Michael and Conor's blog

What IR means to me…

cs8uw — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 20:20:53 +0000

International Relations to me is what defines the relationship among countries throughout the world, politically and socially. It defines by what means different governments agree or disagree on public policy domestically and foreign. It also shows the differences or similarities in cultures among different countries. By studying international relations one is able to view the foundations of governments and how they view foreign aid and policy in comparison to other countries. International relations is an interesting topic because as time goes on different countries’ politics are constantly changing so the study never ends.

Cold War Eastern Europe and IFIs

mm5rg — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:12:06 +0000

International financial institutions were often used as a tool of East-West strategy in the Cold War. People usually see IFIs as a capitalist, free trade type of organization. However, the system the Soviet Union set up with its satellites in Eastern Europe can be seen as an IFI. Basically the USSR used the other nations’ economies and trade for personal gain. instead of having a governing body outside the government, the body was made entirely of Soviet government officials.

Rules based ends based

mm5rg — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:57:38 +0000

Both rules-based and ends-based methods are found in Eastern Europe during the Cold War. In Poland, the Soviet Union used tactics of ends-based reasoning to stop the surge of nationalism and the complete failure to win elections. instead of honoring the fact that they had lost the faith of the people, the Soviets used troop presence in order to keep Polish communists in power. The Soviets also used rules-based methodology during the takeover of Eastern European governments by Soviet-sponsored communists. By using a process of open government, then assumption of control, all the while keeping a military presence.

Morality Involving the Cold War

cs8uw — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:54:38 +0000

There are a number of moral issues containing the Cold War whether it was what caused the war, throughout the war, or effects of the war. To start, a morality issue was one of the reasons hatred occurred between the Soviet Union and the United States. The moral issue was the United States dropping the atomic bomb on Japan. The Soviet Union did not agree with the United States’ decision to drop the bomb and were angered that they did it secretly. Another moral issue was the lack of free elections that Stalin promised over his “Iron Curtain” of countries he controlled in Eastern Europe. Another moral issue was the blockade the USSR put on Western Germany because of the aid they were receiving from the Allies. A final moral issue resulting from the Cold War was the peoples’ distrust of their government because of the corruption throughout the war, especially in Eastern Europe. This moral issue of problems between the people and their government causes much issue in the domestic policy of that country.

The State in Cold War Eastern Europe

mm5rg — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 03:12:08 +0000

Most Eastern European nations during the Cold War had little state power. All authority that the state held was given to it by the Soviet Union. The exception was Yugoslavia, whose power was vested in Tito. The other communist nations were known as Soviet satellite states because the leaders were all hand picked by Russian leaders.

After the Soviet Union began to systematically take over the the governments of its Eastern European neighbors, the role of the state began to decline rapidly. Instead of a state which looks out for the best interests of its people, the governments became tools of the Soviet government to be used for the improvement of Russian security. Whether the Eastern bloc provided financial help, agriculture, or a military buffer zone from the West, these nations no longer controlled themselves.

The Cold War domination of the Soviet Union over Eastern Europe completely undermined the power of the state. By allowing themselves to be encompassed by the strength of the USSR, these nations gave up their ability to stay in control.

The International System and the Cold War

cs8uw — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:06:52 +0000

There are three types of polarity in the international system and they would be unipolarity, bipolarity, and multipolarity. As Mike said in his last post about The Cold War, neither side had an edge on the other so hegemony was impossible. Therefore it wasn’t unipolarity. Each side had their supportive countries but The Soviet Union and The United States were the leading countries on their respective side so it was not multipolarity. Therefore it had to be bipolarity and it was because neither side had more advantages than the other. This was such a significant and powerful war because of this bipolarity because both sides had much power including many other countries which were affected because of the outcome. Also, according to Waltz and Mearsheimer this type of polarity is the most stable because each side is best able to moderate the other side’s use of violence. This also contributes to the fact of how much of an impact this war made to The United States and Eastern Europe.

Eastern European International Relations Theory

mm5rg — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 04:56:11 +0000

The Communist bloc during the Cold War was an interesting study in international relations theory. While the governments were communist and thus Marxist ideologically, Soviet foreign policy was more based on realism.

After the Bolshevik Revolution, Soviet Russia had the plan of world communism as its ultimate goal. After World War II neighboring nations, particularly in Eastern Europe, became communist. Eventually the world was split into two sides, Communist Russia and the democratic United States. In this polarized situation, both sides took a realist view on foreign policy.

The security dilemma of trying to keep up with other countries in terms of security was perfectly highlighted by the Cold War. Both sides constantly built up their militarys in order to stay secure. However, it only made the world that much more unstable. In Eastern Europe in particular, where the Iron Curtain separated the world, tensions remained high for decades.

Also, the realist scholar Mearsheimer discusses that in order to secure one’s nation, it is necessary to seek power and secure hegemony. During the Cold War neither side had an edge and thus hegemony was impossible. Due to this the world was constantly insecure.

Communist Eastern Europe was a powder keg as soon as Soviet power moved in after the defeat of Germany. Once it became clear that democracy and communism could not coexist, Marxism no longer seemed a suitable foreign policy. Instead, realism dictated Soviet tactics, particularly the arms buildup.

Topic

mm5rg — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:47:38 +0000

I would like to analyze the Cold War and more specifically its effects on Eastern Europe. I have chosen this topic because almost every country in the world was in some way involved in the polarization caused by the friction between the United States and the Soviet Union. I also have a good background of information on the subject because I took a class on Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution, which dealt heavily with Soviet influence over the Eastern block.

My life changing event

mm5rg — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 07:54:51 +0000

Last August I was driving home from my friend’s house and I got into a car accident. It was a pretty close call and afterwards I did a lot of thinking about my life. It changed my whole outlook on life. While I was waiting for the tow truck I looked at the damage done to the guardrail I had hit. I didn’t realize until I saw the uprooted railing how close I came to going off the side of a mountain.

After I got over the ensuing shakes, I thought about what I’ve done in my life. In the seventeen years I had lived, I couldn’t think of one thing I had done that would leave my mark on the world. I would have been just another teenager who died because he was driving too fast. I then made a decision to change that. I decided that I would stop taking for granted the life I lead. I chose to ensure that I would be remembered when I die.

I know that seems like a hard thing to do, but after thinking about it, I figured out how. I didn’t need to cure cancer or become the President. The key to leaving your mark is doing the small things that matter. I let my mom kiss me in public. I always call people back when I say I will. I remember to tell people happy birthday. But most importantly, I let the people I care about know it. I realized that living on is about staying in people’s hearts. So now instead of assuming tomorrow will be there, I make sure I use every moment.

Event in Life

cs8uw — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 06:28:58 +0000

I would have to say the event would be my senior year when I went on a retreat for Religion class at my Catholic High School. I had to go on a 3 day 2 night retreat in order to fill a Religion credit. It was a retreat that brought together all different types of kids from different Religious backgrounds. Basically we were split up into different groups and we talked among each other about our personal beliefs and our different Religions. Before that point in my life I was pretty unaware of other Religions especially those not so common in the United States, let me add that this was an international retreat, but now since the retreat I have become more knowledgeable of other Religions and of people from different backgrounds. I met many people from different backgrounds that I now keep in touch with on a day to day basis. That retreat helped open up my eyes to relationships on an international level.