lecture notes world politics

WEEK 1

1. THE WORLD POLITICS PROBLEMATIQUE
Reading: FLS, Introduction

2a. THREE COMPETING APPROACHES TO THE PROBLEMS OF WORLD POLITICS: LIBERALISM, REALISM, CONSTRUCTIVISM
Reading: FLS, Introduction

2b. THE VOCABULARY OF LIBERAL ANALYSIS
Reading: FLS Chapter 2, Understanding Interests, Interactions and Institutions

FLS CH.2 Concentrate on
Bargaining vs. cooperation
Public goods (peace in international politics, health care in local, everyone needs it but hard to find people to pay=collective action problem)
Collective-action problems
Free riders
Prisoner’s Dilemma (like chicken, stagg hunt…game problem, nuclear, pre-war discussions), involves question of Trust.
Problematique
A system of problems
Approaches to world politics
Liberaism, focuses on peace, younger by 15hundred years, West European / era of Enlightement and Industrial, England, France and Germany and transplanted to USA
Realism, focuses on power, the oldest, ancient Greece, China, India
Constructivism, focuses on ideals, youngest, not fully developed, post-Marxist solution, central are not power or wealth but IDEALS / cultures and norms; potential change by changing people’s minds--
LIBERAL approach in FLS: peace Cooperation
Prosperity
Progress
Democracy
And other values
Changing the world from what it is to what it’s not
We have Common Interests, they’re not being achieved?then what’s wrong?
Strong connection to Economics, not just Philosophers
Political Economists, Smith and Ricardo Focus on WEALTH
Maximize wealth=goal for everyone, us all
Harmony of Interests; possible for people to
My prosperity depends upon your prosperity, my prosperity does not make you poverty, its possible for humans to prosper together, not at another’s expense, so we have common interest=Wealth
Liberal are optimistic about the environment
Common interest is clean air, clean water
Optimism about democracy
Common interest in avoiding costly war
But there are still wars, poverty
But liberals continue to believe in progress-liberal dream = problems to be analyzed and solved, if effectively analyzed

Professor reorganized chapters
Why War? Ch. 3
FLS, xxi
Democratic peace? Ch. 4
FLS, xxii
Peace through alliance and collective security Ch. 5
Common wealth through free trade? Ch. 7
Through free movement of capital? Ch.8
Money (only gold) and goods moved more freely, and free movement of labor between countries in 19th century
Through world money? Ch. 9
Through development? Ch. 10

Problems or inescapable reality which we need to learn to adjust?

FLS is liberalism but other two ways are realism and constructivism (propagandist, activists, promoting new norms, changing public view)
FLS welcome certain Constructivist truths, like in intervention of poisonous nuclear weapons, genocidal conflicts Norms do involve. Mandelbaum=The ideals that Conquered the World: peace, democracy and free markets in the twenty-firth century (democracy is optimal way to organize, peace… for 1st time in history they have no serious rivals, war is goof for absolutely nothing, removal of formal ‘norm’ of struggle)
Mandelbaum vs. FLS
FLS are engeneers, make it work
Mandelbuam wants to advertise, spread the faith
Professor Mezzeroff promoted terrorist
LTTE liberation tigers in ShriLanka, by example of female sui
Is it realistic?

DISCUSSION:
Realists: Self-rational actors that do whatever needed to preserve themselves
Thomas Hobbs—in a state of nature where there’s no overruling sovereign men are basically in a state of war. In order to get out of state of war, these individuals come to the decision that they should collectively give up their decision and then there’ll be a state of peace. Essentially he was justifying an over-ruling monarch. In the current world there’s no over-ruling anarchy (no adults over little children) so in state of chaos the only thing that drives people is self-preservation in so far as they get power.
The UN-toothless without the funders, the funders are self-interested
Amnesty International
A bad character who does damage and lets the UN and International help clean up his mess
Locke, liberal, people are interested in doing what will serve everybody in common
Constructivists move from the fact that there’s a fixed-state of nature, eventually states can change. Alexander Went speaking about Soviet Union.
WEEK 2

3. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO CURRENT WORLD POLITICS a. BEFORE AND OUTSIDE THE RISE OF THE WEST
Reading: none. b. THE RISE OF THE MODERN WEST
Reading: FLS Chapter One, What Shaped Our World?

FLS’ History of World Politics
FLS starts history at: 1492 – president
True history begins in Western Europe, the great transformation began in Western Europe and only reached the world through stages
Main theme is Progress
Modernization, Globalization, Westernization
Marquis de Condercet, liberal historical theme
Modernization, continuous progress in human knowledge, technology, engineering, social science, etc
Globalization: spread of Western European politics (and progress) to every corner of Earth
Spread of Westernization
Realists view as Rise and Fall, history of growth and change in system of powers, never ending struggle for power
Well represented in Lo Guanzhong’s Romance of Three Kingdoms
Percy Bysse Shelly, Ozymandias

Where they don’t
Liberal: progress outweighs power politics
Realist: power struggle, the more history changes the more its same story

The struggle for hegemony (realist)
Candidate Hegemons:
Habsburg Austria (Charles V)
Catholic-Lutheran Wars in Germany, 1524-1555
Result: peace of Augsburg 1555
Defeat of Habsburg bid for hegemony
No centralized empire but only independent states
Charles V was fighting for POWER
People were fighting (dying) for IDEALS
Habsburg Spain (Philip II of Spain & Portugal)
1598 Spain, Portugal
Result: Peace of Westphalia (1648)
Spain loses Portugal and Netherlands
Defeat of Spanish bit for hegemony
Then, rise of France as candidate hegemon
Ottoman Empire – Turkey
Conquests in Europe: Greece, Bosnia, Albenia, Herzegoniva, Montenegro, East Anatolia, Syria and Egypt, Algeria, Serbia, Iraq, Hungary, Libia
First check: Naval battle of Lepanto 1571 vs. counter-coalition of everyone else who hadn’t been conquered, ending coast of Medditerrenian
Tunisia, Georgia, Stalemate century, 1682 second siege
Final Reversal: Austria, Poland, Russia
Slow disintegration, and by 1923, the other great powers tore it to peaces
Bourbon France – Louis XIV
1552-1798
Hanoverian England
Seven Years’ War 1756-1763
The British Empire
American Revolutionary War 1775-1783
Anti-British Countercoalition, 13 colonies, France, Spain, Netherlands
Britain lost to memebers of countercoalition
Revolutionary and Napoleonic France
2nd rise and Containment of France (Revolutionary and Napoleonic)
Austria, Russia, Prussia, Britain, and only Britain stuck to war all the way through
By 1812 France’s borders expanded to great scale]
Eventually, great powers rose against him
War of Sixth Coalition
War of the Seventh Coalition 1815 – complete great power counter coalition of Britain, Austria, Prussia, Russia
Eventually defeated
All were frustrated by counter coalitions
BUT
Liberal historians have another view from this (realist view):
Begins with 1492 in Western Europe with Struggles toward Modernization
Real struggle=economics
5 periods in development of modernist capitalist world
Cooperation through History
1492-1815 Violetn struggles for hegemony
1800s relative peace and prosperity early mid 1900s things go bad, world depression, wars late 1900’s, good period, globalization

I. Mercantalist Era 1492-1815
The Spanish Empire and the Aztec Empire discover each other
Mercantilism as economic doctrine
Military and economic power complementary (guns and butter)
Monopolies: certain enterprises favored, other not
Trade Barriers
Suppression of Mass consumption, taxes on food or other mass consumption, trade with other colonies
=to increase wealth and power of Interpol
Controls on Trade: An Example
Good for metropol, bad for colonies,
But liberal – inefficiency, wasteful, free markets
Costs and benefits of Mercantilist
Table A in book
Benefit was protection, cost was $profit for colonies, eventually colonies didn’t need protection
Interests
Security through power
Control of markets and resources
Interactions
Zero-sum bargaining among states
Institutions
Few international institutions beyond the norm of sovereignty
Realist lessons vs. Liberal Lessons

New Great powers joins a world system

II. The Pax Britannica 1815-1914
“the Hundred Years’ Peace” sources of cooperation interests began to converge upward GDP per Capita
Industrial revolution altered interests
Exchange replaces mercantilism
Economic integration increases
Mechanisms
Migration, free trade, gold standard
The Gold Standard
Gold becomes major monetary system, promoting stability and predictability
Liberal view
Paper currency in every country be exchanged for Gold and this became means of international trade, international investment
The congress of Vienna
The Latecomers (didn’t fight one another) scramble for colonies outside of Europe and dealt with weak states instead of strong states
Agreement among the winners and even losers (France) – nobody would show signs of becoming a hegemon
By 1815-1915 almost all Asia and Africa taken over colonial powers
Liberal explanation:
Interests Changed: economic wealth through trade and investment
Interactions: informal diplomacy, state cooperation in security and economic affairs
Institutions: British hegemony and the Concert of Europe
British “persuaded” not “forced” to make free trade agreements, but a REALIST would say Forced
Realist would say this time was not as peaceful as Liberal FLS say about “Pax Britannica”
Not so relatively peaceful
Taiping Rebellion 1850-1864, Chinese Gordon, people killed
US Civil War 1861-1865
Bismarckian Wars 1864-1871
War of Triple Alliance 1864-1870
Heart of Darkness 1885-1908
Indian Revolt of 1857
Excessive Eurocentrism
Rose-colored glasses
Anglo-American navalism
III. The Thirty Years’ Crises WWI and WWII, 1914-1945
From realist point of view, book leaves out essential
Central Powers vs. Allied powers
Costly, long, bloody, destroyed governments of emperial Germany and Russia, destroying Austria, Ottoman Empire and replaced it with Republic of Turkey
Treaty of Versailles, economically unsound
Destroyed Germany, made it impossible for Germany to recover economically as long as it was trying to be “a good citizen” and pay back
Hyper-inflation, made its Doichmarks virtually worthless
The Great Depression of 1929 countries turn inward, began to do Mercantalism, free trade ended, countries returned to their “bad old ways” more hegemonic aspiration
WWII followed, Axis powers, Allied Powers

Battle of ideas 1491-1815
National Imperialism and Cult of Personality
Bonapartism

The Pax Britannica, 1815-1914
“the Hundred Years’ Peace,” no all-in wars free trade
Industrial revolution altered interests, fist in Britain
Newly powerful classes prefer open markets
Trade grows at the expense of mercantilism
Economic integration increases
Gold Standard: Gold becomes major monetary system, promoting stability and predictability.
No wars drew in all Great Powers the Concert of Europe
British hegemony
Sources of Cooperation
The “scramble for colonies” –The Pax Britannica, 1815-1914

Point of View of Realists:
1815 – 6 great European Powers Unstable Balance: Italy, Germany (from Prussia), Japan (at expense of China), America (at expense of Hawaii and Spain)
Arms Racing: (Defense Spending) Euro Great Powers quadrupled defense spending after German and Italian unification, 1870-1914
Armies grew, with Germany the most powerful, followed by Russia, then France, Austria-Hungary
Navy grew, Great Britain and Germany
Imperial Germany seems a new Hegemonic Candidate, opinion that Britain is becoming a hegemony
The call for a counter coalition
Point of view of Constructivist:
Reformist liberalism nationalist imperialism racism nationalist anti colonialism
Millennialist Christianity in China, Taiping heavenly kingdom
Revolutionary liberalism in America, Abolitionism, John Brown
Nationalism and cult of personality in south America, Francisco Solano Lopez “I die with my fatherland”

Interests: economic wealth
A Hundred Years’ Peace? But there were Great Deadly Quarrels!

The Thirty Years’ Crises 1914-1945
(here the book gives a REALIST account!)
Peoples vs. States (1918)
Austria-Hungary
Tension in Europe
Europe Divides into Two Camps
Anticontainment Coalition Pre-empts
Central Powers
Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Empire
System of Rigid alliances
Local Crises:
The Chain of Friendship (Austria-Hungary wants to beat Serbia but Russia will protect if they try, and so on with all states in Europe)
Austria-Hungary vs. Serbia
Austria Hungary vs. Russia
Germany Vs Russia
Germany Vs France
Briatin vs Germany
Japan joins Allies
China joins Allies
Italy changed sides and joins Allies
America joins Allies (late but it did)
Austria-Hungary dissolves
Russian and Ottoman Empire Fragment
New weak national States arise
Britain and France badly weakened
US is the Last man Standing
But US declines Soft Political Hegemony
International Instability Followed
Germany down but not knocked out
Branded “aggressor”
Lost territory
Reparations replace indemnities
Germany resents that it’s called “aggressor” that didn’t exist before, in past if you lose war you get occupied for so many years,
Germany here lost territory but was punished, must pay for all reparations to pay for damage
Japan, China, Korea, Italy frustrated in their small share of the pie that was divided
Anti-Liberal Movements flourish: Rise of Fascism and Communism
Liberal World Economy did not manage to get back on track, on the ropes
Germany Destroys its Middle Class by Hyperinflation of its money
Reparations and War Debts Cripple World Economy
US replaces Britain as World Creditor (takes care of Economy), and soft economic Hegemon
Dawes Plan (1924)
Young Plan (1929), International prospertity followed by Great Depression, which Liberalism did not understand and almost dropped ball
Mercantilism Revives: everyone goes his own way, protect yourself,
Free trade ends
Volume of world trade
Pre-emptive Predatory Alliences
Rome-Berlin Axis 1939
Japan joins Axis 1940
WWII Countercoalitions finally forms
Germany invades Poland
First allied powers: Britain, France
Axis Powers: German, Italy, Japan
WWII fought on European and Pacific fronts
Outcome: Germany, Japan, Italy decisively defeated
Liberal FLS analysis:
Interests:
Global cooperation collapses 1914
Security through alliances, expansion, economic self-sufficiency
Constructionist View:
Liberalism, Naitonalism, Fascism, Communism
Propaganda: Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler
What went wrong?
Liberalism: unsound economic policies, provoked regressive behavior
Realism: Indecisive Victory in WWI,
Abdication of US Power (it should have stayed in and maintained order, not dropped out)
Constructivism: Superior Antidemocratic Propaganda, these horrible leaders were more charismatic than Liberal leaders of the times
What is to be done differently?
Liberalism for Wealth
Institutionalize political and economic cooperation
Realism for Power
Form pre-emptive antihegemonic alliances and collective security communities as soon as problem arises
Constructivism for Ideology
We should promote, advertise better

Cold War 1945-1990

US, western Europe, Latin America, Japan, others
Institutions
Military: NATO, OAS, SEATO
Economic: Bretton Woods Institutions, International monetary fund, World Bank, General agreement on trade and tarots
Ideological: United Nations (FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt)

Eastern Block arose in response/contradiction
USSR, Eastern Europe, China 1949-1960
Institutions:
Military: Warsaw Pact, in contrast to NATO
Economic: Comecon
Communist institutions designed to collect Communist central plans (5 year for example) (based on the STATE that fundamentally owns everything)
Ideological: none (Comintern dissolved 1943)

Cold Peace
2 Superpowers – US and USSR avoided direct warfare despite the fact that war crises (Berlin 1948 and Cuba 1962), balance of terror, nuclear peace
The Nuclear Peace (Balance of Terror)
All-out War seen as guaranteed Loose-Lose
Economic Competition
Growth race
Follow our blue print and you be wealthy
Ideological competition
Alliance race
Be my ally and I’ll supply you with what you want
Military competition
Arms race
Proxy wars, fighting through someone (having proxies fight proxies)
Proxy Wars:
United Nations vs. North Korea and PRC China 1950-1953
Vietnam War 1956-1975
Soviet-backed vs. US-backed enemies
US and Ethiopia vs. USSR and Somalia
Change of allies 1977:
USSR and Ethiopia vs. US and Somalia
Also during Cold War, popular uprisings that were crushed, Block maintenance via suppression of uprisings:
Czechoslovakia 1948
East Germany 1953
Guatemala 1954
Hungary 1956
Chile 1973
War Crises
Berlin Blockade 1948
Berlin Wall 1961
Cuban Missile Crises 1962
All resolved short of superpower war
Rise of Third World:
Dissolution of Most Great Power Empires
Nazi, Italian, Jap empires swiftly liquefied after WWII
British, French, Dutch, Portuguese empires dissolved more slowly and sometimes violently
Many newly independent new states
Intense competition, 1945 to mid 1960s
Détente, mid 1960s to 1979
China and US reconcile 1972
Renewed tensions
…
Fall of Berlin wall 1989
Collapse of USSR
USSR lost economic war, capitalist system fueled by government spending more successful in promoting economic growth
Military: USSR defeated in Afghanistan where US was supplying weapons
Ideological: Glasnost and Perestroika decease state ideological control
Result: Soviet Union becomes 15 different states because of democratic vote

3 different stories as to what happened
Liberal institutions produces wealth and growth while Communist institutions produces stagnation, disaster
Should continue to spread development and prosperity via sound cooperative economic institutions like WTO
Realist: US outraced USSR in weapons, alliances, military bases in world
Should maintain and increase collective security lead of US centered alliances
Constructivist: Ideals of democracy and liberalism beat Communism
Should keep on spreading your ideals on what is the right way to be in world

LIBERAL VIEW
Cooperation in 1991 Gulf War
Increased role of UN
Promotes development, health, rights
Increased global economic integration
World Trade Organization
Challenges: Multiple Capitalist Crises, we have a buffer but we don’t know where they come from (financial crises)
Challenges: Rise of BRICS (Brazil, Russia I

DISCUSSION REVIEW SUMMARY
Some things may be missing from these recollections
1492, Age of Exploration, expansion starts, beginning of Early Modern World because of advancements, Mercantilism, colonies, World History and World Politics
1618-1648, Thirty Years’ War, where the balance of power in Europe had started to crumble
1648, Treaty of Westphalia was signed, Nation States begin=Borders: the idea that a nation / state is Bounded, you can draw in map, if you cross this you infringe on my sovereignty. This system did not exist until 1648, large cause was the Thirty Years’ War.
1756-63, Seven Years’ War in the New World, between Britain and France, Britain gained Canada, The importance of Seven Years’ War=Britain beats France in the New World, signaling the beginning of British dominance of the world, which is why the Pax Britannica (1815-1914)
The reason Mercantilism is important because new relationship between colonized and the colonizer, FLS like Mercantilism because of expansion of trade and cooperation, but the dark side is based on people exploiting resources and taking over lands that aren’t theirs
1815,
1815-1914, Relative peace, British empire has ownership of most colonies, The Pax Britannica
1870, The Gold Standard, Britain convinced other nations to convert their colonies to Gold and this becomes universal exchange commodity, provides stability and predictability, way of stabilizing a large economy, FLS likes that because it consolidates world as an economic unit even more so
1870-1890, Period of German modernization, Germany wanted to catch up because they lost out of the scramble for colonies (like Africa), so focuses on becoming a regional power and efforts in becoming a modernized country with technological innovation. Beginning of German existentialism, where they didn’t like technological innovation and modernization. Also beginning of nationalism.
1870-1900,
1904-1905, War between Japan and USSR, Japan wins, a non-European power could win a European power (Russia was considered Euro/modern), big deal for Ottomans for example
1914, WWI, Austrian king assassinated by a Serbian national anarchist, the gunshot heard around the world because creates many diplomatic problems between Serbia, France, Belgium and Britain, as well as trickling down to everyone else’s diplomacy
1919,
1929,
1940-45

what are the events that were caused for first World War?
Identify all major actors involved?
Try to come to understanding on what FLS says and what your lens might agree?
What strategic interest can you see at play from all actors at play?
According to FLS what caused the breakdown among states?
What are institutions and what role did they play at the beginning of WWI?
FLS close section where they talk about WWI
ACTORS
INTERESTS
INSTITUTIONS
INTENTIONS
BARGAINING/ COOPERATION
INTENTIONS
STRATEGIES

WEEK 3

4. THE MAIN LIBERAL PROBLEM: WHY WAR?
Reading: FLS Chapter Three: Why Are There Wars?
Reading: FLS Chapter Six: Violence by Nonstate Actors: Civil War and Terrorism

Syria
Failure to Bargain, Assad failed to step down in a civil war. US acts as a world police its own interest by not only remaining as a dominant force but by security…
America threatened by regime does not accept
Russia: they have their own interest

Cooperation, maintain national law, getting involved to protect civilians and prevent destruction, also to speed up economy, opportunity for profit

Realist approach: Syria located in geographically volatile area; China and Russia are involved and backing Syrian regime. US trying to support democracy and free market, but also power struggle.
It seems that Syrian community is insignificant in terms of global community.

Constructivist would look at ethnic divisions, histories, traditions. Religious traditions and ethnicities. Ideology.

--
Is Israeli Palestinian conflict inter-state or civil war? Who should keep land? Holy land—returning home; Palestinian

Rebel objectives in civil war
Policy changes
Secession for independence for national reunion

Revolution
Policy changes

Secession for independence South Sudan 2011
East Timor 2002
Kosovo 2008
Eritrea 1993
USA 1783

Secession for national reunion Nazi uprising in Austria July 1934
Serb uprisings in Croatia 1991and Bosnia 1992

WEEK 4

5. THE LIBERAL SOLUTION TO THE WAR PROBLEM,
PART 1: THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE 
Reading: FLS Chapter Four: Domestic Politics and War

CIVIL WAR AND TERRORISM
Civil War
Becomes global war
Syrian civil war, all actors (not just Syria)
Intra State
Civil
Origins of Intrastate war
Conflicts of interests
FLS says
Greed, resources
Grievances:
Policy changes
Secession
For independence
For national reunion
Revolution
Policy changes
South Sudan
East Timor
Kosovo 08
Eritrea 93
USA 1783

Secession for national reunion
Nazi uprising in Austria July 1934
Serb uprising in Croatia 1991 and Bosnia 1992 (national reunion)
Revolution:
Rhodesia---Zimbabwe
South Africa
Afghanistan
Rwanda 1994
Libya 2011
Syria 2011
Why War? FLS analysis - 3:
Group level explanations
Groups organize for rebellion when they:
Share identity: ethnic, language, religion
Know one another
Have access to resources that allow them to think they can win
Share a sense of injustice directed specifically at government
Example: Ireland Catholic vs. Protestant, Northern Ireland loyalists=group level explanation

Country level explanations
Geography and population: armed rebellion more likely if country have large population that make it hard to find rebels
Less uncontrollable are wealth of contries, wealth of countries and their neighborhoods: civil wars clustered in poor neighborhoods/countries, poor countries also can’t afford border control so they targeted when their neighbor is at civil war
International level explanations

Civil war is bargaining failure
Information asymmetries
Differential access to incomplete information
Both have strong incentives to withhold rather than to share
Withholding information or providing false information, according to FLS, they do not get the result they seek
Commitment problems
Can we trust them to keep their promises and Stick with a deal?
Futile ceasefires
Broken promises
What if relative power changes?
What if disarm?
What if rebels split?
What if some rebels wont settle?
Why should we make ourselves weak/vulnerable?
Indivisible goods
“all or nothing!”
How wars end or Prevented: Strategies and Resolving Civil Wars
Insurgency
Asymmetric Power
“war of the flea” too small and invisible, the flea can’t win but can’t be suppressed either
Counter-Insurgency
Conventional military forces
“Hearts and minds” –good win and sympathy towards natural by providing goods to people
Rebels against rebels
Use of state Terror, the rein of terror
International efforts to end civil wars
Foreign countries intertwined to insure ones they favor win
1st European intervention
Foreign intercession toward a settlement
More than intervention now its settlement
Outsiders can break bargaining and turn settlement by offering a pot of land or something like trade link
We can get better deal once foreigners are subsidizing peace
Civil wars and Resolution Attempts:
Colombian civil war – Havana peace talks since 2012, no FARC disarmament agreement
Philippine civil war – 24 Jan autonomy agreement for Moros
Syrian civil war – Geneva 2 peace talks stalled on humanitarian issues

South Sudan civil war—23 Jan ceasefire
Central African Republic—African Union Multinational Force for Central Africa
Mexican Drug war –vigilantism
Post US Iraq insurgency fighting ongoing between Sunni
Burma civil war-international economic sanctions propelling toward political solution
Reducing likelihood of civil wars
By political democracy
Slovakia, Catalonia
Democracy provides peaceful overturn of government, peace is better bargain
But FLS have no other remedies to offer
Inequality
Democracy transition is rocky road
Egypt example
Opportunities that couldn’t previously wage civil war to do so at this time
Terrorism
Use of violence against civilians and actions taken by group that’s not a state
Terrorist networks try to bring about change by violence against civilians
Are terrorists rational?
Terrorists are strategic
Terrorists Have goals
Instill fear into population they’re targeting
They are extremists: goals are extreme and means available little
Little influence but grand ambitions
Are ancient hatreds to blame?
FLS thinks of terrorism as Bargaining Failure, just like Civil War
So offers:
Dealing with mistrust
Why not just make a deal and be peaceful

Which countries are Democracies and which not? America is not a direct democracy.
Democracy – voicing your opinions, directly or indirectly
What is the relationship between country and WAR:
Are we responsible whether or not our country chooses to go to war
Chief representative’s decision to go to war: if we in democratic do we have a say?
From realist we don’t think about people: realist: is there direct relationship for acts of war
If you disagree with a war but it happens are you responsible
Whether you agree with war or not, doesn’t matter because your tax money feeds military, bought into the system
Forfeiting your will for all
Us citizen assassinated who joined ranks
Is it ok to assassinate US citizens if they joined Alkaida
Should you assassinate the leader of something or go to war with the entire country? Save you money just by assassinating
Member of US citizen
Marxists view
Butterfly effect, we live in world in global economy so we are all “sinners” all involved-global economy: if we are involved they are too
WEEK 5

6. THE LIBERAL (AND REALIST!) SOLUTION,
PART 2: ALLIANCE AND COLLECTIVE SECURITY
Reading: FLS Chapter Five: International Institutions and War

Discussion:
Institutions
Alliances aren’t necessarily actors, alliances are institutions
Liberals and constructivists could look as institutions as an extra factor to maintain balance of power and prevention of war
What happened after WWII and Post Cold War—what happens in early 90’s that changes everything: The Fall of SSR
Think of WW as having taken place 1914-1992, Clinton Years (proxy wars, if not WW)
After WWII, regional organizations like NATO, African treaty organization, many more…Big player after WWII is United Nations, 1946.
Justified intervention becomes important, After WWII: maybe would be good to not respect national severity (Holocaust); humanitarian intervention based around responsibility to protect/never again (with Holocaust in background)
2003 rhetoric was that this is Another Hitler, we justified intervention, UN is supposed to be that force

The Dilemmas of Collective Security
(everyone comes together to protect everyone)
The Collective Action Problem, pg.192
Problem of getting people to do things together
If you want to protest and want that protest to be effective, you have to have everyone act
General consensus problem
UN tries to respond to solve issue of collective decision making and joint action—they cut out a lot of players, 5 important people decide when to act
What is Collective Security
What are Alliances

Why should we intervene?
Intervention: humanitarian vs. military
Non-action (Clinton in Rawanda) is seen as long chain of horrible genocides
Self-security
But is there any way for humanitarian intervention not to be explotative?
What justification is there to help other people on international scale?
Humanitarian intervention on basis of legal
Ethical
How world ought to be, through a Liberalist

Why should we intervene? LEGAL, MORAL, ETHICAL arguments, Humanitarian
Who/what is the object of intervention? What do you mean when you talk about humanity Temporality: “never again” fixes on one moment in history (assumes the role of a trauma)

joint decision problem and alliances and likelihood of war
(don’t need to get into bargaining)

;WEEK 6

7. THE LIBERAL SOLUTION,
PART 3: FREE TRADE
Reading: FLS Chapter Seven: International Trade

8. THE LIBERAL SOLUTION,
PART 4: FINANCE CAPITALISM
Reading: FLS Chapter Eight: International Financial Relations

Direct investment: investor maintains control of facilities
Portfolio: investor has no role in management: loans, bonds, stocks
Sovereign lending
Loans from private actors to governments
When you loan money to US government
Investor’s Viewpoint
When have we saturated the market, Join the Wealthy
Two major classes of private economy
Wealthy individuals
Middle-class contributors to pension funds
In liberal view $ should go from wealthy to middle class (red to blue)
Capital’s early steps toward investment:
From you
To an investment bank (or company)
Then to a mutual fund
Bond or stock or both
Domestic or foreign or world
Sector or region
One-country or several
Mostly stays at home
Mostly low-risk (US Treasury bonds)
Mostly insured US municipal bonds
Risk capital mostly goes to high-grade lower-risk corporate bonds and stocks
Low-risk goes to good wealthy countries that have great track record of paying back and probability, if goes to invest to poorer countries it’s for success stories

Why not more foreign investment? why doesn’t world invest in poorest countries that need most?
Primary objective is to make a profit
Going away from home get an even bigger profit
Primary objective: A higher rate of return
Also:
access to resources not available at home, opportunity to reuse owned technology – good imitator, access to a superior legal system – so their investments less likely to be stolen or nationalized
Sovereign risks
Sovereign defaults
Inferior legal rights
Higher information and transaction costs
Unexpected macroeconomic trends
Scapegoating, foreign investors can be unpopular and scapegoated at home and abroad
Offshoring our jobs!
Borrowing or opening door to foreign investment: selling bonds to other countries, then we become dependent on other countries
Strategic vulnerability, hostility between two countries can arise, and then confiscation of bonds
During war and revolution
Confiscation of foreigners’ investments
Repudiation or moratoriums on debts owned to foreigners (Russian revolution, Nazi revolution, Cuban revolution…)
International investors have problems, even though these problems also exist domestically
“Obsolescing Bargain” investor commits irrevocably then loses bargaining power the bargain is jeopardized a country that needs may bargain in generous terms but over time bargaining power shifts to host government and may decide to turn tables for its own benefit: The Godfather may limit countries’ access to foreign investment foreign capitol inflows may be limited to the most liquid investments foreign capital can be flighty and scary—investors may lack confidence in borrowing, then bond price goes down and government is humiliated in order to be able to flee, they first had to invest in liquid investment (which never helped building the country in the first place)
High-risk situations
“Big Daddy will always bail me out!” an insurance agency, international institutions or maybe the people
Indonesia faced huge financial crises it also had to make huge spending cuts, burden fell on the poor, someone else got victimized but not people who borrowed
Borrow for investment
Spend on
High living
Electoral bribing
Have a fiscal crisis
Offer a “haircut”—give you 10% back on your money (final offer)
Demand a bailout—international agencies must bail us out
Insurance creation
Someone else is COMMITED to pay if you get in trouble
Sometimes increase
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, created in 1933, protected Band Deposits Against Bank Failures, gave depositors insurance against bank failures—moral hazard
Moral Hazard: INSURANCE
The S&L crisis example (late 1980’s)
A bank knows that it is insolvent, declare bankruptcy vs. make very risky loans that will be lucrative if they pay off (lottery tickets)
All leads to bailout
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTION – Bailout institution that protects governments not investors
International Monetary Fund
Cooperation through an institution,
Serves same function as Britain in 19th century, lenders of last resort
Countries contribute to international fund, could borrow on condition that borrower reformed their ways
Prone to socially disastrous failure but eventually can recover, intended for crises prevention of complete disaster
IMF turned from monetary insurance to fiscal Salvationism in the mid 1970s
Largely serves now as lender to developing counters, can tell world not You can now safely lend to this developing country: we’ve taught them how to get into fiscal normality and also we are Watching them
Lately, Ireland, Greece, Portugal
Benefits:
Provides information,
Can facilitate agreement that otherwise would be difficult
Agreements between borrowers and lenders
Criticism of IMF:
Financial standards and information are helpful in SOLVING crises but don’t seem useful in PREVENTING crises
Negligible impact on preventing crises
Negotiations nondemocratic: between appointed financiers and international appointed burocrats, also not transparent
IMF forces unwanted and unpopular policy concessions: cutting social spending, cutting wages, raising taxes
IMF bailouts invite moral hazard, as long as you know Daddy will be there to bail me out you’re more likely to engage in risky behavior
IMF seems skewed to rich countries over poor countries, people whose welfare gets reduced are majority the poor

Multinational Corporations
Foreign direct investment FDI
Building new factory in foreign country or buying existing firms or joint
Smithfield Pork (China bought)
Mergers and acquisitions
Join Ventures
Nike, abundant cheap labor makes it profitable
Apple Ipad and Iphone assembled in China
Why and where?
Market access
Natural resources access
Permissive tax
Minimize factor costs
Regulatory environment
Hire my people and I will subsidize you *Hollywood
Lets go somewhere where nobody cares, pollution
Why do countries seek FDI?
Less risky than foreign loans
Creates jobs,
Creates exports and revenues taxes on goods…
Profitable
Spillover effects: locals can learn management practices by being employed
Partnering with General Electric, Chinese partners got great knowledge
International institutions and FDI
World Bank, governments want to be on good terms
Poland top global improvement this year, made easier to invest, register property, etc
Other major increases: Sri Lanka, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Burundi, Costa Rica…
Devoted to promote economic freedom and prosperity
Competitiveness advice
Transparency international: corruption

Summary:
Progress on ease of doing business
No progress on correction
Mobility of international capital imperfect
There real-world obstacles
Gradual

FLS Labor Mobility
Very limited FLS coverage, but important
There’s intense social pressure to move toward prosperity
International labor mobility

What’s real money? What isn’t?
It’s all real money whoever will accept it
Subjective reality—believe in it and it is
Note of hand, replica money, if you accept it – it woks as currency
*check: writing in piece of paper, English lord…and everyone trusted him so used it as currency art as money—beautiful so people want their money over someone else’s tool as money, knives, spades, hose – could use those as trade items, eventually produced in symbolic form to be used as money merchants can produce money incidentally
Who creates money?
Now central banks
(conflict of interest between the bankers and the government: one wants caution as not to reduce value and other wants action so there’s more)
Governments “greenbacks”
Nature
Writers “notes of hand”
Crypto Communities (Bitcoin) for illegal drugs, unregistered weapons, and today Bitcoin value is nothing
MONEY is worth if you think it is until you think it isn’t

International Money
Evolution of Moneys
Hard money
Gold standard (paper promise I have paper for gold)
Fiat money (here I am believe in me)
Function well as:
Medium of exchange
Measure of value
Unit of account
Store of value
Any currency needs:
Predictably stability
Not easy to get
Stable money works best but stability is hard to get and carries price of its own
Evolution: Hard Money (“Specie”)
Copper (base)
China, Rome, America, they were called cash, low grade currency takes a lot of them to make a purchase, and you don’t know how many so you need a specialist to count it for you and pay a small fee for him to do that
Silver
China, Athens, Spain, America (1934 part of Great Depression and then dropped by US both gold and silver)
GOLD
Rome, Persia, Britain, America
“The Gold Standard” remained, President Roosevelt forbade Americans to have gold except jewelry during Depression
$100,000 gold backed currency bill (hand it over in treasury and you get worth in gold back!)
The Classical Gold Standard Controversy
1970-1914, Great Britain, most were although China remained multi-metallic country with silver more important than gold
In 1890’s, the US was in recession
US tried to add silver
The Gold Standard Controversy, many silver mines at that time
Dorothy, America, farmers, workers, Gold Standard Analogy

The Reality of Hyperinflation: DISASTER
Chinese paper, Marco Polo praised paper money
Continental Dollars, 1775 to worthlessness in 1781
Assignats, French Revolution, created as Republican currency, in 7 years became worthlessness
Mandats, very fast worthlessness
Confederacy Money, based on belief South will rise
The German Marks, 1923, most notorious Modern currency collapse
Zimbabwe Dollar

NONETHELESS, TODAY WOLD FUNCTIONS IN PAPER MONEY
Dollar, Euro, Pound, Yen: How is Dollar number one when Pound and Euro is worth more?

“Reserves” and “Reserve Currency”
Foreign-exchange reserves: assets held by central banks and monetary authorities, usually in different reserve currencies
Reserve currency: a currency governments and institutions choose to hold in significan quantities as part of their foreign exchange reserve “OUR CURRENCY IS BUILD TO LAST! HAVE FAITH IN OUR CURRENCY”
Transaction Currency: the currency in which a business transation is processed and booked
“somewhere between 40 and 60 percent of international financioal transaction are denominated …”

Where are we today?
Floating rates, 1914-44
Attempts to reestablish gold standard but unsuccessful
Bretton Woods, 1944-73
International Monetary, created by US, big winner monetarily after World Wars so in position to be leader
1914-Present
US fixes currency to gold, other broke countries fixed their money to US dollar
If currency collapse the IMF would be there and US would be standing there next to IMF, IMF there to nag countries if they’re spending too much
1970’s collapse! US put in money in Vietnam War, and countries lost hope and believed US didn’t or wouldn’t have the gold to back its dollar up anymore, belief that US currency wasn’t going to last and they were right, Nixon said “we’re abandoning the peg” and collapsed!
Managed float, 1973-Present
Most countries don’t want hegemony back so they loosely coordinate and try not to surprise each other to not do anything under the table
Only major currencies really able to manage this
Bounced (diminished) but not in catastrophic way, degree of change people are prepared to tolerate
Inflation
Value of $ means inflation, we need to be able to INFLATE sometimes
Dorothy wins at last!
We need flexibility, we need to be able to inflate
We need to be able to devaluate

Inflation Targeting
Began in New Zealand, 1990, wanted to increase money supply one way or another
In use by central banks
UK, Canada, Australia, South Korea, Egypt, South Africa, etc
This is done OCCASIONALLY
Inflation Target as of 2012 is 2% (we are short of it actually)
Set Interest Rates
Buy US Treasury Securities
“Quantitative Easing” lowers interest rates
“print money” (without using a printing press!)
=increase amount of money in circulation but not running a press night and day
Accepted countries have certain amount of inflation of 1-2% annual
BUT Exchange rates need to be monitored day to day

Choose your own National Regime!
Floating
Pegged, hold value of our money stable in relation to another currency or gold
Managed, fiddle with it but not enormously
Dump your currency, we’ll adopt someone else’s currency, usually small country that doesn’t want cost of central bank so they take on a bigger country’s currency
Joys and Sorrows of Currency Depreciation
Under-valuated Currencies
Attract foreign investment
Attract foreign tourism
Help exporters and exports
Improve trade defects
Over-vaulted Currencies
Help importers and consumers
Discourage foreign investors
Hurt exports
Directs tourists out of the country and discourages tourists come into the country
What to do?
Shall the state intervene to
Maintain the value of currency
Appreciate the currency
Depreciate the currency
Or just let the currency run its own way, adopt new value
US doesn’t monitor exchange rates with other countries but instead monitors internal currency
Investors favor FIXED RATES because they can make more long time investments
Vs. PEGGED RATE

Currency Crises
When not creditable,
Consumers loose purchasing power
Manufacturers may gain
Speculative attacks on currencies have been more frequent in recent years, Kazakstan stopped supporting their currency and let it fall (because was getting such bad rep and they could not back it up)
Greece, ‘our deficit lot less than it should be’ this is problem because uses the Euro, could not manipulate its currency because doesn’t have currency, Euro pressed Greeks in return for bailout you must take severe austerity measures and there were protests but they went ahead with it
International cooperation can and has stabilized bailouts
Benefits and Costs
Austerity-countries don’t like, but have to accept (Grece)
The Liberal Monetary Ideal
ONE World Money
The Brute …?
Arguments for:
Look notes
No sign we’ll get it in near future, because governments like to have control over its monetary policy and to run their own economy
Absence of political trust, belief that people will manage in a way not helpful to us but only them
No chance of having a voice, loss of sovereignty by small nation
People say you’ve gotten as close to World currency as you’ll get, dollar
Source? IMF? World central bank? World state? Gold standard?
Not Quite World Money but it is getting more narrow
Major invoetion of Exhange Rate system: created and Still expanded
During the post-1973 major innovation is Euro
No clear course or ideal
Settle of day to day lots of money management and lots of instability

Discussion
Liberal view FLS
Benefits from trade:
Adam Smith, free market, what’s the reason why certain actors have more and certain have less? There are barriers, government.
Comparative advantage: in IR some countries have Comparative advantage, can produce one good better than another country, Shri Lanka cinnamon because of its geographic location: if you have it and other country doesn’t then have something to sell. You want to make it such that every country is making use of their Comparative advantage, this way everyone makes use of global economy.
Complications
Land, Labor, Capital=3 components of organizing for FLS
Capitalist mode of production
Liberal framework begins with development of capitalism, historically, Major liberal theorists: John Lock, mode of production-capitalism and making sure everyone gets piece of pie
What helps produce capital? What is capital? Machines
Financial capital is money used by entrepreneurs and businesses to buy what they need to make their products or to provide their services to the sector of the economy upon which their operation is based, i.e. retail, corporate, investment banking, etc.
Demand (supply) gives capital value
Labor Theory of value is alternative to economic model, which is supply and demand
Labor Theory of Value has dropped out currently, it becomes heated, because in order to have capital you need surplus. To have surplus you need to extract from someone. Means of living. But ultimately you also have to work just to keep things running. More work actually that you do that produces surplus. Way to get capital is to get surplus, way to get surplus is to extract form labor. We call alienation of labor. (Marxist) Marx versus Adam Smith.
Surplus value created by labor vs. demand by consumers
Marxist: against saying demand creates value
Post WWII
In FLS, they talk about Pax Britannica, sea is open given that we own it. Free trade for everyone given we’re empire, they took away all the barreiers so Pax Britannica interesting model for international trade
Break Down of Pax Britannica
Imbalances of power in military scale
Single empire had dominated global economy such that they could make things/keep things free
The western world moved gradually
Developing nations are developing towards?
Modernization theorists, Islamic revolution, Iran 1979, certain ideologies that drive people towards become modernized, you had a progression and then all of a sudden becomes modern.
Can you be modernized without being westernized
By 1980’s rich countries become open to international trade, eventually most communist countries join the liberalizing trend.
Pattern merchalized, liberalization after 1945, further leading to globalization 1980
FLS points out that after 1980, globalization/ global market—like Pax Brittanica: saying we can actually return back to time where there was global market but during Pax Britannica there was a global sovereign, but FLS problem can you have free trade without global dominion?
Can a country become modernized without becoming Westernized? Do modernization and Winterization go hand in hand? China (modernized but they don’t follow our values) Is that desirable?
When we talk about this, we ALSO talk about globalization, inclusion of other countries that aren’t in world economy into the world economy
Could a country be included in world economy while maintain its own political and cultural values?
Globalization? What’s becoming Globalized? Is Globalization truly Global? World Economy? Globalization? What IS BEING Globalized? Are we entering a purely economic one?
People, information, goods, culture, economy, intermixing
When entering globalization, Whether or not person entering global market is forced to give up their cultural values?
Mexican labors who are undocumented? Cali – if that labor force disappeared the whole economy would collapse, see Day Without A Mexican
Economy is not national, It’s Global, within global you have different markets, cities, or regions, you have annoying thing called Borders, people compelled to leave their homes to go to places that have jobs/economy, becomes big problem with undocumented migration
We pay them cheaper, they put in more into economy that they take out. If we make them citizens we have to pay them minimum wage.

Trade? What policy theorom is it based on?
Culture, liberal doesn’t look at, but instead what does country have? We don’t have to think about culture, we can just think about the products and raw materials?
Protectoin: by having tarrifs its talking about protection
Specific *factors approach, when you think about factors of production, have to be mindful
Sectors, industrial, agriculture
Barriers of trade, economy is fractured in different sectors, where people have different interests creating barriers to cooperation

http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/twigg/Karl_Marx_versus_Adam_Smith.shtml http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value WEEK 7

9. THE LIBERAL SOLUTION,
PART 5: WORLD MONEY
Reading: FLS Chapter Nine: International Monetary Relations

10. THE LIBERAL SOLUTION,
PART 6: DEVELOPMENT
Reading: FLS Chapter Ten: Development: Causes of the Wealth and Poverty of Nations

Relationship between wealth:
Education, primary school—gender inequality: girls left out of primary school
Maternal Death, India: 8 million male/female difference in attending primary
Obstacles to Development
Geographic Obstacles
Geography:
Physical distance from Cores (rich countries)
As translated into time-to-market
And cost-to-market
Further you’re from Core more costly to get your stuff there and back, every day goods spend on raute there’s a cost/charge
Neighborhoods: in neighborhood of Core state
If neighborhood, costs are reduced
To be well off rich neighborhood better
Physical distance has significant impact on growth
Landlock
Disadvantageous

Geography of Unhealth: often preventable deaths Infectious diseases, prenatal, maternal, preventable
“endemic” like malaria, geography, mostly Africa, ½ worlds population—but neighborhood for malaria tends to be warm and wet like Africa—geographical disadvantage endemic vs. epidemic (if it suddenly breaks out)

National resources
Can be disadvantageous as well as advantageous
Material, water, and, air, fossil fuels metal ores, all important not evenly distributed in world
Uneven distribution of Freshwater Resources
Amazon and mountains of South America=high concentration of water resources but hard to export, possible to be rich country and be water poor, water shortages affect all countries, they affect development like agriculture then that affects cali food prices and exports and so on
“Resource curse,” look at FLS, copper proved to be a curse to Zambia, oil curse to Nigeria, average Nigerian hasn’t gotten the advantage, pg. 391,397 of new FLS; governments that buy silence of their population and elite can live high – unsustainable but happening

Ethnic Diversity? Is it good within a state? FLS pg. 396
Postcolonial boundaries and ethnic diversity
55 states in world in 1900 colonialism
65 states in the world during League of Nations interwar period and 58 were sometime members
200 states today 192 UN members
Is Somalia land a state? Is Taiwan a state? Subjective

Indigenous living languages, 6,700 languages in world
From Mali to Papa New Guinea that has 836 living languages
Hard to colonize-these are people that don’t speak each others’ language, hard to pack them together into one nation, can’t speak to each other decolonization? DO we need ethnically homogeneous nation-states? FLS may say Yes, One nation per state, one state per nation 6700 UN member nations? (most would be landlocked?) has world seen insufficient decolonization? Independence

Decolonization
French West Africa 1895-1960:
Walk away
When you walk away? Will you leave behind?
One federal
How to divide and leave the colony? How to be divided by administrators?
8 former administrative districts promoted to independent states—they were divided by 8 successor states of French former colonies or 371 ethnic nation-states which would have been divided by languages?
Economists say One state and One market
Nationalists demand Wilsonian national self-determination for all
Politicians compromise How many countries should emerge?
Economists: one because better for trade: not doing business for legal system, one big global market
Spain vs Portugal cannot be together culturally
Negotiation and violence
Liberal-Capitalist conclusion
They need single encompassing market economy

Historic Obstacles to Development, former Metropoles
Ex British colonies did best than French or any other
British common law protects investors from state
Was it Liberal institutions?
Was it Liberal Ideology?
Likely both

Geographic Obstacles
Historic obstacles
Self-Reinforcing

Self-Reinforcing:
Positive feedback causal loops, increase in A produces increase in B
Illiteracy for women: gets passed down, hard to learn on own send kids to school

Corruption:
Set-back to production, makes country less able to reinvest in its profits since prifits are being skimmed by corrupt (who are investing in something unuseful in development)
War begets poverty begets war
Female illiteracy: ignorance begets poverty begets ignorance endemic disease begets poverty begets malaria
Capital Consumption: high maintenance economy
Large infrastructures cost to fix
“now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place” so maintenance cost is nothing
But it is a Public Good, so costly not to invest in any
Negative savings 2003, unsustainability, depreciation of fixed capital and environmental resources minus also environmental damage and pollution which is a form of negative saving

Antidevelopment interests: You can neglect to make, a public good, they see as a threat to social, struggle between aristocrat and rising middle class which will gain political power democratically—fear in British, aristocracy was happy with what they had, didn’t like idea of sharing wealth or being displaced themselves
Absence of rule of law, poor policy decisions: anti-development and infrastructure neglect
Infrastructure neglect
Collective Action problems

Other obstacles:
Terms of trade—relative price of exports in terms of import, amount of goods can purchase in export of goods
Terms of trade improvement: 1980-2001, the only countries that terms of trade improved, US gained most, Japan, India, brazil did better, while countries where terms of trade went down was Mexico, among others
Oil exporters, manufactured goods exporters, agricultural products exporters, metals and mining products exporters, net food importers
Thesis: Industrialized countries always get advantage over primary producers, only was to get ahead for primary producers is to industrialize, However, this thesis failed – oil exporters did best while food producers did worst, so primary producers did really well, commodity boom did not go along with this thesis, this also part of economic cycles, not a great idea to tell country that manufacturers are way of future
FLS – paired cases of development: pg. 391
Paired cases of development: government policies
In Zambia vs. Botswana
Zabmia, establishes one party sate designed for patronage, copper, government buys off anyone who looks as threat, guarantee you a salary that you couldn’t get by leading some sort of democratic legislation, wasn’t invested in human capital, used to stifle further development
Botswana, diamonds, but unlike Zambia, Botwana invested in human capital, established stable reliable investment for foreign investment,
Burma vs. Thailand
Thailand prospered, Burma hasn’t
Long similar history although ethnically different, but had different domestic policies that contributed
Democratic institutions, investments in human capital, law are path to success professors questions whether ethnicity and terms of trade are really bad for growth

Adam Smith, liberal
How to overcome obstacles from malaria to corruption? What’s a strategy? Do you have to go country to country ?

Competing Development Strategies

WEEK 8

11. THE LIBERAL SOLUTION,
PART 7: RULE OF LAW AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
Reading: FLS Chapter Eleven: International Law and Norms

Import substituting industrialization
Interest Groups: Winners
Domestic industry and workers

Limits of ISI
Restricted application
An early phase

Competing developing stratedies
ISI vs EOI
Import-substituting vs. export-
EOI: aims at producing for world markets
Cartels of primary producers
Object: drive up export prices (adam smith, people of same trade seldom meet together), cartels: how far can we raise prices
OPEC
International sugar organization, international coffee agreement, international tin council, tropical timber organization
Tried to raise prices, realized there substitute, they want sustainability and stable
--eventually created stable?

Washington Consensus
Interest Groups:
Winners: businesses and workers in foreign trade
Losers: national workers

Beijing Consensus (much like Washington Consensus)

ISI—limited application
EOI-limited application
NIEO
Washington consensus

Proposals FLS pg. 417-418

How to address obstacles in development?
Physical distance, like Suez and Panama canal change time difference, as well as Melting of ice caps changes shipping
New “Cores” have emerged and changed
Landlock
Diseases
Political obstacles
Addressing stagnancy

FLS discussion:
Public good =
Rival vs. non-rival public good
Non-excludable = can’t keep it from someone
Non-excludable but rival = hot-water, anyone can use it but there is limited; fish population (Tragedy of the commons) over fished then there’s none left…
Overexploitation
A public good that is non-excludable but rival, in so far as we are self-interested ass-holes
Collective action problem
Environmental policies
Factors make it easier/harder to get people involved: size of groups, distrust of others in group—refers to bargaining
How would you create an incentive: tax people, create tradable permits - privatization (free market solutions …privitize), fining people
Bundle public and private goods in order to incentivize people to cooperate

FLS NAMES FOUR: size, history, interaction, intensity (how badly they want it)
FLS says Polluters win, they have money
Lobby, pro-business lobby
Advanced industrialized countries create the most pollution
International Convention…why didn’t it work? Set standards, but haven’t provided any accountability –no visibility. Weren’t able to monitor everyone’s… what did the United Nations do
Public good is non-disputable
Some are rival
Harder to make
History of your interactions matter
You have to give incentive
Domestic interests differ-some people care more about some issues than others
COLLECTIVE ACTION PROBLEM
JOINT DISSSION PROBLEM factors that go into facilitating collective action
Environment consequences of failure we all will global warm, distruction of earth
WEEK 9

12. THE LIBERAL (AND CONSTRUCTIVIST!) SOLUTION,
PART 8: WESTERNIZATION
Reading: FLS Chapter Twelve: Human Rights

13. THE LIBERAL (AND CONSTRUCTIVIST!) SOLUTION,
PART 9: INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION FOR PUBLIC GOODS
Reading: FLS Chapter Thirteen: The Global Environment

Discussion
International Law
Customary international law, developed slowly over time, norms that are ‘appropriate behavior (such as Russian military intervention) constructivist way-socialization occurs through our interactions, how to mediate between local, national, global – telos is that everybody is becoming “normal” cultural relativism – should we enforce cultural norms?
France vs. US
Government has to go in line with popular culture
Hollywood
Liberalism vs. constructivism

---liberal law is process of learning—what is making people ‘normal’ is learning itself. Those norms should always be pushed though?
Being habituated.
How that process happens? Granier.
WEEK 10

14. THREE LOOMING PROBLEMS
a. ANTIGLOBALIZATION
b. NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION
c. USCHINA POWER TRANSITION
Reading: FLS Chapter 14, The Future of International Politics

Intro concise, Sections proportional
4000 words that are little papers
3 times papers one larger argument examples my example why -0 is good is migration, then 1000 words

pick 3 examples for globalization