?
Began in 2001, triggered by the 9/11 attacks.
President George Bush demanded that the Taliban hand over the leaders of al-Qaeda and when they refused, US officials began implementing a plan for war to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan.
US and British forces provided arms, equipment and advice to the Afghans.
Attempts to reconstruct Afghanistan were inadequately funded.
Over $38 billion in humanitarian and reconstruction assistance to Afghanistan was appropriated by the US Congress.
US and NATO formally ended their combat mission in Afghanistan on December 28, 2014.
How does the Afghanistan war provide evidence for realism?
The US acted in self-defence - they felt that the 9/11 attack was enabled by the Afghan state as they provided a safe haven to the Taliban
The war took place because Osama Bin Laden would not be handed over by the Taliban - this was considered sufficient reason to go to war. War was entered with reason.
Policy towards the end of the conflict involved negotiations with the Taliban - demonstrates the pragmatism of realism.
The US has stopped providing humanitarian support to Afghanistan since the Taliban seized power in 2021
The US violated the Geneva Convention during the war, and there were over 70,000 civilian casualties
Bin Laden slipped away from the US military in 2001 with the help of Afghan and Pakistani soldiers that were supposedly helping the US - demonstrates instability of alliances across states
How does the Afghanistan war provide evidence for liberalism?
44% of polled US residents feel that the US has an obligation towards the Afghan government, and 76% of those polled felt the goals of US policy didn’t warrant waging war - the US may not have been pursuing national interests when carrying out the war
The US provided humanitarian and reconstruction support ($38 billion) to Afghanistan
British forces fought alongside American troops - not necessarily isolationist as they were allied with another country.
What was Brexit in 2016?
Brexit refers to Britain’s exit from the European Union
Brexit took place in Jan 2020, following the June 2016 referendum
Negotiations took place between the UK and the EU on the terms of a divorce deal
The EU is a politico-economic union of 28 countries that promote ease of trade and free movement of citizens between states
How does Brexit provide evidence for realism?
Realists promote national interest and believe isolationism is good - leaving the EU isolates the UK and supports self dependence. The EU can be a threat to UK national interests.
The EU can be seen as a world government; leaving the EU rejects higher moral supremacy.
Realists think alliances are unstable and you cannot trust any other state.
The nature of the EU is to ask states to surrender control over their national policies in exchange for access to a single currency and economic market, which deters power from the member states.
How does Brexit provide evidence for liberalism?
It could be argued that leaving the EU reduces power and security as they will not have as many alliances for war that is ‘always lurking’.
Making up and building trade deals with other nations.
What were the US-China relations under President Trump?
Under the administration of US President Trump there was a rapid deterioration of relations between the countries. This trickled down into the US and Chinese publics, who were increasingly distrustful of China, considering it an enemy or competitor.
Trump claimed he wanted to protect American jobs so put tariffs on Chinese imports, which China then implemented on US imports.
China has also shifted to a more aggressive foreign policy, particularly in the South and East China Seas and in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Trump was the first US President to have diplomatic contact with the Taiwanese President since 1979
Trump’s confrontational approach to relations was ‘justified’ by China’s military expansion and breach of human rights; the US claimed to be stopping China from chipping away at the liberal international order. China believed that the US was attempting to suppress their rise in power.
China and the US are battling for domination of the world stage, with China on the rise and the US arguably declining in power. This has created a stalemate between the two countries, oscillating between hostility and coexistence.
How do the US-China relations provide evidence for realism?
The route cause in the deterioration of the relationship stems from the struggle between the US and China to be the dominant world power.
Both countries were/are looking out for themselves and their citizens and their economies rather than global issues.
There is an evident lack of trust between the countries as both countries fight to be the most powerful state.
China’s increasingly aggressive foreign policy adds to the idea that counties cannot be trusted and conflict could be just around the corner.
It suggests a unipolar/bipolar global system where there is only so much power that everyone is fighting to hold.
In these issues states were the main actors and there was minimal influence for IGOs such as the UN or global trade bodies to intervene.
How do the US-China relations provide evidence for liberalism?
The US claimed to be protecting liberalism’s international order by holding China accountable for its aggressive military expansion and illiberal human rights violations.
The two states used trade and tariffs as the method of expressing their dispute rather than military force.
What was the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine?
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, both Ukraine and Russia were separate countries.
In recent times, the Ukrainian public have desired a government that favoured Ukraine and Europe, rather than Russia.
Putin believes that Ukrainians and Russians are”brothers” (with Russia being the “elder brother”, so therefore should take charge).
Putin decided to invade to take back Ukraine, however the Russian people did not have a say in whether they wanted to invade Ukraine or not.
5,587 civilians have been killed during the conflict. With around 34,000 soldiers falling.
How does the Russian invasion of Ukraine provide evidence for realism?
Putin invaded to remove the neo-Nazi government (that may pose a threat to Russia) that ran Ukraine and replace it with his own, guaranteeing Russia’s safety. An action of realism by securing Russia’s position and safety, from a power that holds a threatening position.
The invasion was in Russia’s own self interest, they wanted to remove a threat to their country and people.
In a realist world there is a desire to have power and security, as it is a ‘self help’ world, therefore, Russia’s invasion furthered their security.
Putin would consider the invasion ‘just’ as it is in Russia’s best interests and necessary for their security and stability.
How does the Russian invasion of Ukraine provide evidence for liberalism?
Putin believes that many Ukrainian people want to be united with Russia, and that with unification comes strength for both parties involved.
In a liberal world, Russia wouldn’t have used violence in the quest of uniting the two countries.
Putin did not cooperate with the people of Russia on the issue. Instead he ordered for a surprise attack - by using the power he holds to brush aside any opposition.
What is international anarchy?
The notion that states are self-contained units that frequently clash with each other, in a world system where there is no authority such as a ‘world government’ that is as legitimate, powerful or authoritative as nation-states.
What are six consequences of international anarchy?
- IGOs have limited impact
- States want to prevent IGOs making decisions not in their best interest
- International law is not always enforceable
- International courts can be ignored
- States are able to breach international law or commit human-rights abuses
- Powerful states will try to gain enough power to become authority
