Great Power competition

Question 1

Introduction

Answer 1

• Cold War:
o Bipolar period of International Relations that set off after the end of WW2 and ended with the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the fall of the USSR in 1991
o Proxy wars
 Middle East was one of the ‘hot’ regions during the Cold War in which both superpowers fought
• Reason to fight are many – each theory can look at a different aspect
o Constructivism
o Neorealism
• Sheehan: Western involvement in the ME had a dual purpose
• Road Map:
o USSR’s interest in the Middle East in terms of national security
The ideological fight of the Cold War and how this was a major reason to intervene in the Middle East
o US’ interest in the Middle East in terms of oil
• Conclude:
o There are many reasons for the Great Powers to compete within the Middle East.
o Both constructivism and neorealism give a good perspective on the topic
o Constructivism however have many failures as the sole ideological conflict doesn’t not justify or allow to fully understand why the region got so ‘hot’
o Realism is necessary as the Middle East was an area that hosted key interests for both superpowers

Question 2

point 1

Answer 2

• Point: one of the reasons for superpower competition in the Middle East its their interest to ensure national security.
• Jabber: self-interest was a key factor in the great powers involvement in the ME region
• Explain: this is mostly true for the Soviet Union, which share borders with many Middle Easter states
o Turkey
o Iran
o Afghanistan
creats a decurity dilemma and UUSr need to prevent that invade its territory especially with us there
 A strong presence and alliance with the US would be a direct threat for their material existence as they would always be under threat of invasion
• Instead of allowing this to happen, the Ussr fought for the Middle Easter state alliance in order to ensure its own survival
• Explained well by neorealism, Waltz
 Tradition theory of IR
 States exist in a state of anarchy
 All states possess military capabilities
• All can inflict some harm
 States can never be certain about the intentions of other states
• Instead of fighting to maintain their balance of power the fight against perceived threat (realism vs neorealism)
 Their most important aim is to ensure their own security
 Rational actors
• Strategically stipulate policies and make decision that will allow them to pursue such a goal
• Back to question: neorealist explains why national security is a key reason for the superpowers to compete in the ME, especially the USSR, as the state of anarchy and the security dilemma shaped by such state of anarchy leads the USSR vulnerable to an invasion, meaning that it has to rationally take action in order to avoid such an occurrence which is allying with as many ME countries as possible
• Middle East: each country competed over the Middle East in order to ensure their self-interest of survival
o Middle East was a key area for both countries as shared borders with the USSR and the US was highly dependent on its oil

Question 3

example point 1

Answer 3

o As a response to the Baghdad Pact in which the US gives military assistance to Iran, Iraq, Turkey
o Establish the Czech arms deal
 Egypt: 1955 Czech arms deal $90-200 million = 89.7% of arms
 Afghanistan 1956 – 95.4%
 27% of military spending on arms trade
• Back to question: clearly show thee rational strategy of the USSR to try and get as many countries to ally with it as possible

Question 4

theoretical debate point 1

Answer 4

• However, Bennett: dependence on the USSR for weapons imports does not necessarily translate into political influence and that the exporter often develops interests in maintaining levels of arms exports that are unrelated to the original objective of increased influence
• Nevertheless, under realism is not the political affiliation but the material security of the state that has to be ensured and due to the failure of an invasion of the USSR all through the Cold War it shows its success in doing so

Question 5

point 2

Answer 5

• Point: Fighting for ideological supremacy
• Explain:
o Sluglett: Cold War was an ideological fight and the two superpowers compete to make as many countries fall to their own ideology as possible
 The middle east was perfect for such competition as the process of decolonisation was setting off at the same time as the Cold War, hence many new states were being created
• The two superpowers allowed two different roads to be taken for such new states
o Competed in order to force the country to adopt their ideology, norms and values
o Echevarria All of them are essentially about power and influence, just as with wars over territory and material resources, and their stakes can run very high indeed
• Constructivism Ketzenstein:
o the main scholar of such theory, believes that the identity within a state shape the state itself and its policies.
 shared ideas and values influence social and political action
• identities inform interest and consequently actions.
• Back to question: constructivism allows to understand why the two-superpower competed in the Middle East. To shape the identity and spread the norms and values in an area that can basically had a clean slate and needed to be directed
o Middle East: the superpowers compete in the Middle East as they want to shape the Middle Easts’ identity according to their ideology, norms and values
 Increase influence and power
• The ideological war in itself

Question 6

example point 2

Answer 6

o Israel – SUCCESS
 Access key to the Middle East for the Unites States
 Mirrored the identity of the US, should be an example of what the capitalist ideology can bring
• Idea of a benevolent hegemon
• Soft power
• Spread values of liberty and consumerism
• Diplomatic relations
• Healthy Israel is a healthy US
 Wendt: states can become friends rather than rivals or enemies, meaning that the security and interests of the Self and Other become identical
• Importance of ideological supremacy

Question 7

theoretical debate point 2

Answer 7

• However, constructivism can explain such a certain aspect. The ideological context is not enough to understand why the two countries were so heated in the competition for the Middle East. It overlooks key interests the countries had in the region
• As scholar (NEOREALISM) Bourdieu
o Focus on the social construction of interest rather than the material interest in itself
o Material interest much more important in shaping how an actor acts

Question 8

poin 3

Answer 8

one last reason for which the superpowers competed in the region is their interest in the Middle Eastern oil reserves
• Explain: especially true for the US
• Husdon: Need to prevent internal forces from nationalising Western companies or restricting production or increasing prices
• US as a capitalist countries relied heavily on the ME oil and needed it in order to maintain its wealth, hence its military and economic power
o 50% of the US oil came from the ME due to its rich oil reserves
 The necessity of having high flows of ME oil to the US was key in pushing the country to intervene in the ME
• Neorealism:
o Material self-interest
o states are utility maximisers
• Back to question: this leads the US to intervene in the ME as the establishment of such a supremacy and alliances in the ME ensures high flows of oil to the country, meaning that it is allow to protect its economic and military capabilities

Question 9

example point 3

Answer 9

1973 oil embargo
o October 1973 when OPEC proclaimed an oil embargo.
 targeted at nations perceived as supporting Israel during the Yom Kippur War
 the price of oil had risen from US$3 per barrel to nearly $12 globally; US prices were significantly higher.
 Oil shock with many long, medium and short term effects such as
• Nixon asked gasoline sellers to not sell gasoline Saturday night and Sundays
• Price of it rised from 43% from 38.5¢ in May 1973 to 55.1¢ in June 1974.
• National speed limit decreased from 80mph to 55mph
• Decrease of productivity

Question 10

scholars point 1

Answer 10

Jabber: self-interest is a key factor
Bennet: arms import is not equal to political influence

Question 11

scholars point 2

Answer 11

Sluglett: cold war is an ideological war
Echevarria: ideological wart is about power and influence
Bourdieu: constructivism focuses on social contrusction of interest when material interest is key

Question 12

scholars point 3

Answer 12

Husdon: prevent nationalisation of western industries