6.3: International Conflict and Security
6.3.1: National Security and Thomas Hobbes
This article presents a philosophical perspective on the existence of governments within the international system. Compare the views of Locke and Hobbes. Think back to the reading “Theories of International Relations” from subunit 6.1. Do you see any connections between Locke’s views, Hobbes’ views, and the perspectives of realism and liberalism?
Like the previous article, Colonel Tak compares the philosophical viewpoints of Locke and Hobbes; in this instance, however, they are examined through the lens of national security and, specifically, the War on Terror. While the liberal perspective of international relations posits that states prefer to cooperate when given the chance, realists are more inclined to believe that conflict is unavoidable. In subunit 6.3, we look at various aspects of conflict in the international system. How can the perspectives of Locke and Hobbes explain and direct our understanding of conflict in the international system?
6.3.2: War and Terrorism
This section describes war as “an organized, armed, and often prolonged conflict that is carried out between states, nations, or other parties.” Because of the potential for chaos, suffering, and destruction, war is a critical concept in the study of international relations. Pay close attention to the different types of war described in this section.
This section defines “peace” as “a state of harmony characterized by the lack of violent conflict or war.” To understand “war” in the international system, we also need to understand what peace looks like. As you read this section, consider your own definition of “peace.”
The development of nuclear weapons changed the dynamics of war permanently. Winston Churchill once said that, “Peace is the sturdy child of nuclear terror.” Some argue that when two states have nuclear weapons, war is no longer a rational foreign policy option for those states, as the level of destruction would mean the costs will exceed the benefits. As you read this section, consider how nuclear weapons have changed the security environment and influenced the balance of power in the international system.
The realist perspective on international relations argues that war is inevitable. Indeed, even with all of our modern advances in science, culture, and education, war and conflict still occur. The Just War Theory was developed as an attempt to codify the ethics of war. Do you think it is important to discuss and consider the morality of war? Do you agree with Just War Theory’s given criteria? Do you think war can ever be considered “just”?
This section defines terrorism. Terrorism refers to violent acts committed for a religious, political, or ideological goal in which the targets are noncombatants. Why do terrorists specifically target noncombatants?
This section expands on the previous reading by exploring the impact of terrorism on the United States and the rest of the international system. Specifically, it explores the influence of Islamic terrorism and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. How do you think that particular event changed the international security environment and the international system as a whole?
6.3.3: Huntington's Clash of Civilizations
Samuel Huntington's controversial "clash of civilizations" theory posits that people's cultural and religious identities will be the primary source of conflict in the post-Cold War world. His theory has fallen under the stern critique of various academic writers. Since this article is short, read through it twice. The first time you read it, identify and consider the main points of Huntington’s argument. Then, when you read it for a second time, identify and consider the authors’ critiques of Huntington’s argument. Particularly, refer back to Unit 1.3, which explored political science as a “science.” How do the critiques found in this article reflect the principles of “scientific” social science research?
This article also explores Samuel Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations,” and discusses his argument in light of recently gathered data regarding online interactions among regions. Do you think the data provided in this article supports Huntington’s claims? Why or why not?
6.3.4: Democratic Peace Theory
According to the democratic peace theory, a pattern exists in international relations: democratic states are unlikely to go to war with one another. While many scholars argue that the democratic peace theory is an observable, statistically-identifiable trend, this article critiques the theory and argues that societal attitudes and perceptions of democratic countries greatly influence the acceptance of this theory. Do you agree?