Transcript Linear Regression 1

Sociology 2:
Class 20: Globalization &
Conflict 4
Copyright © 2010 by Evan Schofer
Do not copy or distribute without permission
Announcements
• Final exam coming up…
• Format similar to midterm
• Topics: All course material… with main emphasis on
material covered in weeks 5-10
• Final Exam Time: Friday, March 19, 10:30-12:30pm
• Final exam review sheet
• Handed out last week
• Available on the web
• Course evaluations available online…
• Today’s Class: Culture & Conflict
• Foreign policy and Afghanistan
Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy
• Daalder, Ivo H. and James M. Lindsay. “The
Bush Revolution.”
• What was foreign policy like before Bush?
– Historically, the US was “isolationist”
• Rarely got involved in international affairs
– But, US emerged as dominant global power after
World War II
• President Truman established new ideas about how the
US should wield power in the world: the “Truman
Doctrine”
US Foreign Policy
• The Truman Doctrine
• “The hallmark of Truman’s foreign policy revolution was
its blend of power and cooperation.”
• “He… calculated that US power could be more easily
sustained, with less chance of engendering resentment,
if it were embedded in multilateral institutions.” p. 159
– Truman worked with other countries to create
multi-lateral institutions (IGOs)
• World Bank, IMF, GATT, etc., to manage the global
economy
• The United Nations to address global political issues
• NATO (“North Atlantic Treaty Organization”) to deal with
issues of international security
– To balance against the power of the Soviet Union
US Foreign Policy
• Truman Doctrine (cont’d)
• “Washington actively cultivated friends and allies….
International organizations, and especially military
alliances, were a key instrument in foreign policy.
• NATO, but also arms control treaties, etc…
– Key policies of the Truman doctrine:
• Deterrence: developing military capabilities that deter
(discourage) others from attacking you
• Containment: Keeping your enemies from expanding
their territory & influence.
Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy
• Truman Doctrine (cont’d):
– Example: The cold war: US vs. Soviet Union
• Don’t attack it directly (risk World War III)
• Instead, build strong multi-national alliances to oppose
the Soviet Union (NATO)
• Limit expansion… fight communist insurgencies
– Ex: Korean War, Vietnam War
• Containment will weaken & marginalize the Soviet
Union… eventually lead to collapse
– Ex: First gulf war: Contain Saddam Hussein
• Work with other nations to limit his aggression
– Push him out of Kuwait...
– NOTE: First gulf war really did involve many nations…
The Bush Revolution
• Issue: Bush foreign policy represents a big
break from the past:
• “Not a revolution in America’s goals abroad, but how to
achieve them”:
• “He relied on the unilateral exercise of American power
rather than on international law and institutions to get
his way.”
• “He championed a proactive doctrine of pre-emption
and de-emphasized reactive strategies of deterrence
and containment.” p. 153
The Bush Revolution
• The logic of Bush (#2) foreign policy: The US
is the only super-power… therefore:
– 1. US can best achieve security by “shedding
constraints of friends, allies, and international
institutions.”
• In a dangerous world, the US shouldn’t ‘dither about’,
negotiating with Europeans… better to act alone.
– 2. America should “use its strength to change the
status quo in the world”
• Don’t wait to be attacked (like Pearl Harbor, or 9/11)
• Instead: seek out dangers, preemptively destroy them
• Result: Regime change in Iraq, Afghanistan…
Bush & Realism
• Issue: Bush foreign policy tends to reflect
ideas of “realism”
• Key advisors studied the theory: e.g, Condeleeza Rice
– Realism:
• States are the main actors on the world stage
– International organizations = unimportant
• Military force (or threat of force) is the main currency…
– Consequence: a state-centric approach
• Main approach to terrorism is “regime change” in Iraq &
Afghanistan
– Issue: If Al Qaeda is a loose social movement, is
this likely to be effective?
Complex Interdependence, Soft Power
• Several theories predict the importance of
IGOs, norms, & “soft power”
• Examples: World Polity Theory (WPT), complex
interdependence (CI), and constructivism
– Winning people over to your side and taking the
moral “high ground” can be very effective
– Not glamorous (like the TV show “24”)… but it works
• Ex: Milosevic in Serbia (Clinton)
– US & rest of world lined up against him… and he backed down
after a very small air campaign.
Effectiveness of War
• Issue: Is war an effective means of wielding
global power?
• Compared to multilateral negotiation…
• Governments obviously think so… or else they wouldn’t
start so many wars.
• But, what does the evidence say?
• 1. In fact, states that initiate wars are not
especially likely to win…
• Historically, it is more like 50/50
• States are routinely overconfident about military power.
Effectiveness of War
• 2. War tends to weaken/destabilize states
• And, weak states lead to civil wars (Hironaka)
– Example: Iraq
• Result: dangerous instability
• 3. War is incredibly, massively, unbelievably,
stupendously, ridiculously expensive
• Ex: Iraq war = 3 Trillion (Stiglitz)
– Many countries & empires have bankrupted or
destroyed themselves by starting wars…
• Rome, Spain, Germany, Japan, Britain, Soviet Union
Costs of War
• Security threats are just that… threatening
• Fear can lead to unwise decisions about risk
• We MUST consider costs of war… and balance that
against other uses of that money
– Providing health care that will certainly save lives
– Investing in education, infrastructure
– Etc.
• Not to mention tragic human cost…
– Innocent people WILL die when you start a war
• Costs of the Iraq war:
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgq5suMXCV8
Saddam, Al Qaeda & the War on Terror
• Argument: We need the Bush doctrine
because our new enemies are crazy…
• They are evil, they hate Americans
• Can’t be reasoned with, only killed
• Analogy: Hitler – must be opposed
– Negotiating emboldens enemies
– This argument comes up in every conflict
• Ex: Soviet Union…
• In fact, historical evidence suggests that most enemies
(particularly states) can be reasoned with…
– Truly crazy ones are rarely powerful.
Al Qaeda & the War on Terror
• Telvick, Marlena. 2007. “Al Qaeda Today:
The New Face of Global Jihad.”
• Describes research of Marc Sageman…
– Issue: The form of Al Qaeda has changed…
• In 2001: “Al Qaeda was a hierarchical network with
clear lines of authority leading to Osama bin Laden,
who in turn provided funding and/or command and
control over autonomous groups”
• “But all of that changed when Al Qaeda's control "more
or less evaporated” following war in Afghanistan
• “As a result, the international jihadi movement reverted
to what it was before Al Qaeda and bin Laden came to
the forefront -- a collection of local people with local
grievances who share the same ideology”
Al Qaeda & the War on Terror
• Al Qaeda is destroyed in 2001… but a social
movement has emerged:
• "Al Qaeda is operationally dead. There is no Al Qaeda
anymore. The social movement is alive and well, but the
guys who did Madrid, Casablanca and Istanbul were not
Al Qaeda. They were people who were doing
operations on behalf of Al Qaeda, but they were not Al
Qaeda. The old Al Qaeda is hiding away in caves
someplace.“
Al Qaeda & the War on Terror
• Issue for reflection: How would strategies for
dealing with Al Qaeda differ if we think of it as
a modern social movement?
• Rather than a “traditional” reactionary movement…
Reflections: Bush Foreign Policy
• Problems with Bush foreign policy
• 1. Substantial evidence supports new
theories like CI and WPT
• Emphasizing the importance of international
organizations, rather than military force
– By relying on unilateral force, Bush has pursued a
very costly approach…
• And, all costs are being borne by the US.
Reflections: Bush Foreign Policy
• Problems with Bush foreign policy
• 2. “Regime change” is harder than it looks
• It always involves weakening an existing state
• Civil war, subsequent revolution is common
– It often works in the short term: It isn’t hard to
change a regime…
• Iraq: gulf war 2
• Iran in 1950s: CIA overthrow of democratically elected
leader Mossagedeh; replaced by US puppet
– But, “Friendly regimes” are unstable, war-torn
– Result: When dust settles, enemies may come to power
– EX: Anti-us groups in Iran; Iranian-backed groups in Iraq.
Reflections: Bush Foreign Policy
• 3. The main terrorist threats come from social
movements
• Concrete terrorist organizations aren’t that hard to
disrupt (“old” Al Qaeda)
• But, we DO need help from countries around the world
to combat the broader Al Qaeda social movement
– Multilateralism is helpful…
– The social movement concept of framing is useful
• Don’t play into the role of “imperialist bully”
• Evidence suggests that large civilian casualties
generate “terrorists”…
Reflections: Bush Foreign Policy
• 3. More generally: The main threat to the US
(the sole superpower) isn’t any particular
terrorist group or country… It is:
– “Empire trap”: tendency of dominant powers to:
• 1. Overextend, leading to collapse; and/or
• 2. Create many new enemies who “gang up on you”…
– Plus, other non-military threats like global
warming…
Obama Foreign Policy
• What is Obama doing differently?
• Beinart, Peter. 2009. “Obama Shrinks the War on
Terrorism.” Time Magazine, December 7, 2009
– Reduce scope and ambition of American efforts
• Pragmatism: don’t pursue grandiose dreams of
reshaping he world
– Don’t try to defeat all enemies and pave way for global peace
and democracy
• Instead, try to prioritize threats
– Afghanistan not Iraq
– So, why ramp up in Afghanistan?
• Debated issue; Beinart argues it is to gain leverage for
future negotiations.
Obama and Afghanistan
• What is Obama doing differently?
• Afghanistan: Shift toward counterinsurgency and nation
building efforts
• Video: Obama’s War
• US has shifted toward counterinsurgency and nation
building efforts in Afghanistan
• Chapter 1 (5:47 to end), 3, 4 (up to 6:00), 5 (1:35-end)
• Discussion: Is Obama’s strategy likely to
work?
Reflections: Foreign Policy
• What should the US do?
• NOTE: Evan’s opinions; not on the final exam…
• 1. Recognize the power of international norms
and multilateral institutions
– A. Work through multilateral institutions
• Use them as instruments of foreign policy
• Spread out the costs of security… get everyone on
board, even if it takes a while
– B. Don’t be uni-lateral; don’t violate norms
• This undermines multi-lateral institutions, weakening an
important tool…
Reflections: Foreign Policy
• What should the US do?
• 2. Use war as an ABSOLUTELY LAST resort
• War is vastly more costly than just about every other
possible strategy
• Not to mention moral/human costs…
– Potential for weak states, destabilization, civil war
• 3. Work through strong multilateral forces, not
individual weak intermediaries
• Alliances are unstable; today’s friend may be an enemy
– Ex: Iraq was armed by US to fight Iran in 1980s
– Ex: Taliban was armed with US money via Pakistan to fight
Soviet Union
• Fuels civil war.
Reflections: Foreign Policy
• What should the US do?
• 4. Don’t forget about other international issues
• Stabilizing regions (e.g., Afghanistan/Pakistan) is a
laudable goal, but VERY expensive
• The US could do a LOT of good more cheaply
– Reducing trade barriers to poor countries
– Foreign aid or debt forgiveness, etc.
• Plus issues like global warming, etc…
• 5. Don’t forget about domestic issues
• Obviously, militaries are needed… but the US spends a
HUGE amount on its military.
Global Military Spending (2006)
Reflections: Foreign Policy
• What should the US do?
• 5. In short: don’t act like a lone superpower
•
•
•
•
The “Truman Doctrine” was smart
Keep a low profile; stay under the radar
Don’t make enemies, don’t overextend…
Instead: just try to be prosperous.