IR 210 1st Edition Lecture 22 Current Lecture The global intelligence of our national leaders If we go into Libya where does it stop Do we go into Africa next Tom Marino R Penn Member of the foreign affairs committee 2011 Out of civil states there is always war of everyone against everyone T Hobbes War is endemic in the system Fourth foundational voice Thomas Hobbes 1588 1679 Royal tutor clearly influenced by chaos of the English civil war The Leviathan 1651 Published in exile Hobbes not always as pessimistic turned by the overthrow of the monarch not so much by his translation for Thucydides There s none that pleased me like Thucydides Machiavelli human nature is critical variable Thucydides minimalist all three levels are critical variables focused on system level especially security dilemma Hobbes says democracy s a foolish thing than a republic wiser in one King Sovereigns could not be judged in his actions by the same moral standard as the private individual Why o Duality of morality Acting in an amoral environment man in nature struggle for power Man s natural right is not determined by sound reason but by his desire and his power all men seek supremacy Seven contributions to Realist Traditions o Man in a state of nature is in constant state of conflict and war Asked why conflict early advocate of Why did it happen Levels of analysis Competition pursuit of wealth in a context of materials scarcity Quarrel for glory honor dignity and reputation Lack of trust fear Individual level or national level of fear o How should a leader control and manage conflict Govern A central power or strong state that provides law ad order security of life liberty and material possessions Sounds like defining activities During the time that men live without a common power to keep them all in awe they are in a condition called war where everyman is enemy to everyman o o o o o International system no common power Conflict is the likely outcome of material competition in the absence of an overpowering bulwark against aggression Life is based on fear and the danger of violent death People use violence for trifles as a word a smile a different opinion and many other signs of undervalue Someone will use violence if there is nothing to fear other than the power of the victim Why are we not always at war What prevents leaders from using war as a common behavior Three reasons Prudence cost of war Altruism pity on victims Moral convictions Rejects the moral argument Human kind seeks only power until death Rejects altruism works when stakes are low but not when high Most likely deterrent is prudence or the fear of defeat ad high costs What about alliances DO they provide a way to prevent future wars and encourage cooperation Alliances based on the adaption of independent wills easily fall apart when it comes to implementation Covenants without swords are but mere words What is the best defense and deterrence against war Foresight Prepare for war and bolster one s capacity to defend Sets up security dilemma Can we be saved by global regimes that encourage cooperation Cooperation is not part of human nature Countries should seek peach and be fair and forgiving but because selfinterest rules and survival is a higher value no sate should take risks to achieve these duties Strong states keep order at home but peace globally secured by Forts garrisons and guns on the frontiers of their kingdom Kings whose power is greatest turn their endeavors to assuring it at home by laws or abroad by wars Fundamental and Modern Realism ruled from 1648 1920 Assumptions form earlier thinkers ad events No common power Hobbes Thucydides Strong state essential Machiavelli Hobbes Constant struggle for power War is a constant possibly Duality of morality Cooperation limited utility stag hunt Self help force an indispensible tool of statecraf No state is prepared to give up the possibility of gaining individual advantage over the rest Sovereignty and independence get in the way of rational world peace JJ Rousseau WWI end of a very fragile balance of power system and a frayed colonial system WWI a time for rethinking world order Grotian or Wilsonian moment At Grotian moments critical voices emerge to shape debates about global policy End of WWI Carr Jane Addams Woodrow Wilson Norman Angell Max Weber End of WWII Niebuhr Morgenthau Kennan Aron Mitrany Kissinger and Kirkpatrick End of Colonialism Nkrumah Fanon Gandhi Bio Nyerre End of Cold War Enloe Falk Bruntland Mearsheimer Walt Wendt At the end of WWI and WWII Major peace movements the active public sought Eliminate war as a tool of statecraf Stop use of certain types of weapons Minimize war crimes Establish rules laws eliminate need for force Global force collective security Address causes of violence Excessively utopian Unrealistic Summing up foundational realists If we did for ourselves what we do for our country what rascals we would be Cavour 1 First modern voice Max Weber 1864 1920 Founder of the 20th century sociology and political economy Many contributions to social science 5 important for IR Definition of a state sole source of right to use force Control of the authoritative allocation of public resources Politics is all about power there is no peace in the economic struggle for economics Politics is defined by conflict and a constant struggle for power Nationalism great powers have the responsibility to preserve culture at home and in the system View of leadership Ethic of responsibility in order to do good you have to do some evil A political ethic has no choice but to confront the reality that good ends often require evil 2 Second modern voice Edward Hallet Carr 1892 1982 Reorganization regional and international cooperation and regimes Journalist diplomat Woodrow Wilson chair 1936 1947 The twenty year crisis almost lost the chair Not himself a realist in true sense criticism of Utopianism failure of liberal Internationalism to establish Post WWI peace Complex and inconsistent thinker Concerned about social justice but also extremes No heaven on earth Bankruptcy of liberalism The twenty years crisis 1939 this is where he trashes Wilson peace advocates and others Utopian world order designed by the winners excessively idealistic All fields start out idealistic need a blend of Utopian and realist thinking Middle ground democracies should take some of the good lessons Main contribution to realists avoid extreme positions No universal solutions go for moderation and