Midterm Review

RealismInstitutionalismFeminist Theory Focus – what is being explained? ConflictCooperationGender/racial conflicts rather than interstate conflict Actors – who are considered the main actors to watch? States are primary and act as unitary rational actors Multiple actors (states, MNCs, NGOs); not always unitary or rational Gender, racial identity matters as much as national identity Goals – what are the goals of the main actors? Survival, security, and hence, power Econ & social goals as well as security Individual security and well- being (but state provides only for some) Means – what means do actors use to achieve their goals? Military force is usable, effective, and fungible Asymmetry in interdependence; issue-specific power Gender/racial identities in service of state; marginalized power in cooperation (vs. force) Organizing Principles – how is the international system organized? Anarchy and self- help Anarchy mitigated by norms, rules, & institutions Patriarchy, gendered and racial hierarchical structures Dynamics – what does the process of international relations look like? Acquisition and balancing of power Alternation of cooperation & conflict Reconstruction & maintenance of gendered and racial hierarchies

Some “facts”: what are they examples of? WW1 was preceded by a rise in German power Soviet Union and US were allies in WW2 but alliance dissolved as soon as war ended Since 1945, no war among European Union members but war in Yugoslavia and former Soviet Union States with greater gender equality go to war less often US invaded Afghanistan without UN authorization UN sanctions against Iraq hurt poor, women, children 9/11 attacks were committed by non-state actors

Some “facts”: what are they examples of? 8,000 men slaughtered in Srebenica while women and children taken to safety in UN buses Increases in number of Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons between 1997 and 2014 Decreases in number of US and Russian nuclear weapons between 1997 and 2014 No treaty explicitly outlaws most forms of sexual violence against women Treaty banning landmines signed because of NGO activism AND it has reduced use of landmines in war

Terrorism

Criteria to distinguish “terrorism” from “other human-on-human violence” Who is responsible? What do they want to achieve? What tactics are they using? Who are the targets and who is the audience? Do these criteria allow you to distinguish terrorism from military attacks, murder, and other “human-on- human violence?”

Examples of human-on-human violence: which are terrorism? Slavery, and later, the Ku Klux Klan Hiroshima and Nagasaki Irish Republican Army Oklahoma City Bombing Hamas and Intifada fighters 9/11 Attacks Radical Leftist Anti-war activists Systematic rape and abuse of women ELF: Environment Liberation Front and eco-saboteurs White cops killing African-American motorists

CRITERIA Who is responsible? What do they want to achieve? What tactics are they using? Who are the targets and who is the audience? Terrorism NOT Terrorism

Criteria to distinguish “terrorism” from “other human-on-human violence” Typical answers to our earlier questions: Who is responsible? Non-state actors What do they want to achieve? Political, religious, nationalistic, or ideological goals Usually not economic or personal What tactics are they using? Violence as a means to instill fear, intimidate, coerce Who are the targets and who is the audience? Target certain actors but other actors are the audience that terrorists seek to influence

Motivations and sources of terrorism Nationalist aspirations Racial, religious identities: most terrorists not religious, most fundamentalists not terrorists Resentment and resistance to oppression Fear/alienation: response to perceived threat of “other" Poverty, disenfranchisement, disempowerment Political discontent

Are terrorists rational? Rationality addresses means, not goals Terrorists appear quite rational in means they use to achieve their goals Pick targets appropriate to achieving goals Use randomness when it furthers goals Choose means that make up for lack of power To extent they succeed, it’s an example of “paradox of unrealized power”

Types of terrorism State terrorism International terrorism Transnational terrorism Domestic terrorism Nationalist-separatist terrorism

Responses to terrorism Deter Defend Criminalize Preempt Negotiate and compromise Remove conditions that promote it

Fit with 3 theories Realism - doesn’t expect non-state actors to play important roles but does expect violence as useful and fungible Institutionalism - institutions have an important role to play in allowing US to operate effectively in its fight against terrorism (Walt). Nonstate actors play a far more important role in institutionalist thought. Disenfranchised –marginalization, oppression, and disempowerment of groups based on identity as source/breeding ground of terrorism. If you take everything away from people then terrorism may be the only tool they have.