Bargaining Failure: Aggression by Rogue States Class 7 What is a - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

bargaining failure aggression by rogue states
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Bargaining Failure: Aggression by Rogue States Class 7 What is a - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Bargaining Failure: Aggression by Rogue States Class 7 What is a rogue state? What is a rogue state? State behaving contrary to conventional norms of international community. Typically, small, insulated and not very influential,


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Bargaining Failure: Aggression by Rogue States

Class 7

slide-2
SLIDE 2

What is a rogue state?

slide-3
SLIDE 3

What is a rogue state?

  • State behaving contrary to conventional

norms of international community.

  • Typically, small, insulated and not very

influential, especially after 1945.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

What is a rogue state?

  • State behaving contrary to conventional

norms of international community.

  • Typically, small, insulated and not very

influential, especially after 1945.

  • Engage in conflicts that they are unlikely to

win, but face few consequences (short of regime change) from losing.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Can powerful states be rogue states?

Vs.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Examples of rogue state aggression

  • Libya invades Chad
  • Iraq invades Iran and Kuwait
  • North Korea nuclear program
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Libya invades Chad

  • Gaddafi had pan-Arab

ambitions after gaining power.

  • Invaded northern Chad

to support Arab rebels in 1978.

  • Eventually defeated in
  • 1987. Army loses 10% of

troops.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Iraq under Saddam Hussein

  • Saddam gains

power in 1979.

  • Iraq invades Iran in

1980.

○ 8-year stalemate.

  • Iraq invades Kuwait

in 1990

○ Removed by US and coalition in 1991.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

North Korea and nuclear weapons

  • Fall of USSR drastically

reduces aid.

  • North Korea starts nuclear

program in 1994.

  • US threatens airstrikes, NK

retaliation against the South.

  • Deal made for aid to NK.
slide-10
SLIDE 10

What do Libya, Iraq and North Korea have in common?

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Regime Type and Aggression

  • Why do democracies tend to win the wars

they fight?

  • Why are some autocracies more likely to be

aggressive than others?

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Democracy and Conflict Initiation

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Democracy and Conflict Initiation

Democracies are more likely to win wars because they are more selective in the wars the fight, because:

  • Threat of leader removal due to loss is

greater.

  • More effective ways of assessing
  • pponent's’ strength.
slide-14
SLIDE 14

Accountability

  • Competitive elections

hold leaders accountable for losing conflicts.

  • Backing down in a

standoff or losing a war make leaders unpopular.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Free Press and Opposition

  • Leaders’ political
  • pponents and free press

demand transparency.

  • Gives leaders more clear

picture of military effectiveness/probability

  • f victory.
slide-16
SLIDE 16

When democracies are attacked, they are more likely to win...

  • Soldiers from

democracies are better trained and have better morale than soldiers from autocracies.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Examples of democratic selection into conflicts/restraint? From book? Your own?

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Do all autocracies fight wars in the same way? How are they distinct?

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Do all autocracies fight wars in the same way? How are they distinct?

  • Weeks: autocracies vary on two dimensions:
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Do all autocracies fight wars in the same way? How are they distinct?

  • Weeks: autocracies vary on two dimensions:

○ Is leader personalist? ■ Can members of leader's’ inner circle be assured

  • f keeping positions if leader is deposed?

○ Do leaders/elites have a military background?

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Do all autocracies fight wars in the same way? How are they distinct?

  • Weeks: autocracies vary on two dimensions:

○ Is leader personalist? ■ Can members of leader's’ inner circle be assured

  • f keeping positions if leader is deposed?

○ Do leaders/elites have a military background?

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Machines

  • Regime insiders don’t

depend on leader for survival.

○ Regime is bureaucratic, civilian-run.

  • Act more like

democracies regarding conflict.

○ Leaders are cautious.

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Juntas

  • Officers can remove

junta leaders.

○ Usually if leaders fails to succeed militarily.

  • More aggressive than

machines.

  • Evaluate conflict from

military perspective.

○ Use of military forces may be less costly for armed forces than civilians.

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Bosses

  • Civilian leader on

whom regime elites depend.

○ Usually backed by cult of personality

  • More aggressive, more

likely to lose wars (or lose more in wars).

○ Bosses can keep spoils from wars and be insulated from costs.

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Strongmen

  • Personalist leaders with

a military background.

○ Retain large personality cult.

  • Most aggressive:

○ Have optimism of military juntas. ○ Lack constraint of officer corps.

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Which regime types would rogue states fit under?

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Are Reiter and Stam and Weeks correct? Are there problems with their arguments?

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Dealing with Rogue State Aggression

slide-29
SLIDE 29

What strategies can mitigate rogue state aggression?

Incorporate legalization/rationalist model of war.

slide-30
SLIDE 30

What can be done to ensure that personalist regimes are not aggressive?

Regime change is not the best answer (see Iraq, Libya, Syria)