INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 2013–2014 Update Tenth Edition Joshua S. Goldstein Jon C. Pevehouse Chapter Two: Realist Theories

French forces intervene in Mali, 2013. In April of 2013, the United Nations Security Council voted to establish a peacekeeping force for Mali, adding to a recent military intervention by France, on condition that fighting between French-led troops supporting the Malian government and retreating militants be understated. French forces intervene in Mali, 2013.

2.1 Realism Explain international relations in terms of power Foundation is principle of dominance Developed in reaction to a liberal tradition that realists called idealism Long tradition of realism Idealism emphasizes international law, morality, international organizations as key influences on international events Human nature basically good International system is a community of states with the potential to work together to overcome mutual problems Idealists particularly active between WWI and WWII Theoretical framework that has held a central position in the study of IR Sun Tzu Thucydides Machiavelli Hobbes Morgenthau Based on the principle of dominance International relations is best understood in terms of power. The exercise of power by states toward each other is sometimes called real politik, or just power politics. Modern realism has extensive historical roots. MyLab Activity 1: Video: Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech http://media.pearsoncmg.com/long/long_mpsk_vcs_1/vcs2_03_churchills_iron_curtain_speech.html Creative Assignment: After viewing Churchill’s “iron curtain speech,” and after considering the questions the video poses about links between Churchill’s speech and that of Neville Chamberlain prior to World War II, as well as considering the causes of the Cold War, ask students to imagine Stalin’s response to Churchill’s speech. Remind them of the definitions of realism, with its emphasis on power, and idealism, with its emphasis on morality, and international law and organizations.   Ask students to pen their Stalin response. Then break the class into small groups, with students reading their responses to the others in the group. Members of the group should give each other feedback on how realistic their responses are, keeping in mind issues around realism, idealism, “state of war,” and perhaps containment and geopolitics, as well. Finally, present Stalin’s response to Churchill’s speech, as published in the March 14th, 1946 issue of the New York Times (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1946stalin.html), and let students estimate how their own responses measure up to Stalin’s response.

MyLab Media Video: Churchill’s Iron Curtain Speech http://media.pearsoncmg.com/long/long_mpsk_vcs_1/vcs2_03_churchills_iron_curtain_speech.html Please log into MyPoliSciLab with your username and password before accessing this link. 4

Realism explains international relations in terms of power, and realists and idealists differ in their assumptions about human nature, international order, and the potential for peace. Power can be conceptualized as influence or as capabilities that can create influence. Idealists were particularly active between World War I and World War II, following the painful experience of World War I. U.S. president Woodrow Wilson and other idealists placed their hopes for peace in the League of Nations as a formal structure for the community of nations. Those hopes were dashed when that structure proved helpless to stop German, Italian, and Japanese aggression in the 1930s. Since World War II, realists have blamed idealists for looking too much at how the world ought to be instead of how it really is.

Theoretical approaches to IR attempt to provide a conceptual framework to analyze international relations. Approaching issues in global politics through the filter of any particular IR theory allows one to perceive the conspicuous events relevant to that theory.

2.1 Realism Q: Modern realist theory developed in reaction to which of the following? The Cold War Idealism Marxism Constructivism 7

Answer: B) Idealism 8

Realists believe that States are the least important actors in IR. True-False: Realists believe that States are the least important actors in IR. 9

Answer: False 10

2.2 Power Defining Power Estimating Power Elements of Power Power is an important concept in international relations, and for realism in particular. Power is notoriously difficult to define and measure.

POWER AS INFLUENCE Power is the ability to influence the behavior of others. Military force and economic sanctions are among the various means that states and nonstate actors use to try to influence each other. Russia’s position as a major energy supplier to Europe has increased its power in recent years even though its military threat to Europe has decreased. In 2009 Russia shut off natural gas supplies during a price dispute with Ukraine, a dispute shadowed by Russian anger at Ukraine’s efforts to join NATO. The shutoff, visible here in a pressure gauge reading zero, left customers across Europe without heat. In 2010 Ukrainians elected a new president more friendly toward Russia. Power is not local: beyond Ukraine, the former Yugoslavia, Moldova, Bulgaria and Slovakia were all deeply impacted by the gas cuts by Russia.

Power as Influence The ability to get another actor to do what it would not otherwise have done (or not to do what it would have done) Problem - seldom know what the targeted actor would have done in the absence of first actor’s power One approach distinguishes power as influence from power as capability. There are some problems with measuring influence. How do we know what a second actor would have done in the absence of the first power’s influence? Circular logic: power is defined as influence, and influence measures power. 13

Power as Capability & Estimating Power Specific characteristics or possessions of states Easier to measure than influence Total GDP may be the best single indicator of a state’s power Material elements of power Nonmaterial elements of power Soft power Relative Power Capability is not influence itself, but the ability or potential to influence others; capabilities can be based on material elements; and capabilities can also be thought of in nonmaterial terms. Examples of specific characteristics of possessions of states Size, level of income, armed forces, etc. Total GDP may be the best single indicator of a state’s power - combines overall size, technological level, and wealth - still a rough indicator Material elements of power: geography, natural resources, GDP, weaponry, etc. Nonmaterial elements of power: national will, leadership/negotiation skills, governmental legitimacy, etc. 14

Elements of Power Long term Short term Fungibility Geopolitics 15 Total GDP Population Territory Geography Natural resources Less tangible - political culture, patriotism, education of the population, strength of the scientific knowledge base, credibility of its commitments, power of ideas Short term Military forces - size, composition, preparedness Military-industrial capacity to quickly produce weapons Quality of a state’s bureaucracy Less tangible - support and legitimacy that an actor commands from constituents and allies, loyalty of a nation’s army and politicians to its leader Fungibility of power Geopolitics - use of geography as an element of power Lecture Starter: Use the revolution in Libya to discuss how both GDP and military power might play out in power conflicts. In turn, use the link between that Libyan revolution and the rebellion in Mali to discuss how unexpected or intangible factors might circumvent more measurable factors, like GDP and military might. Then ask students to provide a couple more examples pulled from history or recent headlines. 15

THE ECONOMICS OF POWER Throughout 2013 the U.S. saw its economy contract as a result of less spending on defense, sparking conversations among politicians about the consequences of both details in the face of China rising in both economic and militaristic power. Military power such as tanks rests on economic strength, roughly measured by GDP. The large U.S. economy supports U.S. military predominance. In the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, the United States could afford to send a large and technologically advanced military force to the Middle East. Here, U.S. forces enter Iraq, March 2003.

2.2 Power Q: With respect to power, __________. it is not difficult to accurately measure the power of another state the relative power of a state is more important to realists than the absolute power of a state more powerful states will always defeat weaker states in war if a state’s own values become widely shared among other states, it is harder to exercise power over them 17

Answer: B) The relative power of a state is more important to realists than the absolute power of a state 18

Being landlocked is a geopolitical concern of states. True-False: Being landlocked is a geopolitical concern of states. 19

Answer: True 20

2.3 The International System Anarchy and Sovereignty Balance of Power Great Powers and Middle Powers Power Distribution Hegemony The Great Power System, 1500-2000 States interact within a set of long-established “rules of the game” governing what is considered a state and how states treat each other. Together these rules shape the international system. International anarchy—the absence of world government—means that each state is a sovereign and autonomous actor pursuing its own national interests. The international system traditionally places great emphasis on the sovereignty of states, their right to control affairs in their own territory, and their responsibility to respect internationally recognized borders. Seven great powers account for half of the world’s GDP as well as the great majority of military forces and other power capabilities. Power transition theory says that wars often result from shifts in relative power distribution in the international system. Hegemony—the predominance of one state in the international system—can help provide stability and peace in international relations, but with some drawbacks. The great power system is made up of about half a dozen states (with membership changing over time as state power rises and falls).

Anarchy and Sovereignty Anarchy Sovereignty Respect for the territorial integrity of all states within recognized borders Security dilemma Anarchy- lack of central government that can enforce rules The international system is characterized by anarchy. States are sovereign actors in an anarchic system: each government has the right, in principle, to do whatever it wants in its own territory. Sovereignty - a government has the right to do whatever it wants in its own territory, states not supposed to interfere in the internal affairs of other states Respect for the territorial integrity of all states within recognized borders - important principle of IR Security dilemma - states’ actions taken to assure their own security threaten the security of other states Classroom Activity: Introduce the concept of sovereignty. Then sort students into groups, and divide those groups into two parts. Ask one group to represent the international community and one group to represent a state breaking an international agreement, in the context of the idea of a “world police.” Next, have them discuss and debate what actions might be taken by the international community, given historical precedence, to rectify the agreement breach. Have them report back to the class on the obstacles and solutions they have uncovered. 22

PASSPORT PLEASE Sovereignty and territorial integrity are central norms governing the behavior of states. Terrorism and secessionist movements present two challenges to these norms, but the world’s mostly stable borders uphold them. Every day, millions of people cross international borders, mostly legally and peacefully, respecting states’ territorial integrity. Here, tightrope walker Nik Wallenda crosses the U.S.-Canadian border at Niagara Falls, 2012. Immigration reform negotiations in 2013 centered around a call from conservatives to erect about 700 more miles of fencing along the Mexican border, nearly doubling the size of the Border Patrol and buying new aerial drones to police the border in exchange for creating a path to citizenship for 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. unlawfully.

Balance of Power One or more states’ power being used to balance that of another state or group of states Counterbalancing occurs regularly and maintains the stability of the international system. Balance of power can refer to: Any ratio of power capabilities between states or alliances Only a relatively equal ratio of power Alternatively, it can refer to the process by which counterbalancing coalitions have repeatedly formed in history to prevent one state from conquering an entire region. Theory of balance of power Counterbalancing occurs regularly and maintains stability of the international system. Stability does not necessarily imply peace but, rather, the basic maintenance of the international system by means of recurring wars that adjust power relations. 24

The decline in favorable views of the United States worldwide continued through 2007. After 2008, with the United States seeking to exit its wars and exert its power less forcefully around the world, opinions turned upward. These shifts in public opinion make the governments in those countries more or less likely to cooperate with, or oppose, the United States on the world stage.

Great Powers and Middle Powers Great powers Middle Powers What is a great power? Defined generally as states that can be defeated militarily only by another great power Great powers - half dozen or so most powerful states Have world’s strongest military forces and strongest economies U.S., China, Russia, Japan, Germany, France, Britain Middle Powers - rank somewhat below great powers in terms of influence on world affairs May be large but not highly industrialized May have specialized capabilities but are small No agreement on list 26

What states are great powers today What states are great powers today? Although definitions vary, seven states appear to meet the criteria: the United States, China, Russia, Japan, Germany, France, and Britain. Together they account for more than half of the world’s total GDP and two-thirds of its military spending. They include the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, which are also the members of the “club” openly possessing large nuclear weapons arsenals.

Power Distribution Neorealism Polarity 28 Neorealism - structural realism - is a 1990s adaptation of realism - explains patterns of international events in terms of the system structure (the international distribution of power) rather than the internal makeup of individual states Polarity - - number of independent power centers in the system Multipolar system: Has five or six centers of power, which are not grouped into alliances (e.g., late-19th century Europe) Tripolar system: Has three centers of power (e.g., China, the U.S., and U.S.S.R. in 1970s) Bipolar system: Has two centers of power (e.g., U.S. and U.S.S.R. for most of Cold War) Unipolar system: Has a single center of power around which all others revolve (e.g., U.S. in 1990s) Power transition theory - holds that the largest wars result from challenges to the top position in the status hierarchy, when a rising power is surpassing or threatening to surpass the most powerful state 28

The polarity of an international power distribution (world or regional) refers to the number of independent power centers in the system. This concept encompasses both the underlying power of various participants and their alliance groupings. Figure 2.4 illustrates several potential configurations of great powers. Power transition theory says that wars often result from shifts in relative power distribution in the international system.

Hegemony Britain in 19th century and U.S. after WWII Hegemonic stability theory Ambivalent United States hegemony Hegemony - the holding by one state of a preponderance of power in the international system so that it can single-handedly dominate the rules and arrangements by which international political and economic relations are conducted Ambivalent United States hegemony Internationalist vs. isolationist Unilateralism vs. multilateralism Classroom Activity: Use the 2003 war in Iraq, which lacked UN approval, to discuss the American public’s predisposition toward unilateralism, in the context of the alternative, multilateralism. Ask students to write a brief paragraph arguing for the U.S. as isolationist or unilateralist, in regards to that particular military action. Once students have discussed their thoughts on this, ask them to suggest how a context like the Cold War might have driven the U.S. toward a multilateral approach to American foreign policy. 30

CHINA RISING Realists emphasize relative power as an explanation of war and peace. The modernization of China’s military—in conjunction with China’s rapidly growing economy—will increase China’s power over the coming decades. Some observers fear instability in Asia if the overall balance of power among states in the region shifts rapidly. Here, a nuclear-powered submarine sails near China’s coast, 2009. From the perspective of less powerful states, of course, hegemony may seem an infringement of state sovereignty, and the order it creates may seem unjust or illegitimate. For instance, China chafed under U.S.-imposed economic sanctions for 20 years after 1949, at the height of U.S. power, when China was encircled by U.S. military bases and hostile alliances led by the United States. To this day, Chinese leaders use the term hegemony as an insult, and the theory of hegemonic stability does not impress them.

PRICE OF HEGEMONY The United States is the world’s most powerful single actor. Its ability and willingness to resume a role as hegemon—as after World War II—are important factors that will shape world order, but the U.S. role is still uncertain. America’s willingness to absorb casualties will affect its role. Here, soldiers return from Afghanistan, 2009. Some argue that a shift has occurred in U.S. interests from the Middle East to East Asia and the Pacific, because U.S. trade with China, Japan, South Korea and countries in Southeast Asia is huge. In addition, China is the principal challenge to U.S. interests in Asia.

The Great-Power System: 1500-2000 Treaty of Westphalia, 1648 Rules took form in Europe in the 16th century Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815) Congress of Vienna (1815) Concert of Europe World Wars I and II Treaty of Westphalia (1648) symbolizes birth of modern international system and set rules by state relations. Established the principles of independent, sovereign states Rules originated in Europe in the 16th century, prior to Treaty of Westphalia - key to system was the ability of one state, or a coalition, to balance the power of another state

Noted by the presence of great powers, sovereignty, balance of power, and periods of hegemony, the modern great power system is often dated from the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which established the principles of independent, sovereign states that continue to shape the international system today (see Figure 2.5). These rules of state relations did not, however, originate at Westphalia; they took form in Europe in the 16th century.

2.3 The International System Q: What treaty is commonly thought of as the start of the modern international system? Treaty of Versailles Treaty of Paris Treaty of Rome Treaty of Wesphalia 35

D) Treaty of Westphalia Answer: D) Treaty of Westphalia 36

True-False: The argument that a dominant state can enforce international rules, avoid collective-action problems, and encourage peace is known as the democratic stability theory. 37

Answer: False 38

2.4 Alliances Purposes of alliances North Atlantic Treaty of Organizations (NATO) Other alliances Regional alignments An alliance is a coalition of states that coordinate their actions to accomplish some end. Formalized in written treaties Concerned with a common threat and related issues of international security Endure across a range of issues and over a long period Shorter-term arrangements are simply coalitions

Purposes of Alliances To augment individual members’ power by pooling elements of power of all members Generally formed in response to a perceived military or economic threat Based on cohesion Affected by perceptions regarding members’ burden sharing, credibility, honoring of commitments Maintenance: based on cohesion - the east with which members keep an alliance together, which is based in part on the degree to which national interests converge and the extent to which cooperation within the alliance has become institutionalized and habitual 40

MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE The election in the spring of 2013 of a new Prime Minister in Pakistan, a U.S. ally, Nawaz Sharif, created hopes that he would, in turn, help build alliances between Afghan warlords. It was the hope that this would maintain peace and stability in Afghanistan as the U.S. military presence waned. Alliances generally result from a convergence of practical interests, not for sentimental or ideological reasons. Here, a U.S. general gets rival Afghan warlords to patch up relations in 2002.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization Founded in 1949 to oppose and deter Soviet power in Europe Warsaw Pact created in 1955 to counter NATO power First use of Article V - terrorist attacks on United States in 2001 First actual use of force was in Bosnia in 1994 European Union rapid deployment force outside of NATO Issue of eastward expansion Recent challenges for North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) European Union formed its own rapid deployment force, outside NATO. Eastward expansion, beyond the East-West Cold War dividing line, has met fierce Russian opposition. Ongoing role in Afghanistan 42

The biggest issue for NATO is its recent eastward expansion, beyond the East-West Cold War dividing line Russian leaders oppose NATO’s expansion into Eastern Europe as aggressive and anti-Russian. They view NATO expansion as reasserting dividing lines on the map of Europe, but pushed closer to Russia’s borders. In response to NATO expansion, Russia has attempted to expand its own military cooperation with states such as Venezuela, a government critical of U.S. foreign policy, and China, with whom it has conducted dozens of joint military exercises recently. The world’s main alliances, including NATO and the U.S.-Japanese alliance, face uncertain roles in a changing world order.

ALLIANCE OF THE STRONG Currently, NATO troops from a number of member countries are fighting Taliban forces in Afghanistan. Since 2006, these forces, known as the International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF), have been under NATO leadership. Over 100,000 troops serve in the ISAF, with NATO states providing the bulk of the forces. Non-NATO states, such as Australia, New Zealand, and Jordan, have also contributed troops to ISAF. International combat forces are scheduled to withdraw by 2014. The NATO alliance has been the world’s strongest military force since 1949; its mission in the post–Cold War era is somewhat uncertain. Here, President Kennedy reviews U.S. forces in Germany in 1963.

Other Alliances U.S.-Japanese Security Treaty Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) U.S.-Japanese Security Treaty U.S. maintains nearly 50,000 troops in Japan. Japan pays the U.S. several billion dollars annually to offset about half the cost of maintaining these troops. Created in 1951 to guard against the potential Soviet threat to Japan Very asymmetrical - U.S. defends Japan if attacked, Japan not similarly obligated; U.S. maintains troops in Japan, not vice versa U.S. has used alliance as a base to project U.S. power in Asia, especially during Korean and Vietnam Wars Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) 12 members - former Soviet Republics, minus Baltics, Georgia (2008) Some military coordination takes place, but initial plans for a joint military force did not succeed 45

Funeral of two Spanish soldiers killed in Afghanistan, 2010. After the terrorist attacks in 2001, NATO member states pledged their assistance in fighting the forces of al Qaeda and its Taliban protectors in Afghanistan. Countries formed the multinational International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF), made up of mostly NATO troops deployed in Afghanistan. The forces are trying to provide security for the fledgling Afghan government, train a new military, and build political institutions to prevent the Taliban from retaking power. Funeral of two Spanish soldiers killed in Afghanistan, 2010.

Regional Alignments Most international alignments and coalitions are not formalized alliances Nonaligned movement Organization of African Unity Asia Middle East Nonaligned movement - global South during the Cold War standing apart from U.S.-Soviet rivalry Organization of African Unity - African Union Asia-China loosely aligned with Pakistan in opposition to India Middle East - general anti-Israeli alignment of Arab countries, but less so recently 47

It is unclear what new international alignments may emerge in the years to come. The fluidity of alliances makes them a wild card for scholars to understand and for policy makers to anticipate. For the present, international alignments—both military alliances and trade relationships—center on the United States

2.4 Alliances Q: After the Cold War ended NATO forces were __________. cut expanded kept stable attacked 49

Answer: cut 50

True-False: A potential problem of forming an alliance is that great powers will be dragged into wars with each other if their respective client states go to war. 51

Answer: True 52

2.5 Strategy Statecraft Rationality The Prisoner’s Dilemma Actors use strategy to pursue good outcomes in bargaining with one or more other actors. States deploy power capabilities as leverage to influence each other’s actions. Bargaining is interactive, and requires an actor to take account of other actors’ interests even while pursuing its own.

MyLab Media Simulations: The Prisoner’s Dilemma: You Are a Presidential Advisor http://media.pearsoncmg.com/long/long_mpsk_media_1/sims_2011/presidential_advisor/player.html Please log into MyPoliSciLab with your username and password before accessing this link. 54

Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh Almost 20 years after announcing a “Look East” policy, India has only recently agreed to work with its neighbors to lower tariffs. In turn, India is also enjoying steadily deeper commercial relations with the United States, China and the European Union.

Statecraft Key aspect of strategy Strategies Example of China Deterrence Compellence Escalation Arms race Statecraft - the art of managing state affairs and effectively maneuvering in a world of power politics among sovereign states Strategy - What kinds of capabilities to develop, given limited resources, in order to maximize international influence? Key aspect of strategy is choosing the kinds of capabilities to develop, given limited resources, in order to maximize international influence Strategies also shape policies for when a state is willing to use its power capabilities Example: China’s diplomatic and military strategy of preventing Taiwanese independence Deterrence - a threat to punish another actor if it takes a certain negative action Compellence - the use of force to make another actor take some action Escalation - a series of negative sanctions of increasing severity applied in order to induce another actor to take some action Arms race - reciprocal process in which two (or more) states build up military capabilities in response to each other Discussion Question: As a way of discussing the concept of deterrence, highlight why a policy of persistent mobilization is seemingly necessary for the U.S., post World War II. Then ask students how the post-Cold War world, where the U.S. faces few particular threats from specific individual world powers, alters or might alter the way deterrence is looks or is carried out. 56

AMPLIFYING POWER Coherent strategy can help a state make the most of its power. China’s foreign policy is generally directed toward its most important regional interests, above all preventing Taiwan’s formal independence. Despite conflicts with a number of its neighbors, China has had no military engagements for 25 years. Here, China uses its veto in the UN Security Council for only the fifth time ever, to end a peacekeeping mission in Macedonia, which had just established ties with Taiwan, 1999. Two of the seven vetoes China has used in the UN Security Council were to block peacekeeping forces in countries that extended recognition to Taiwan. These vetoes demonstrate that if China believes Taiwanese interests are threatened, it can play a spoiler role on the Security Council.

INTERNAL DIVISIONS The unitary actor assumption holds that states make important decisions as though they were single individuals able to act in the national interest. In truth, factions and organizations with differing interests put conflicting pressures on state leaders. In extreme cases, weak states do not control the armed factions within them. These Somali pirates being captured by Turkish commandos in 2009 are just one of the internal groups, ranging from autonomous territories to Islamist militants, that operate with impunity within Somalia. The unitary actor assumption, or sometimes the strong leader assumption is a simplification, because the interests of particular politicians, parties, economic sectors, or regions of a country often conflict. Yet realists assume that the exercise of power attempts to advance the national interest — the interests of the state itself.

Rationality Most realists (and many nonrealists) assume that those who wield power while engaging in statecraft behave as rational actors in their efforts to influence others Two implications of this view Two implications of this view Assumption of rationality implies that states and other international actors can identify their interest and put priorities on various interests Unitary actor (or strong leader) assumption Assumption that the exercise or power attempts to advance the national interest - which is not always clear Rationality implies that actors are able to perform a cost-benefit analysis - calculating the costs incurred by a possible action and the benefits it is likely to bring Not easy to tally intangible political benefits against tangible costs of a war Costs and benefits can be miscalculated Human behavior and luck can be unpredictable 59

The Prisoner’s Dilemma Game theory Prisoner’s Dilemma Game The “Game of Chicken” Game Theory - branch of mathematics concerned with predicting bargaining outcomes Zero-sum games Non-zero-sum games Prisoner’s Dilemma game - a situation in which rational players will choose moves that produce an outcome in which all players are worse off than under a different set of moves Captures collective-goods problem common to IR The “Game of Chicken” In the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy, “won” by appearing ready to risk nuclear war if Soviet Premier Khrushchev did not back down and remove Soviet missiles from Cuba. Discussion Question: Address the India-Pakistan standoff of the late-‘90s/early-2000s referenced in the chapter. Ask students exactly how this illustrates the “Prisoner Dilemma.” Then, ask students that the India-Pakistan scenario embodies why realists tend to be skeptical of “cooperative solutions to collective goods problems.” Also, ask students to argue for why realists should not be so pessimistic about “cooperative solutions to collective goods problems.” MyLab Activity 2: Simulations: The Prisoner’s Dilemma: You Are a Presidential Advisor http://media.pearsoncmg.com/long/long_mpsk_media_1/sims_2011/presidential_advisor/player.html Creative assignment: Ask students to debate the potential effectiveness of a neutral negotiator or arbitrator in an international relations Prisoner’s Dilemma scenario. Perhaps the United States and China might be seen as the “prisoners,” and environmental degradation and/or security issues as related to China’s growing economic and military power, might be the “dilemma” or “dilemmas,” as such. Can this neutral party, perhaps the U.N., alter the cost-benefit ratio for the two parties, and create a context in which cooperation is the path both parties choose rather than a context in which all players are worse off? Students should take into consideration those impacted by the “dilemma,” such as those nations with increasing disputes with China over territory, and/or those feeling the pressure of China’s expanding military influence, such as the Philippines and Australia. 60

Game theory draws insights from simplified models of bargaining situations. The Prisoner’s Dilemma game embodies a difficult collective goods problem. The game can be summarized in a payoff matrix as exemplified in Figure 2.8. The first number in each cell is India’s payoff, and the second number is Pakistan’s. 4 indicates the highest payoff, and 1 the lowest. The dilemma here parallels that of the prisoners—each state’s leader reasons: “If they go nuclear, we must; if they don’t, we’d be crazy not to.” The model seems to predict an inevitable Indian-Pakistani nuclear arms race, although both states would do better to avoid one.

2.5 Strategy Q: As regards rationality, __________. decision-makers often lack necessary information to accurately estimate the costs of an action it is relatively easy to determine the national interest, because all states are interested in power states arrive at decisions through their strongest leader, which is also known as the unitary-actor assumption it is easy to calculate intangible political benefits against the tangible costs of a way 62

Answer: A) decision-makers often lack necessary information to accurately estimate the costs of an action 63

True-False: The wealth of trust between the two prisoners is the most likely explanations of the Prisoner’s Dilemma. 64

Answer: False 65

Chapter Discussion Question Why does the international system traditionally place great emphasis on the sovereignty of states, their right to control affairs in their own territory, and their responsibility to respect internationally recognized borders?