JSIS 201 Final: Essay Questions

1. Frieden argues that global capitalism has undergone periods of expansion and deepening (up to 1914, 1945 to the early 1970s, and 1989 to perhaps 2007) and periods of contraction and stress (the 1930s, the 1970s, and perhaps since 2007). What are the consequences of these periods of contraction and stress for global order? For the national order of a significant great power (your choice)? For weak states? Explain.
Global Order United States Conflict of ideology, fascism, axis states. Institutions are not working (Versailles Treaty The New Deal, social and League of Nations) programs, isolationist foreign policy. The Gold Standard is collapsing and states are unable to pay their debts. Weak States

1930s

The colonies were striving for self-determination; Germany was unstable, increased nationalism. Fascism is born

1970s

Bretton Woods collapse, End of Bretton Woods. Watergate scandal and Former colonies, Middle OPEC and the oil crisis other shakes to the political Eastern states, Latin helped to fuel the economic system, increasing America. Rise of militant collapse. International government spending on Islam and military coups in system: Non-aligned military, push to go global Latin America. movement are creating aka neoliberalism problems= Arc of Crisis. New global force.

2007-Present

Criticism on institution. New Actor: China, the biggest debt holder (lending more than the IMF)

Break down international and economic systems lead to the forming of a new system. Some forces are in decline as a result of crisis, while others get new prominence.

2. Why have some Third world countries managed to "catch up" while others are left behind? Is it more attributable to domestic characteristics (be specific) or international influence (again be specific)? Why or why not? Are there clear political, economic and social characteristics for each group of countries? Which characteristic, in your opinion, is the most important one and why?
Countries rise to power on economic strength, which is based on resources and technology o There is no simple solution to development but it seems that the path to growth inevitably lay through globalization o In relatively recent history, many countries went through an extraordinary phase of catch-up Linked to the many benefits global integration Domestic characteristics Political characteristics for each group of countries is more important

 Economic policies of the rulers were the main key to economic development o The ruling classes of these societies were principally responsible for their ability/inability to take advantage of new economic opportunities Countries that Catch-Up o China/Indiatransformed themselves from the most populous poor developing countries to major powers The different speeds of their transformation and how far they have progressed are a result of: Their development strategies The capabilities of their governments and populations o Both countries initially pursued an inward-oriented system and autarkic development strategy with a Soviet model of strong governmental intervention before gradually opening up and integrating into the rest of the world with more mark-driven/externally-oriented systems Both countries partially turned inward because of their previous negative experiences with foreign powers Law of Uneven Developmentless developed countries can catch up quickly by acquiring and making effective use of existing technologies in leading countries In fact, the rise of many powers has been based on swift technological catch-up rather than the initiation of major technological revolutions China/India have followed in the tradition of lagging powers that catch-up through the rapid acquisition of existing technologies o Spain/Portugal also began accelerating their economic opening when their dictatorships were gone National firms were freed from the constraints of home markets Failures of DevelopmentLeft Behind o Misrulegovernment plunders the nations wealth for their own purposes Many rulers were unable or unwilling to create conditions for sustained economic growth These countries economies stayed traditional, not industrialized, to secure the government control Growth requiredinvestment, easy contact with domestic and overseas customers, local skill acquisition, access to foreign capital and technology, secured property rights Misrule kept the domestic manufacturers from taking their goods to the world market o Signs of misrulescarcity of banks, insufficient transportation and communication, mistrust in national money, and absence of clear government commitment to dependable economic environment (global economy) o Africa is home to many countries that are falling behind More time and energy was spent on political conflict and military unrest than on the economy Zambia ruler saw tightened government control as an essential part of the countys social progress o Humanitarian aids did not reach its intended beneficiaries o If anything, the governments decided to reduce its governments efforts to improve as they now had foreign donors

3. The problem with creating world orders is that they are usually established at the end of a major war, and reflect the balance of power at that time. They cannot predict future developments, and are not very adaptable. Therefore, world orders seldom last. Indeed, attempting to create a lasting world order is a fools errand. Critically analyze this statement based on course materials. Indicate your personal view on this quotation, and defend your views both logically and empirically.
Countries will go to war to establish order in an otherwise chaotic world Historical review between rising established powers and the rule of the international system is not very encouraging Looking back at the last 200 years, all but one global war shift have resulted in war Problem concerned with gaining and maintaining power and warding off threats rather than mutual cooperation/accommodation Countries that grow fast and become large economically have geopolitical tensions with established powers over resources, market ideology, and the governance of the global system

 The current global system was designed within a different context more than 60 years ago there are new issues and new major powers 1. Doesnt represent the current alignment of political and economic power 2. The world is facing increasing challenges from global interdependence in trade, finance, and the environment 3. There are major gaps in the existing system, such as lack of any effective mechanism to deal with global warming or international financial flows and imbalances

4. Western hegemony is neither a product of nature nor is it eternal. On the contrary, at some point it will come to an end. (Martin Jacques, When China Rules the World, p.45) Do you agree or disagree with this claim? Why? In what ways might the end of western hegemony be a good thing, and in what ways might be a bad thing? Explain.
Agree The collective strength of the West is on the way down. Power is undeniably flowing away from the West to developing nations o Since the 1980s, there has been a profound shift of economic power from the United States and Europe to emerging Asia, in particular China and India o It is clear that changes are taking place in the relative power of China and India versus the United States and the European Union in terms of economic strength, trade, finance, foreign investment, technology, education, military capability, and geopolitical projection Good Will save us a lot of money cost a lot to be the policemen of the world China, the US, the European Union, and India can play key roles in supporting these global public-good efforts, and through their example, they can and must help bring other countries into the initiatives o In action on the issues of trade, finance, energy, and environment could lead to major problems in the world stability, sustainability, and welfare, which could be worse an outcome for most players than the costs of compromising on autonomy to ensure stability There are problems with the existing international governance system 1. These institutions or mechanisms do not cover the issues of an unstable financial system, increased competition for resources (especially energy and water), the risks of disastrous climate change, insufficient support for R&D to deal with global problems, or the new threat of global cyber security 2. They cannot deal with the new aspects of traditional international issues such as unfair trade regimes undervalued currencies, balance of payments surpluses, foreign direct investment from developing countries, intellectual property piracy, nuclear proliferations, or increasing global inequality 3. The formal institutions established by the strong hand of the U.S. and its Western European allies in the post-WWII period gave governance structures that represent economic power as it was at the end of WWII, not the current distribution of economic power Many countries probably wont have the wherewithal to avoid food and water shortages without massive help from the outside The health of the global economy increasingly, will be linked to how well the developing world does more so than the traditional West Will save us a lot of money cost a lot to be the policemen of the world The main powers need to undertake more action on their own to help maintain global economic stability and sustainability while working to create more appropriate multilateral institutions The US and China, in particular, must recognize that they need to work together to ensure the emergence of a workable system o As the two biggest powers, how they interact between themselves and with others will affect how well the system works o They would do well to develop a system that works regardless of which country ends up the biggest player It should be emphasized that many of the critical issues such as not dealing with climate change, pandemics, famines, terrorists, or rogue states with access to weapons of mass destruction create global problems no matter which country is the hegemon Rising powers and incumbents both share an interest in seeing that the countries at risk of falling behind hold together and take positive development steps

o o

One reason is the problems that arise in failed states Another is the benefit of growing global markets for exports

Bad Require changes in behavior of all parties o While the solutions may be straightforward in principle, the political economy of implementing them is difficult because it requires it involves significant costs and changes in behavior of all major powers the difficulties are also related to the time frames of different political systems and the mind-sets and perceptions of people and nation-states Given its size, its long-term view, its patience, and its superiority complex, it will oblige the rest of the world to agree to its way of doing things as it becomes the largest and most important economy

5. Dahlmans book is titled The World under Pressure: How China and India are influencing the global economy and environment. Consider what the rise of China and India mean to you over the next 20 years, with regard to issues of war and peace, jobs and the economy, and the environment you live input emphasis on the level of you as individual, not the country in which you reside or of which you are a citizen.
War and Peace Countries will go to war to establish order in an otherwise chaotic world o Edward Friedman argued that the rise of China carries risks similar to those resulting from the rise of Germany prior to WWI Growing investment in military power by both China and India as both countries become bigger economically, they are investing more in their military capability As both countries strengthen their military power, countries worry about their increasing military capability and their future incentives The strategy of military preemption is too costly in: o Resources o Human lives o Principlesparticularly for a country that has prided itself on equality of opportunity and human rights o Risk of nuclear war Jobs and the Economy Competition with China has resulted in loss of jobs and slower wage growth for the middle and lower classes The problem is that manufacturing and production is where the middle class jobs are China does the manufacturing for many US corporations o At least 2.4 million manufacturing jobs were lost between 2001 and 2008 because of China taking over the production of manufactured goods o Middle class cant afford college because their generational wealth is being eroded as their middle aged middle class families lose their incomes The U.S. is now very weak on macroeconomic stability, health institutions, and financial markets o Less vibrant economy o Drop in standard of living o Consumerist minimalist Environment Planning for more sustainable lifestyles is a change facing developed and developing countries alike China/Indias economic growth puts pressure on global environment resources, including the capacity of environment to absorb carbon dioxide China/Indias increased demand for primary goods has been an upsurge in commodity prices o The result is water shortages, deforestations, reduced biodiversity, and climate change, which is putting the long-term sustainability of the world at risk The realization of environmental constraints in terms of the amount of C02 that can be emitted without cause a rise of global temperatures that could have very negative effects on global growth and welfare Effects of Global Warming o Melting of polar ice caps and flooding Seattle/UW/Edmonds close to sea-level o Irregular weather patterns increase in rain/snow/hurricanes/other storms o Changes in food production plants will find it harder to

cope and will die Human health heat waves=heat strokes & diseases (ex. Malaria) will spread to new regions/greater exposure

6. Critically evaluate the last paragraph of Mazowers book: In the ongoing atomization of society, citizens and classes have both vanished as forces for change and given way to a world of individuals, who come together as consumers of goods or information, and who trust the internet more than they do their political representatives or the experts they watch on television. Governing institutions today have lost sight of the of the principle of politics rooted in the collective values of a res publica , even as they continue to defend the civilization of capital. As for the rituals of international life, these are now well established. The worlds heads of state flock annually to the United Nations General Assembly. There are discussions of reform and grandiose declarations of global targets, which mostly go unmet. Politicians, journalists, bankers and businessmen make their pilgrimage to the heavily guarded Alpine precinct of Davos, seeking to confirm through this triumph of corporate sponsorship that a global ruling elite exists and they belong to it. Our representatives continue to hand over power to experts and self-interested regulators in the name of efficient global governance while a skeptical and alienated public looks on. The idea of governing the world is becoming yesterdays dream.
Main argument is that you cannot govern the world. Hence, why is this so? o Loss of trust in politics And what does this mean for a governing world? o In order for any successful legitimate governing body, it needs the peoples trust. If it does not, it is not able to do as much as it would like. o Individualization, atomization of society What atomization mean? o The breaking of society into individual matters. Everyone is more concerned with individual well-being, as opposed to the well-being of everyone else. How does this affect politics? o No collective consciousness, no political movements. People are not relying as much on politics. o The Occupy movement, people realized they were not alone and that there was a problem to be fixed. Mazower is saying that this is not happening. o The US thinking they can combat 9/11 and terrorism on their own. Post- 9/11 Foreign Policy.

o Cycles of mistrust: When a state is in conflict, or trouble, people tend to mistrust the government more, but when the country is stable, the people tend to rally and support government more. More specifically loss of trust in international politics Mazowers argument Is this true? o Domestic is linked to international. You are more likely to trust international politics if you trust politics at home. Public trust, not state trust, in the international system.

7. Again from Mazower (p. 395), critically comment: [Speaking about responsibility to protect] Why Gadhafi and not Tibet? Or Gaza or Bahrain? Supporters (of R2P) say a little intervention is better than none. But that may be quite wrong, and for reasons that go beyond the obvious reproach of double standards. The main point is that the way leaders treat their people is not the only problem that counts in international affairs. A world in which violations of human rights trump the sanctity of borders may turn out to produce more wars, more massacres, and more instability. It may also be less law abiding. If the history of the past century shows anything, it is that clear legal norms, the empowering of states, and the securing of international stability more generally also serve the cause of human welfare.

8. Mazower and Frieden appear to have different views on the nature, governance, and desirability of the current global economy. In what ways are they similar and different and why? Which do you feel makes the better argument? Why?
Mazower We are, in 2012, as far away from the utopian view of world government as we have even been since we have already tried and failed The idea of governing the world is becoming yesterdays dream o We have moved from an era that had faith in the idea of international institutions to one that has lost it o Money-driven individualistic future has crowded out an older vision of what the public good might look like o Without a comparable transformation in our own views about the nature of government, the public good and the role of the state, without our developing a new kind of faith in our own collective capacity to shape the future, there is no real incentive for politicians to change They may not be trusted by their electorates but they have no real incentives to care so long as this lack of trust does not translate into mobilization, resistance, and sustained pressure for reform Frieden The history of modern world economy illustrates two points 1. Economies work best when they are open to the world 2. Open economies work best when their governments address the sources of dissatisfaction with global capitalism The challenge of global capitalism in the 21st century is to combine international integration with politically responsive, socially responsible government o Contemporary ideologies of many stripes argue that this combination is impossible or undesirable View But theory and history indicate that it is possible for globalization to coexist with politics committed to social advance it remains for governments and people to put the possible into practice o International economic integration generally expands economic opportunities and is good for society o Attempts to seal countries off from the rest of the world have ultimately been disastrous few countries have achieved economic progress without access to the international economy

9. In what ways is the story of David Petraeus, as told by Kaplan, a success? A tragedy? What are the larger lessons that come from Kaplans work? Explain.

10. Global Trends 2030 identifies four megatrends over the next two decades (individual empowerment, diffusion of power, demographic patterns, and food, water, and energy nexus) and seven game-changers (crisis prone global economy, governance gap, potential for increased conflict, wider scope of regional instability, impact of new technologies, and the role of the United States). Thinking about the world in 2030, which megatrend do you think will be the single most important? Why? Which game-changer do you think will be the single most important? Why?

11. IN 1941, Henry Luce (who owned Time Magazine and other media properties) wrote an editorial arguing that the century going forward would be the American Century. In what ways was the period from 1941 to 2011 the American Century, and what ways was it not? On balance, would you agree that it still is the American Century?

12. Consider the relationship between global collective action problems and global institutions over the period from 1950 to 2000. Which major collective action problems have global institutions dealt with rather well, and which have they failed to deal with very well? What explains the results you identify? [Be sure to think about several different collective problems, and develop criteria to assess whether the collective action problems are dealt with well or not.]
There are many reasons it is so difficult to get action on many of these issues o Lack of a coherent understanding of the interdependencies and the seriousness of the issue o Different between national and global interests o Mismatch between the short-term perspective of decision making and the longer time frame of the issues o Difficulty for democratic political systems to make economically painful decisions and the tendency to put off decisions that do not affect the immediate future The main powers need to undertake more action on their own to help maintain global economic stability and sustainability while working to create more appropriate multilateral institutions