Causes of war
- 1. Causes of War Is war natural or man made? Is every war uique? Are there some deep, underlying causes that can help us to understand (and prevent) future wars?
- 2. Why do wars occur? Each war is unique; stems from unique historical circumstances But, war is also a historical constant Can we find deeper, underlying explanations that apply to all ages and times? One way to explain wars: Weltz’s 3 levels of analysis Realists vs liberalist explanations Marxists: ‘war is a consequence of the international dynamics of the capitalist system’: All about controlling new markets, raw materials, cheap labour The economic theories/explanations have become less influential since 1945
- 3. Clausewitz on war ‘War is mereley a continuation of politics (policy) by other means’, i.e, war is merely a MEANS to an end, a way to force the opponent to submit to one’s will. A rational means to pursue a goal Criticisms: A result of Westphalian system which emphasized inter-state relations, but this system itself is under scrutiny and attack; based on narrow self interest rather than wider (more moral) idea of justice; cost- benefit analysis that he proposes is no longer reliable in modern times
- 4. Causes of interstate wars ‘A military conflict waged between (or among) national entities, at least one of which is a state, which results in at least 1000 battle deaths of military personnel.’ Oldest form of war, hence loads of material to explain these wars The individual level: human nature and psychology: States do not make war, people do. The desire for power (animus dominandi) Innate aggression: an instinct necessary for the preservation of the individual and species Decision makers and war: 4 models have been suggested: Rational Actor Model (RAM), the Cognitive model, the Affective model, the Prospect model
- 5. The Rational Actor Model (RAM) Assumes that decision makers want to maximize gains and minimize losses Assumes clearly defined preferences, which are ranked in hierarchy Consider all possible policy options and evaluate the outcomes of each Select the one that achieves their objectives with minimum costs Limitations/criticisms: Do not have all the information and options; generally resort to the Expected Utility Theory: compararive utility of war, negotiation, appeasement; the model is over simplification of reality; decision makers are incapable of perfect rationality, hence resort to limited or bounded rationality (incorporates incomplete information, miscalculations, misperceptions)
- 6. The Cognitive Model Considers distortions in perceptions owing to ambiguities in real-life situations under conditions of stress Decision makers see what they WANT/EXPECT to see They are uncomfortable when information contradicts their expectations, and unconsciously interpret such information in ways that conform to their expectations, using shallow analogies and other tricks to reduce their uncertainty Criticism: Over emphasize the significance of information that they receive, and ignore information that they don’t wish/expect to hear; decisions are made on analogies/past experience (Saddam vs Hitler); no two situations are completely similar
- 7. America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
- 9. The Affective model Leader’s personal emotions such as insecurity and hostility distort perceptions and reduce the quality of decision making Stress: Absence/moderate/high Other emotions: shame, humiliation
- 10. The Prospect model People tend to ‘make decisions based upon the value that they attach to particular choices’ in reference to a given point/situation Leaders do not want to lose what they already have, prepared to take risks when there is the ‘prospect’ of making gains, but will be cautious when there is a ‘prospect’ of losses. Losses subjectively hurt more than gains feel good....
- 11. Groupthink Members of a small cohesive group unconsciously tend to develop a number of shared illusions that impede objective evaluation of a situation
- 13. A thought...... THERE have been nine wars and almost 130 violent conflicts across the world this year, according to an annual report released on Monday December 15th by the Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research, a think-tank. The study classifies conflict broadly to include peaceful disputes over politics or borders (low intensity), as well as those involving sporadic or constant violence (medium or high intensity). In 2008 previously non-violent conflicts escalated into violence in countries such as Kenya and Yemen. Ideological change is both the most common cause of conflict and the root of most wars, but there is rarely only one cause of dispute. Congo's ongoing conflict encompasses a battle for its mineral resources and, according to some, an invasion by another state, Rwanda.
- 14. The Unit level: Foreign policy and war Focuses on bureaucratic and organizational politics, regime type, economic systems, nationalism and public opinion, and domestic policies Bureaucratic and organizational politics: Diff govt agencies compete with each other for prestige, political clout, budgetary allocations, etc; each has its own policy preference Culture: ‘War is an invention, a social institution, just like marriage, trial by jury, etc.’; an acceptable way of social life Regime type: Democratic Peace Theory – Immanuel Kant’s Perpetual Peace; He envisioned a future of ‘Pacific union’ or ‘Pacific federation’ (a.k.a Non-aggession pact, not a world govt); democracies don’t fight one another However, tarnsitional democracies tend to be more aggressive and war prone Also, democracies are usually wealthier, so maybe wealth is what makes them peaceful
- 15. Unit level contd..... Economic systems and war: Capitalism equals peace (Marxists?) Sir Norman Angell (Nobel Peace Prize 1993): No one profits from war John A Hobson: Theory of imperialism (due to overproduction and underconsumption)
- 16. Economic systems and war Sir Norman Angell John A Hobson
- 17. Unit level contd..... Nationalism and Public Opinion: Which comes first – nationalism or war? In crisis, public model tends to rally around leaders (eg George W Bush)
- 18. Unit level contd...... Domestic politics: ‘scapegoat hypothesis’ or diversionary theory of war Demcratic states use it more often (because in authoritarian regimes, oppostion is already controlled) Works well when there is a weak enemy who can be defeated easily
- 19. The System Level and War Neorealists are the main proponents of this level. They base their assumptions on 3 characteristics: Distribution of Power: Rapid change in the power balance can lead to war; debate on the utility of unipolar/bipolar/multipolar (which is most likely to lead to war/peace?) Security dilemma: Rousseau’s Stag-hare parable or the prisoner’s dilemma; lack of trust among players (the game theory) Constructivists: ‘kill or be killed logic of the Hobbesian state of nature has been replaced by the live and let live logic of the Lockean anarchic society’ Disarmament and arms control: lack of these can lead to war; 3 categories are: types/numerical/testing & development
- 20. Intrastate wars Proliferation during Post Cold War: more than interstate wars today Ethnic, nationalist, religious conflicts within a state Not really limited to one state but do spill over to other regions/countries Overall, more complex to understand than interstate wars; also because they are relatively new on the global scale
- 21. Individual-level explanations Seek to provide insights about the passions of ordinary citizens and leaders’ motives Social identity theory: Individuals seek – indeed have a psychological need – to belong to groups that have positive and distinct identity There’s a natural tendency for comparison with other social groups Those with indistinct identity, seek to alter that situation by: trying to absorb in dominant group; redefine their negative characteristics; or create new dimensions for comparison If above efforts fail, they engage in direct competition with the dominant group, and might lead to conflict
- 22. Unit-level explanations Emphasize deep, historical animosities, conflicts over scarce resources, redressing past and present injustices, and security dilemma arising out of domestic anarchy Ethnic hatred: Ancient, primordial animosities: Deep rooted in history. But is it really true? How do you explain the periods of peace? Paul Collier calls it a myth. Economic explanations (Collier): Low-income countries, with weak govts and that are rich in natural resources: Iraq (oil), diamonds (Sierra Leone), timber (Cambodia); Nigeria – 40 distinct ethnicities and oil-rich Justice seeking: social fragmentation, large unemployment, political repression Domestic security dilemma: among different groups within a state
- 23. End of topic activity In your group, locate as many current wars as you can on the world map Use the following links to find the lists of current conflicts GlobalSecurity.org www.crisisgroup.org
- 24. Managing intrastate wars More difficult to resolve and manage than interstate wars because both the ‘fighting’ parties live together 1940-1990: Only 20% civil wars resolved through negotiations compared with 55% interstate wars Most civil wars ‘ended with extermination, expulsion, or capitulation of the losing side’ Each group views its armed forces as its ‘only means of protection’ so refuses to disarm
- 25. Management strategies Foreign intervention (Third party involvement): to provide diplomatic support, military security and economic aid Entails risks and may intensify the conflict Succeeds best if the third party has a self-interest in upholding the bargain, is willing and able to use force to implement the agreement External forces remain until the vulnerability of rival groups is lessened by installing a new neutral govt Foreign economic aid, if used carefully, can be helpful, esp for rehabiliting the younf men who have fought all their lives Discussion and research question: Considering the above points, find out (and discuss) the steps taken by the international community in the case of Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
- 26. Management strategies contd.... Power-sharing agreements: Authority must be decentralized and shared among ethnic groups Democratic institutions are insufficient at this stage because it takes time to establish these Two kinds of suggested arrangements are: Federalism and consociationalism; Eg Iraq with autonomous regions for Kurds, Shias, Sunnis; leaders were chosen from different groups as well Might lead to future conflicts if the regions are unequal in natural resources, eg Kurdish and Shiite regions are rich in oil, but not the Sunnii region in central Iraq Physical seperation: Might be a short term solution, but require population transfers