Blog Group 0602

Ciara Farrell Blog post #3 Game theory can promote cooperation in economic affairs by putting meaning behind decision making. Taking notice that countries will most likely have future affairs will dictate the way they act in their current decision making. Knowing that states have to work together in future endeavors, they need to expect that every play is going to affect the next one. This theory also goes the other way in that states who have less future decisions that need to be made together will play with a one game mindset, leaving them being less cooperative and more selfish. In an instance where there is only one decision that needs to be made, states will use it to make sure they are getting the maximum benefit without putting any reliance on the other country to do the same. This is why states are more likely to think for themselves and make selfish moves that might not even lead them to the best outcome. The US has found itself to be involved in many free trade agreements...

  Based on both Susan Strange and Benjamin Cohen’s idea, a mainstream trend in global economics is the apportioned power. On the condition that standing on the original strong countries, like America, Britain, Netherlands, and so on, we won’t think the upcoming power-sharing trend as a good thing. However, I think it will be a certain future – even besides China, there will be more developing countries who will be “eligible” to have a right to speak in the global economic system. I am not indicating that this trend is good or bad, but trying to stop some other countries from getting stronger enough to join in the “high level” will not be a wise decision – generally speaking, IMF and some other organizations actually did a lot to those developing countries. Currently, attempting to reclaim that decentralized power can lead to some unfriendly cold war, especially between several impactful countries – the results can somehow be larger than we imagine. For instance, I would like to men...

  John Wallace  Blog Post 3  For centuries, war was waged through force of arms. But now, we are seeing the dawn of full-scale financial warfare. A tactic that allows stronger nations to expand their influence and power without spilling blood. This also allows for a wider diffusion of power with developing countries, while they may lack financial resources, many developing countries have vast untapped energy reserves that can be exploited with the proper investment. However, large-scale financial warfare is a tactic commonly reserved for large powers as a way to temper each other’s power or to exercise control over smaller nations. Both these methods will be covered in-depth in this blog post.  Large-scale financial warfare has faced a large number of setbacks in recent decades. With many examples of financial warfare such as sanctions being unable to accomplish change or discourage war. This is largely due to these countries being less connected to the global econ...

                           Currency Manipulation of the 21st Century: China and the US Now more than ever, countries feel tempted to engage in a ‘currency war’ and go back and forth trying to devalue their currency in efforts to encourage exports. The two largest economies, China and the United States, seem to be in a long, bitter trade dispute as the trade relationship is significantly imbalanced. From tariffs to currency, trade tensions are clearly escalating with both sides slapping substantial tariffs on each other’s goods. Currency manipulation (arguably the world’s most protectionist international economic policy) refers to the concept of countries artificially lowering the value of their currency to achieve an unfair competitive advantage (Forbes). The U.S. Dollar is the most popular reserve, and everyone wants a stake in our economy. Unlike many other countries, China does not ha...

Grant Voytovich POLS 170 Blog Cohen discusses how power has shifted in the international monetary relations in recent decades, and how the power is more widely spread after certain events.  He says that it is no longer a few countries dominating the finances, which wasn’t what it used to be before.  I believe that the some of the biggest shifts in international monetary power happened when the Bretton Woods system was created, then Nixon taking the United States dollar off of the gold standard, when different currencies were created for different countries, and when International Organizations were created.  The Bretton Woods system was created at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944, and it was set up so that countries could have a fixed currency exchange rate centered around gold.  This system hoped to create stability among countries that were involved, to limit devaluations, and to grow economies.  It was centered around the United States Dollar.  The...

 Kameron Schreffler 03/22/2022 The article "Finance, Information, and Power" by Susan Strange brought up the World Bank Group and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and how communication influences the creation of these institutions. Although some people claim that these institutions build the International Economy, I think that these institutions do not help rebuild the International Economy and cause more harm than good. I believe today that the IMF and the World Bank Group negatively impact the world economy and should not still exist or be heavily reformed.  Both the IMF and the World Bank were created to help the international economic system; these goals have changed as the World Bank's goal was to focus on poverty reduction through rebuilding infrastructure and projects and countries. The restructuring of these institutions promoted free-market capitalism. The IMF then shifted again after the 2008 financial crisis. These institutions changed from being focused o...

 Brooke Wallace Prof. Shirk International Politics 10 March 2022     After reading the different arguments, I found that Elena Baylis made the strongest case for stronger national and regional justice systems.  Her argument is centered around the fact that the ICC is only meant to play a limited role in the courts. The national courts should handle the crimes they are supposed to which, in turn, would allow the ICC to do its job and restore its original purpose. She suggests that only then will there be an effective change in the court system. Baylis also stresses the need for national and regional courts to assume a greater role in the prosecution of crimes. "The ICC was never meant to be the first responder for these situations". I agree with her that there are too many atrocities to expect one court to take on everything; it should be our last resort. The ICC does not serve to replace national courts. Instead, it is meant to complement  the criminal justice s...

On the debate of the International criminal court, I believe that Elena Baylis's proposal for stronger national and regional courts is very strong. This is due to a multitude of factors. For one, the law is not a unified set of rules, but rather an extremely flexible term that varies widely across the globe. An international body attempting to regulate such a flexible term is ineffective and nearly impossible. Local, regional, or even national backlash is sure to follow In response to such an overreach. Especially as the international body serves to push its own definition of the law.  Baylis offers a great solution to the ineffectiveness of the ICC. The ICC should not be thought of as a concrete body, serving to settle individual cases as a normal court would do. But rather, it would serve as an organization focused on bridging the gap between different courts on all levels. By acknowledging their differences and working to serve as a "bridge" between them. The ICC can g...

  After reading the arguments for if the International Criminal Court is necessary I think there were a lot of good points made. I believe that Elena Baylis makes the strongest argument and I was persuaded most by what she had to say. Baylis argues that the ICC was put into place to play a limited role in the courts, if courts would or could not act. She agrees we need to restore its original purpose and stop the court from all it is doing right now which ultimately has not been very effective. National and regional justice systems are more familiar with what is happening in their specific area and would be able to help more. If we help out those systems and rebuild them to have power and actually work in all places then they would have a greater and more effective change in the court system. It is also clear that there are many countries, cases, and issues for the ICC to deal with on a global scale and taking away some of that pressure and making it more national and regional will...

Grant Voytovich POLS Paper 3/9/2022 I thought that Elena Baylis’s argument about the International Criminal Court was the most convincing.  She talked about the weaknesses of the International Criminal Court, which were noncooperation from states like Kenya, concerns with their investigations, and the difficulty of investigating crimes in locations that might not be safe.  I think that the point that I agreed with the most was that it is nearly impossible for an organization, like the ICC, to monitor all of the crimes going on around the world.  This is a concern with tons of International Organizations; it is very difficult for them to be the middle ground, and assist every country that is involved.  They are in charge of a job that seems to be nearly impossible, and is almost always criticized.  If you look at an international organization like the World Bank, they are in charge of ensuring that all countries involved are well off financially, and have to pr...

  Kameron Schreffler 03/09/2022 After reading the different opinions on the effectiveness of the Global court, I felt that the opinion piece of Daniel Abebe was the most persuasive. "I.C.C's Dismal Record Comes at Too High a Price" detailed that the I.C.C. has a huge budget which is "over $100 Million". With few convictions and little justice served, it is a waste of resources that could be allocated to other things. Abebe detailed the money used for the I.C.C. could get "1.7 billion children vaccinated or 600 million people with something to eat". My original thoughts of the I.C.C were that it was not feasible and a waste of time. This opinion piece by Abebe only persuaded me more to what should be done with the waste of money supporting the I.C.C. Abebe also talked about investing in Healthcare and Education in these African countries would help significantly with their current limited resources. Ultimately Abebe's articles persuaded me by explai...

                                                                     To Sanction or Not to Sanction: How Effective are they Really?    T he invasion of Ukraine has shaken up liberal world order as the consequences continue to ripple across the globe. The recent events have provoked the Western World to act promptly against Russia. Earlier this week, the United States imposed economic sanctions in an attempt to dissuade Vladimir Putin from attacking Ukraine. Specifically, they target Russian banks and elites, further separating Russia from the global banking system. However, some experts think that a tougher response is needed to stop Putin from continuing a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.  Both forms of coercion, coercion simply refers to co...

  John Wallace  Professor Shirk   POLS 170 2 March 2022  Russia and the fading dream of a great power  Just 80 years ago, The world was divided into two blocs of influence, East against West, Communism against Capitalism, Russia against the United States. This political deadlock became known as the cold war, creating a tenuous balance that persisted for nearly 50 years until the fall of the Soviet Union. In the 30 years since then, however, the world has changed dramatically. Leaving Russia’s greatness to seemingly fall into the hallowed halls of history. In the wake of the collapse of the soviet union, the western NATO alliance quickly recruited former members of the warsaw pact and fledgling breakaway states alike.  In doing so, America and its NATO allies greatly reduced Russian influence over its former allies. Years of economic woes and political upheaval in Russia further cemented how far it had fallen from its time of grace. However, in recent y...

  Kameron Schreffler Blog Post #2 02/24/2022 "The Return of Geopolitics" by Russell Walter Mead can be connected to the current geopolitical situation between Ukraine and Russia and the United States' role in the situation. The United States' role in the Ukraine/Russia situation connects to Mead's article well because of how the Ukraine and Russia interactions started and the sanctions that the United States put in place to hurt the Russian economy. We can also connect these issues to our in-class discussions about the Iraq war. Although this situation does not directly involve the United States, we can evaluate how much the United States should intervene. Should the United States send troops to help Ukraine? Should the United States put more sanctions on Russia? These are essential questions that need to be evaluated. I feel that the current actions taken by the United States are necessary and were a very appropriate response to the situation. As the Iraq war dev...

  Blog post #2 The idea of war is frightening which causes people to deny its potential occurrence, and ignore the fact that it is possible at any moment. As we discussed the topic of war in class, war is not on the decline, which demonstrates that violence cannot stop as world peace will never be achieved.  The conflicts happening with Russia and Ukraine prove that war can come just as easily as it is halted. Just because a pause in violent wars has taken place, does not equate to the decline of violent wars as a whole. Wars can happen over anything and as a society I think people underestimate the power it holds over all nations. Once a war begins, it takes one leader for the violence to increase and the danger to the population to come into action. Western countries are failing to recognize the validity of war and how it could come but even since recent weeks, the idea of war has become more threatening. In many cases the wars are not being fought in Western, powerful cou...

  Grant Voytovich Blog 2 The most popular world event right now is the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.  President Putin has said that Ukraine is a threat to peace and global security, which is why they eventually decided to invade Ukraine.  Many innocent people have died, and Russia hasn’t really gotten anywhere as of now.  The question if you’re the United States is whether or not they send troops into Ukraine to support them.  I believe that the United States shouldn’t send troops into Ukraine as of right now.  “The Duck of Minerva” by Peter Henne explains what the United States did wrong in leaving Afghanistan, and how they could’ve fixed their wrongs.  Obviously, there’s a lot of differences between Afghanistan and the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine, but it is never easy sending troops to support a country, and pulling them out afterwards.  So, I think we should hold off on sending troops as of now. The United States sent troop...