Author: eohara (Page 18 of 28)

Writing, Revolution & Resistance in US Literature Before 1865

What stories do Americans tell about their origins? How have they used the power of the word to define their communities, justify or contest colonization, resist oppressive regimes, raise their voices, and imagine a new nation? What did it mean to claim the right to write? This course considers questions such as these in exploring a rich variety of texts, including Indigenous oral narrative, oratory, captivity and slave narratives, political tracts, short stories, and myriad forms of poetry; we will also come to understand why these stories still matter today. Readings will include work by Elias Boudinot, Anne Bradstreet, Emily Dickinson, Frederick Douglass, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Thomas Paine, Henry David Thoreau, Sojourner Truth, Phillis Wheatley, and Walt Whitman. Covering the pre-colonial period through the mid-19th century, this course satisfies the US Literature I requirement for the English major and concentration; an elective for the English minor and Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities major; and an Exploration requirement for the Core Curriculum.

Environmental Regulations: Redefining the Nature of the

 International System 

Elia O’Hara 

Professor Courtney 

PSC 201 Introduction to International Relations 

December 13, 2022

 Exploring the issue of environmental regulations within the international system illuminates how making the lasting changes needed when facing the severity of climate change requires a shift in those traditional mainstream markers of international relations. These could include views on power, the structure of our international organizations, as well as taking note of warnings presented by previous scholars. We as a global community have witnessed the accelerating effects of climate change in recent years – which only continue to worsen. This should become an opportunity for deep reflection and a shift of our rhetorics surrounding concepts of competition, security dilemmas, and overreliance on nationalistic priorities to instead a shared commitment where we recognize that cooperation is the only way to address these issues. As former Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel made clear, “Climate change knows no borders… and the whole of the international community here has to shoulder a responsibility to bring about sustainable development.”(Safi 2014). Recognizing that barriers to environmental regulations are, of course, plentiful is a hurdle to overcome, yet not one that leads us further into irreparable damages by avoiding the solutions. 

The severity and urgency of environmental implications appear substantially lacking in regulations and application within international relations. Significant to my reasoning on why these shortcomings arise and how they can be remedied lies within our definitions and theories on power. Most prominent scholars who set the status quo on how we define power in an international context have become outdated and disjointed from the realities facing our world today. For instance, Hans Morganthau, an influential and highly regarded realist, characterized in his work “The Six Principles of Political Realism” how “Power may comprise of anything that established and maintains the control of man over man” (Art and Jervis 2017, pp. 23-4). While this reasoning aligns perfectly with his overarching description of the international system structurally intrinsic to competition, self-interest, and greed, it does not extend to our modern system, where efforts to mitigate conflict and self-interest try to be ardently avoided through the hopes of international organizations, new technology, and diplomatic strategies. Furthermore, the nature of environmental regulation needed to face the climate crisis, these views on power prove unhelped when meeting those pressing issues. The domination of man over man-ideologies has driven unfettered competition and self-interest at the expense of environmental policies and certainly cannot be the mainstream perspective when applying regulatory actions. 

Looking at the work of J. Ann Ticker, a feminist international relations theorist, titled “A Critique of Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism” within our textbook, greatly highlights my argument by her review of the previously stated concepts of Morgenthau and realism with a feminist perspective. While Tickner’s views span many concepts within realism, the most vital concerning environmental regulations is her discussion on how we view power. Discussed in her article were fellow feminist theorists, including Hannah Arendt, whom Tickner describes “defines power as the human ability to act in concert, or to take action with others who share similar concerns”(Art and Jervis 2017, pp. 33). If this became the premier focus of power on an international scale, perhaps more international relations scholars and nation-states would recognize that the urgency and known devastation of climate change must be met with shared cooperation. 

Another direction that can be employed to address environmental regulations is within international trade, specifically as possible solutions to the barrier of enforcement and coordination between individual states in our current market. Dani Rodrik’s article “A Sane Globalization” speaks to my idea of a shift in priorities and focus through his discussion on what is required to maintain an open market through a reorientation of policies and regulations. For instance, Rodrik uses the World Trade Organization (WTO) as an avenue for improvement as he argued, “An expansion of safeguards to cover environmental, labor, and consumer safety standards or development priorities at home…would increase the legitimacy and resilience of the world trading system and render it more development-friendly”(Art and Jervis 2017, pp. 359). Suppose that line of thinking was embraced in our international community. In that case, I feel it would, with the legitimacy of major international organizations like the WTO, allow for a sense of continuity within nation-states, thus creating conditions where environmental regulations could be implemented. Additionally, it would push back against the well-known barrier of an anarchic structure of the international world, enforceability. Those safeguards can ensure environmental regulations are being met and that nation-states which we usually depend on through voluntary measures, would have accountability. 

Highlighting the infamous work of Garrett Hardin’s “Tragedy of the Commons,” the unique ability of this article is that at the time of publication in 1968, its primary concern was population growth, yet it remains relevant within the purview of international relations as it has come to resemble the issue of the climate crisis and the atmospheric commons. Especially important to note when considering barriers to environmental regulations is the very problem outlined by Hardin when he alleged, “Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interests in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons”(Art and Jervis 2017, pp. 481). Bearing this in mind, extending to environmental stressors that stem from our overall free market and capitalistic structure, the only rational option states have been left with is to continue participating in practices that lead to worsening environmental damage. Taking Hardin’s suggestions and the severity of his claim surrounding a population crisis, such as “Freedom is the recognition of necessity – and it is the role of education to reveal to all the necessity of abandoning the freedom to breed” (Art and Jervis 2017, pp. 485). This rhetoric can set the stage for environmental regulations by addressing the need for a new definition of freedom and rights when unprecedented events call for alternative ways of thinking to alleviate climate stressors with environmental regulations.

When reviewing what environmental regulations can achieve through international relations in our current structure, the realities of traditional perspectives that have been maintained must be reconsidered. The overarching theme is the need for innovation to meet the unprecedented severity of climate change. Examining examples of outdated views on power and cooperation, our international organizations and their enforcement, as well as prominent thinkers on global issues, provides that context. Only when our international system becomes committed to the necessity of change can environmental regulations prove efficacious. 

Works Cited 

Art, R. J., & Jervis, R. (2017). International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues. Pearson.

Safi, M. (2014). Angela Merkel pressures Australia to reveal its greenhouse gas targets. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/17/angela-merkel-pressures-australia-to-reveal-its-greenhouse-gas-targets

The Use of Force in the International System and its Contemporary Examples

Elia O’Hara 

PSC 201: Intro to International Relations

Professor Courtney

October 20, 2022 

The application of force in the international system today tends not to follow the strict definitions well laid out and rationalized by International Relations scholars. Instead, they seem to align with their underlying principles with a significant amount of blending and overlap due to what I feel is an incredibly connected and complex system of state interactions. Identifying the traditionally recognized uses of force, known as defense, deterrence, compellence, and swaggering, accentuates the varying degrees of application in contemporary examples; allowing a more compressive view of how these well-written and articulate definitions of force become messy and convoluted when applied to real-world situations. For instance, looking at the extent of compellence and coercive force within the Russian and Ukraine war and North Korea’s swaggering tactics can accentuate the spectrum of how force is utilized in real-world scenarios. 

Before examining the uses of force in our international system today, acknowledging the established definitions and functions of force from prominent International Relations scholars, such as Robert Art and Thomas Schelling, aids in our later discussion of how they take shape today. From our textbook, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, the article titled “The Four Functions of Force” by Art recognizes defensive, deterrent, compellent, and swaggering as the readily understandable categories states and actors employ.   

The defensive use of force in its basic form is “the deployment of military power…to ward off an attack and to minimize damage to oneself if attacked”(Art and Jervis 2017) with additional employment of preventative and or preemptive strikes. The second function is the deterrent use of force which provides a threat of retaliation, meaning using military powers “to prevent an adversary from doing something that one does not want him to do and that he might otherwise be tempted to do by threatening him with unacceptable punishments if he does”(Art and Jervis 2017). Compellent usage of force, as defined by IR scholar Thomas Schelling “involves initiating an action…that can cease, or become harmless, only if the opponent responds”(Art and Jervis 2017), meaning that the success of a compellent is measured by how quickly and closely the target satisfies their adversaries wishes. Art recognizes the last function of force, and most accessible to achieve, as swaggering, which is more of an egotistical display of scenarios such as “military might…national demonstrations and buying or building the era’s most prestigious weapons” (Art and Jervis 2017). While Art sees swaggering as “ill-defined” or lacking a specific intended target, the example found in today’s international system raises the question against those assumptions. 

The extent to which force in our international system today either aligns with or takes a different approach than those expressed in conventionally accepted definitions can lead to examples such as the Russian and Ukraine war that has had ongoing entanglements since 2014. Looking at the connections or alignment with the four functions of force summarized above, the compellent use of force seems to align fundamentally with Putin’s endeavors. There is a physical aspect in which Putin is forcing a change in behavior. Specifically, Putin has advanced this notion that, historically, Ukraine is part of Russia and should return as such. This showcases how his deployment of military power aims to compel his adversaries to recognize this rhetoric and modify their actions in allowing him to control Ukraine. 

However, the interconnectedness of this war brings a variation of the traditional and textbook example of compellent force. Part of this war overlaps with tensions between Russia and the West, especially the United States, as Putin sees the potential threat of Ukraine becoming influenced by westernization and, therefore, not as easily manipulated by his political ideologies. An interesting point made from Dr. Daniel Goure of the Lexington Institution illustrated how this war has taken a mixture of the functions of force by stating, “For the Kremlin, deterrence is a form of operant conditioning; it is in effect when the US and its allies condition their actions with an eye towards avoiding confrontation with Russia. Compellence is the active form of the same principle. It is a matter of actively challenging Western actions in order to force a stand down. Instead of the term compellence, a better word to describe the Russian approach is coercion…”(Goure 2019). 

This assertion highlights the importance of understanding the multifaceted nature of specific state interactions that may pose varying degrees of the four functions of force we have analyzed. For instance, I also see a divergence between strict compellence into a fusion of coercion and destructive forces. The purely militaristic forces trying to eliminate Ukraine’s military assets are present, but eliminating those same assets can additionally take a form of coercion that forecasts what is to come if the behaviors of Ukraine and western involvement do not alter. 

Taking the subject of swaggering and to what extent I see it aligning with contemporary global scenarios, I found that North Korea could adhere to and deviate from the applications of force in the world today, especially when pursuing the debate of pure swaggering versus that of peaceful compellence. Again, swaggering from a standard definition could explain the connection to our textbook and other IR scholars’ views of a state attempting to feel respected and influential. Nevertheless, in the case of North Korea, the idea that the actions they take have no specific aim raises some doubt. Their “swaggering” tactics, such as extravagant displays of nationalism and military might, are unquestionably aimed at global world powers such as the U.S and, therefore, our allies to make a point that goes beyond just ego. 

I also found the question of whether North Korea’s global display of immense military strength aligns with the theory of peaceful compellence notable in this discussion. Our textbook defines this notion of a peaceful compellent as “a state can take actions against another that do not cause physical harm but that require the latter to pay some type of significant price until it changes its behavior”(Art and Jervis 2017). Part of the reasoning behind this connection to North Korea is that in the conventional meaning of swaggering, one could surmise that there is no target intended from the display of excessive national pride or prestige. Quickly examining the history of North Korea and the United States, it would be logical to assume that their swaggering tactics hold a deeper meaning. Specifically, understanding the effects of the Korean War and, subsequently, our involvement in South Korea followed by violations of UN Security Council measures where“… North Korea continues overt nuclear enrichment and long-range missile development efforts”(CPA 2022). One could hold those swaggering tactics as actually an example or a potential threat of what the U.S could encounter if we decided to alter our actions in a way that North Korea found unsatisfactory. 

Through examining pertinent real-world examples such as the Russian-Ukraine war and North Korea’s militaristic endeavors, the degree to which their employments of force align with the definitions we have looked at in class is worth pursuing. Taking the accepted delineations of force and finding the layers of meaning underneath certain states’ actions points to a realization that the highly complicated nature of the international system extends to the application of force. 

Works Cited

Art, Robert J, and Robert Jervis. 2017. International Politics : Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues. 13th ed. Boston: Pearson.

Goure, Daniel. 2019. “HOW DOES RUSSIA PERCEIVE DETERRENCE, COMPELLENCE, ESCALATION MANAGEMENT, and the CONTINUUM of CONFLICT?” Russian Strategic Intentions a Strategic Multilayer Assessment (SMA) White Paper. 2019. https://www.bruce-douglass.com/_files/ugd/21dc4f_6db1bf428a0d423b96226c3e6ec4a055.pdf#page=48.

The Center for Preventative Action (CPA). 2022. “North Korea Crisis.” Global Conflict Tracker. May 4, 2022. https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/north-korea-crisis.

 Joseph Nye’s Soft Power: Critical Scholarship on International Relations

Elia O’Hara

Professor Ali Ahmida

PSC 105 Introduction to Political Science

December 5, 2022

Within Joseph Nye’s book Soft Power, his central theme in the study of International Relations is to present a methodology of the manifestations of soft power alongside the traditional hard power to illustrate their integral role in the formation and success of state relationships. Nye’s work significantly widens the realm of International Relations to a more holistic and in-depth scope of the ever-changing state and societal factors that shape our international system through his addition of the implications of power. In addition, Soft Power allows for the opportunity to engage in contemporary relevancies, such as the views of fellow political scholars like Noam Chomksy and Leslie Stevenson, who expand our knowledge and perspectives pertaining to American Politics and Political Theory, respectively. Nye’s emphasis on the fungibility of soft power also creates another unique modality for analyzing societal factors, such as the American-made phenomenon that is jazz. 

It is vital to understand that the title of Nye’s book, “Soft Power,” opens his argument rather transparently that this notion of soft power must be acknowledged and included in the strategies and ideologies of International Relations. The name offers a symbolic juxtaposition to the well-known, traditional tool of hard power – one in which military and economic force are employed to obtain a particular outcome. Instead, Nye immediately prompts his audience to be open-minded to this concept of soft power that he defines as “…getting others to want the outcomes that you want – co-opts people rather than coerces them. Soft power rests on the ability to shape the preferences of others”(Nye 5). Nye skillfully articulates that soft power’s sources and goals are geared toward the societal side of the international system. For instance: culture such as education, music, and sports; domestic and political values like democracy, human rights, and individuality; foreign policies of certain institutions that create attractive qualities and style. These sources and their effects ultimately influence behaviors without force or commands. 

As to Nye’s thesis, the context of why he felt this topic must be addressed is that as it was published in 2004, it was a response and critique of the United State’s invasion of Iraq in 2003. His thesis thus stresses that we must learn from our international historical events, such as the Cold War, to better implement not solely militaristic strategies but a balance of both soft and hard power, smart power. His argument relies on the fact that the new realities of our international system, including complexities of globalization, technological advancements, and increased government attention toward terrorism, require the multifaceted approaches soft power can supply. He summarized, “Like the challenges of the Cold War, this one cannot be met by military power alone. This is why it is so essential that Americans — and others — better understand and apply soft power”(Nye xiii). Following this claim, the severity of his thesis is expressed through two primary methods; the first being a critical analysis of the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the Bush administration, and the second is how to take these points of criticism and look at how soft power can become a tool to overcome previous mistakes to move forward.

Relevant in the American Politics sub-field of Political Science is Noam Chomsky, a long-time MIT professor and American linguist well-known for his book Manufacturing Consent, co-authored with Edward Herman. As Chomsky focused much of his work on the critique and analysis of the U.S. mass media’s influence and propaganda based on the interests of large for-profit corporations and elites, I feel he might take a skeptical stance on Nye’s thesis. Soft power is highly advantageous, but Chomsky might argue that if the institutions and governmental elites are a resource, it could derive from their hidden agendas, and we should be critical and aware of those goals. Like Nye speaks of in his section on Public Diplomacy in the Information Age, “…publics have become more wary and sensitized about propaganda”(Nye 106); as Chomsky suggests, non-governmental organizations like news media and monopolistic corporations could extend here to have a hand in how soft power’s usefulness can potentially be squandered. 

Taking into account Political Theory as well, Leslie Stevenson, a well-regarded political theorist, authored the book Thirteen Theories of Human Nature which centers around the understanding of human nature that influences many theories and concepts of political structures continuing to the modern day. Overall, the structure of his book is to take influential theorists of human nature through history and explore their diagnosis of a problem in society, how human nature plays into it, and then their prescription on how to remedy it. I feel Stevenson would find Nye’s thesis rational and understandable to systematically uncover what the pressing issues in our international system are, what strategies have historically prevailed, and which caused more harm to then find solutions to make a change to move forward. For Stevenson, his outlook on human nature’s implications was to look at “what visions of human community we hope to work toward, what sort of societal changes we favor”(Stevenson, 2) and for Nye, to acknowledge the success of America depends on the application and understanding of soft power as a way to balance the old ways of hard power and create smart power in the future. 

An exceptional exemplar of soft power is the creation of American Jazz music. Soft power, in part, derives from the cultural factors of society that bring human beings together, such as education, art, films, and music, to allow for those qualities to be shared and acknowledged on a global scale. The Ken Burns documentary “The Gift” presents the history and outgrowth of jazz; not only is it shown to be a symbolic representation of the historical era of change, growth, and economic booms, but also the moment in black history where entire cultural revolutions took place such as the Harlem renaissance. Abroad, effects like the enmeshing of cultures and sense of identity within the First World War were achieved with the soundtrack of jazz unifying and sharing in those moments of growth. Even roughly a century after the father of jazz Louis Armstrong was born, human beings across national borders and with differing ideologies are still influenced by the unique creation of jazz that brought forth the best America had to offer while using its problems and obstacles as an avenue to produce a new narrative. 

Joseph Nye’s Soft Power creates a logical argument on the realities of soft power under the current government, yet it remains highly relevant today. I felt he offered a vital awareness of the implications of power that often go unnoticed within the study of International Relations that aided his argument for the better. Examples such as the 2003 invasion of Iraq undeniably highlight the limitations of hard power that cannot adequately address state relationships in this modern era. Through examples such as the Cold war, Nye took overlooked elements of soft power to showcase their success, which made his argument even stronger. The fact that he didn’t shy away from addressing the downfalls of increased unilateralism and overutilized militaristic power was refreshing. It is hard to find someone willing to critique a system but also offer concrete examples and methods to work toward a better outcome; I found Nye achieved this extremely well and in a way that can continue to be extended. 

Works Cited 

Burns, K. (n.d.). The Gift . Alexander Street . Retrieved December 1, 2022, from https://video-alexanderstreet-com.une.idm.oclc.org/watch/the-gift. 

Nye, Jr., J. S. (2004). Soft power: The Means to Success in World Politics. Public Affairs.   

Stevenson, L. (2018). Thirteen Theories of Human Nature (Seventh ). Oxford University Press.