DOC PREVIEW
UVM POLS 051 - Actors in the International System

This preview shows page 1 out of 2 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 2 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 2 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

POLS 051 1st Edition Lecture 4Outline of Last Lecture I. “The Fall and Rise of the Failed State Paradigm”II. Policy did not work, why? III. Misplaced Confidence IV. Hegemon Outline of Current Lecture I. Actors in the International SystemII. Hirsh, “The Clinton Legacy” III. Intergovernmental OrganizationsIV. Three Schools of Thought: Why IGO? Current LectureI. Actors in the International Systema. Individuals, Inter-Governmental Organizations (IGO), Non-Governmental Organization, State (Main Actor) II. Hirsh, “The Clinton Legacy” a. Thesis: emphasis on how Clinton improved Americas image and interrelations, but played a diplomatic “soft power.” b. Compares to George Kennan whose polar system was hegemonic, was able to simply American Foreign Policy, Clinton’s is too complex c. Now is a non-polar, complex world, impossible to come up with new grand strategy for U.S policyd. Clintons voice not heard, America wanted to strengthen allies and gain leadership without collaboration e. Obama’s Kissinger  Himself!III. Why Diplomatic world pine for the next George Kennan? a. Want foreign policy in a packagei. Containment, lost vision from cold warii. Look for doctrine, less grey, more black and white: more direction 1. Example: Anti-terror These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.IV. Intergovernmental Organizationsa. Define: group of Individual States that work together as oneb. Members are states and every IGO has a specific goal or mission c. Examples: i. European Unionii. NATO- Security lineiii. United Nationsiv. Common Wealth v. African Unionvi. Eurasian League vii. NAFTAd. Main goal (long term): prevent war and conflict, ways to get there differV. Three Schools of Thought: Why IGO? a. Federalism: argues main cause of War, States exercising too sovereignty i. Too much powerii. Hard to create IGO that sets limit for sovereignty iii. Perks, reasons for joining but bound by rules and regulations to limit sovereignty b. Functionalism: economic deprivation, lack of economic development causes war i. Form IGO to strengthen economy of block of states ii. Less likely to experience economic conflict c. Collective goods problem i. Define: everyone has access to goods ii. Who pays for goods and maintenance? 1. NPE VPR- all have access iii. Free rider problem, we know collective goods available iv. Usually hegemon that suppose international


View Full Document

UVM POLS 051 - Actors in the International System

Download Actors in the International System
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Actors in the International System and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Actors in the International System 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?