INTERNATIONAL SECURITYFocus Questions, Unit 1: The Causes of ConflictWhy are there no official intl. statistics kept on political violence and its victims as is the case with economic data? What are some of the ways that social scientists typically measure the presence of conflict and its consequences? Whyis the data on conflict deaths collected by the World Health Organization subject to much debate? Looking at the data that has been collected to document recent conflict trends, how much more or less war is there now than was the case two decades ago? What are the major trends with respect to: the number battle deaths in the typical conflict and overall, civil wars, and conflicts among or involving non-state actors? What about major crises—situations where one or more countries begin to prepare their people for disputes? What about spending on the military? What about instances of genocide?Why are people—and even scholars and policymakers—so unaware of the ongoing changes in the frequency and deadliness of conflict? Looking at survey data that has been collected on regional perceptions of national security, how closely do people’s fears for security mirror actual levels of conflict in their region?What regions have the most conflict in the world today? Which countries have been involved in the most conflicts since the end of WW2? Which countries have spent the most time involved in conflict? What, if anything, do the most violent countries have in common?Why do scholars like Kenneth Waltz think that it is necessary to study the causes of war? Is understanding the causes of war the same as being able to end it? What are the core assumptions of each of the three “images” Waltz proposes to best understand why war happens? His images are not meant to be “theories” of conflict, but rather levels of analysis where theories should be targeted. What theories does he briefly cover for each level? (More specific questions on these are listed below) What evidence, if any, is there to suggest that human beings might be innately—that is, biologically or psychologically—prone to engage in or support violence? Why have social scientists frequently pointed to primate behavior as a source for understanding human biology and violence? What objections have been raised to studying chimpanzees as a proxy for what human beings look like once you peel away the impacts of modern socialization? Based on your partial viewing of Soldiers of Conscience and the various readings we covered on the social constructionof war, what evidence is there to suggest that warriors and war itself are “made” or “invented” rather than natural? What evidence is there that human beings may physically reject the violence of modern warfare? What social functions has war historically served, and why does the nearly universal presence of war in written records not necessarily demonstrate that war is “natural”? What are some other widespread social behaviors that have been nearly or completely eliminated in a short period of time by modernity?How might biological differences explain variations between men and women in supporting conflict? How does the propensity for war appear to change as women gain more political and social power in a society, and how does the data we reviewed in class (PPTs) support Fukuyama’s argument that the world would be a safer place if it were run by women? What kind of biological and other evidence does he provide to support this view? Does patriarchy cause militarism, as suggested by Fukuyama, or is it the other way around? Gwynne Dyer’s documentary (PPTs include links to the video) contends that the development of state militarism led to rigid patriarchyand the various institutions that historically justified and perpetuated limitations on women’s freedom almost everywhere? What evidence does he provide to support his claim? If he is right, how might declining militarism in some societies lead to a restructuring of these nations’ gender relations? What are the major arguments of the scholars—many of them women—who believe that it is “folly” to believe the world would be a lot safer if only it were run by women? Are the differences in support for conflict among men and women all that different when compared to variations across different societies? What kind of evidence do these give in support of their arguments?What are the major approaches to understanding the relationship between ethnicity and violence? Specifically, why might ethnic attachments and motivations towards group violence be biologically rooted? What evidence is there to suggest the socialization is better able to overcome individual inclinations towards violence and group-level violence towards “outsiders,” especially when territory is involved? Why is violence between peoples who see themselves as belonging to different “peoples” or “nations” so common? Other thinkers—among them Dr. Seuss—see ethnies as constructed and flexible identities that are broadly open to manipulation, especially by “nationalists.” What are their arguments? Why does Samuel Huntington think that ethnic identities—even those at the “civilizational” level—are likely to be major drivers of conflict in the 21st century?Some scholars (review Waltz’s images reading and Jack Levy) argue that most international conflict is the product of state/domestic politics and economics. What types of geographical, cultural, and economic settings experience the most interstate violence?What types of governments are most prone to conflict? Why might democracies be expected to be less inclined towards violence against other countries? Although they don’t appear to fight one another, are democracies, in fact, less frequently involved in wars with other states? Are they less likely to start conflicts? Are they any more likely to get out of conflict once they are involved? How do variations among the structures of democracies impact the likelihood that they will start or join conflicts? Some scholars (review the article by Byman and Pollack) have tried to understand how certain political systems and societies are more or less likely to select leaders who support conflict. What kind of leaders (or more specifically, which kind of leader personalities) are most prone to war-making? What kinds of political systems (or at least politicalarraignments) are most susceptible to putting conflict-inclined