« Home

Home » Politics & International Relations » Collins: Contemporary Security Studies » Student resources » Multiple choice questions » Chapter 02

Collins: Contemporary Security Studies

Chapter 02

Instructions

Choose your answers from a-d by clicking the radio button next to each choice and then press 'Submit' to get your score.

Question 1

Why have international relations analysts treated states as the central actors in international politics?

a) States have forged and embody the most powerful, efficacious and largest human communities.

b) States are unique concentrations of power. Beyond their importance as a geographically defined boundary they constitute the predominant point of identity for a person's loyalty and sense of self.

c) States developed and have been shaped by the external pressures of international politics, particularly its security features.

d) All of the above

Question 2

What are the predominant features linked to state security?

a) The capacity of the ruling elite to sustain legitimacy and autonomy against external military, technological, social or political threats, to consolidate the survival of the political system above domestic political developments.

b) Autonomy for people to exchange, or to devolve power and authority for the securing of more favorable socio-economic or technological advancements, or improvements in internal circumstances

c) Autonomy from taking outside orders and the ability of governments, citizens and groups to have their own state, in which autonomy struggles can result in a risk to the state's physical or developmental security, its sustenance implicitly linked to legitimacy of rule.

d) The capacity of the state not to undertake any actions or strategies which may inadvertently risk the security of the state such as arms accumulation, or military preparations which may undermine the physical security of the state from attack, or the devolution of power or territory, or socio-economic development which may undermine domestic structures and risk internal security of rule.

Question 3

What is the significance of anarchy to the Realist explanation of international politics?

a) Anarchy means that the state exists as part of society being indistinguishable from national government and the domestic character of the state.

b) Anarchy means that the state exists apart from society, having its own agenda and strategy in dealing with other states in the absence of an authority, determining the security goals and relations of the government.

c) Anarchy means that there is little continuity in a government's foreign policy over time. Leaders come and go and their foreign policy changes, which is reflective of different preoccupations and ideologies.

d) Anarchy means that the structure of the system is distinctive because states have a strong sense that they are part of a larger entity in international politics with overarching interests and goals making association unlimited and even in importance.

Question 4

What effect does anarchical international society have on International society?

a) States are not autonomous actors in the international system. The "security dilemma," produced by a state's primary objective for absolute monopoly of power within the international system, results in competition and insecurity in international society. The condition of perpetual threat to states' existence necessitates states entering into cooperative agreements in which military capabilities are capped and power is superceded to a higher authority.

b) Anarchical international society results in the unlimited development of international community in which the international system operates as an unlimited sphere of autonomy and control, parallel to autonomy of control in domestic systems. Higher structure of power within the international community typically includes governing and using force necessary for the protection of its member states, its ability to do so free from arbitrary interference from alternative political actors.

c) Anarchical international society results in competition between states for relative power, in which coercive capabilities determine the structure of the international system. States' behavior drives power distribution. In any historical period the pattern of political decision making and action patterns the distribution of power between weakest and strongest states.

d) Anarchical international society results in a situation wherein states are structurally insecure. Limited higher structures means that authority in international politics exists by states limiting themselves to cooperation in treaties and organizations voluntarily entered into. Consequently, states must arrange their own protection, the most important being relative military strength, which may result in power competition, producing a "security dilemma". Competition of power leads to power distribution as being a fundamental political structure of the international system.

Question 5

To what extent is "management" of the international system considered a sustainable project in realist conjecture?

a) International anarchical society is characterized by inter-state rivalry, competition, conflict and insecurity. Cooperation is inconsistent and only temporarily successful in containing conflict or competition, and unable to create a highly secure system. Although cooperation is entered into it is limited, being easily able to withdraw, defect, cheat, or free-ride and cooperation is more favorable to some states than others. Security for the system is rather balancing of power. However, the result is not a high level of security because competition is a consistent feature.

b) Since international politics is subject to rivalry, competition, conflict and insecurity, true cooperation, particularly amongst major states, is important for security-related matters. The durability of a cooperative agreement is viable because governments readily enter into the most important step in cooperation. States are likely to accept agreements that are not very beneficial in the short-term because the cooperation will be beneficial to state security. Willingness to gamble makes agreements easier to obtain and the success of the cooperation more effective.

c) Anarchical international society, characterized by rivalry, conflict, competition, and insecurity results in a situation in which true cooperation becomes a necessity on security-related matters because it is the means by which a sufficiently effective highly secure system can be generated to alleviate members' insecurity dilemmas. Governments are willing to trade autonomy and degrees of autonomy for the creation of a transnational government, and international law on issues of sensitive security matters such as the elimination of weapons.

d) Cooperation is not limited to a small group of states because the durability of cooperation is endorsed by the ability of states to gain the benefits of cooperation whilst incurring minimum costs. States seek to develop advantageous distributions of power however, since the most beneficial distribution of power is highly contentious and thus is a tenuous security arrangement, states rather seek to bind themselves to treaties. Cooperation enables a state to reap the benefits from a higher authority working to check behavior and keep states contained whilst avoiding the expenses involved. The receipt of benefits associated with cooperative arrangements thus stabilizes the inter-state cooperation.

Question 6

Which statement corresponds to the way in which changes to the international system in the post-cold war has related to the realist consideration of security in international politics?

a) A persistent security concern of states' survival in the international system is external, with threat to state survival and systematic pressures continuing to be the most predominant concern of state actors. The collapse of communism demonstrated that systematic pressures and competition erode the possibilities of trans-state cooperation. Despite efforts to build a communist community, it was power that eroded the possibility of cooperation.

b) The collapse of governments at the end of the Cold War demonstrated the instability of the international system when there is a sharp decline in relative military power, as with the communist regimes who continued to be retain legitimacy and support but failed to maintain their military capability vis-à-vis the West.

c) Following the collapse of communism there has been a persistently different pattern in cooperation than anticipated by realist theorization. Initiatives in cooperation have continued to deepen despite the realist claim that integration was a need inaugurated by the military threat posed by the Soviet Union. Examples of efforts include measures that transcend traditional areas of military security, such as arms control, nuclear proliferation. Furthermore, balancing of power is occurring on the "softer" level of policy disagreements rather than limitation of power potential.

d) The collapse of communism resulted in a version of multi-polarity in which newly formed states act to balance the military power of the US. In response the US has attempted to suppress modernization and developmental capacity of potential rivals, notably China, the European Union and Japan. In response to increasing capabilities oppositional alliances in which limitation of power rather than soft balancing over policy issues may become a feature of international politics.

Question 7

How does the Liberalist school of thought diverge from the Realist school in its treatment of the state in international politics?

a) States continue to be the predominant actor in international politics and continue to be so, having their own interests and concerns. Whilst governments and domestic arrangements do determine the character of rule and there will be conflicts of interests between domestic political groups over the representation of states interests, domestic forces and interests will ultimately be instrumental and serve the unchanging interests of the state.

b) States continue to be the predominant actor in international politics but they are not significant by virtue of being a state. Governments and domestic arrangements are the predominant determinant of policies. Therefore, whilst states have their own interests and concerns they are not unitary actors in the international system. States are in the end instruments of domestic forces, its autonomy assuming secondary importance to the safety of the state.

c) State autonomy as an international actor is integral to security of the state within the international system. The emergence of arrangements that will blunt the autonomy of the state but have domestic advantages for domestic citizens such as development are not on the security agenda. Thusly, support for multilateral agreements and institutions are erratic and rarely involve the trading of autonomy to trans-national level.

d) The importance of internal forces in the international system and the interest and concerns of domestic groups has implications on the security of the state. Domestic appeal to groups within a state therefore assumes primary consideration even above the rulers or government's consideration of what constitutes a risk to the safety of a state. Governments may therefore pursue policies which are harmful to security of rule if it serves the interest of the state and national development.

Question 8

From a Liberalist perspective how far does anarchy impact on international politics?

a) Peoples and governments primarily accept that security is not interdependent and will continue to pursue security unilaterally. Whilst economic interactions and limited cooperation will provide limited welfare for some gains and community development, challenges to national security will not be tolerated. For example competitive mercantilism will be pursued if it provides greater domestic gains, for domestic society and interests is the guiding force of state policy.

b) Closed societies and governments with a firm domestic control should be regarded as a natural part of the international system, because their behavior is in general a response to the safety necessities of the anarchical international society. Appreciation of common interests does not therefore breed interdependence because every state's individual interest will vary and the chances of conflict will be an omnipresent characteristic.

c) Anarchy continues to be the presiding factor in determining the extent of cooperation. Increasing interactions within the international community enhance the prospect of misunderstanding and misperceptions by eroding the sovereign capability of a state to act within its own security interests producing an increased chance of conflict over issues of interest.

d) Inter-state cooperation is a feature of the international system, the security dilemma produced by competition, not the presiding feature. Interactions and exchanges between states are attributed to a reduction in conflict and rivalry, facilitating the emergence of further cooperative measures. Consequently interactions and cooperation is implicitly linked to the gradual construction of an international security community whose scope of concern may widen.

Question 9

Where does power form in the Liberalist international political perspective?

a) The liberalist conceptualization of power is understood to be synonymous with the universalisation of principles of democracy, residual in the philosophy of Kant and the Wilsonian principles, in which democracies are regarded as the most efficacious means of guarding against conflict and most liable to promote the peaceful resolution of disputes through discussion (an extension of which is the democratic peace theory). Power is thusly a combination of an open society and democratic government.

b) The liberalist perspective of power is understood to denote the internationalization of economic interactions inaugurated by capitalist economies. Business interests at domestic level become heavily involved bi trade and foreign investment and the pervasion of these vested interests results in internal pressure on the state to pursue cooperative policies and war avoidance tactics.

c) Coercive power is understood to denote the monopolization of capacity to exert influence in the domestic arena and also the capacity for relative military strength within the international arena. Whilst trans- national activities have increased in significance they assume secondary importance to the primacy of states military power and international society is primarily concerned with attaining relative military gains, even if at the expense of coalition building or cooperation.

d) Power within international society is regarded to be within the domain of expanding networks of activities by both private citizens and organizations, and also with political systems (predominantly those democratic systems) as having increasing influence over the state. The new power consists of moral authority and leverage to wield influence and pressure to uphold international community and cooperation alongside the more traditional conception of power as predominantly coercive in character and limited to domestic politics.

Question 10

What are the main intellectual problems with the Liberalist view of international politics?

a) The Liberalist perspective is an optimistic account of contemporary international politics. Nationalism and basic interest are the dominant variable in cooperation and not democracy as the theory would suggest. Liberalists tend to give too little emphasis on the state as an essential vehicle for the articulation of domestic and transnational demands, as the locus of citizenship and for nationalist sentiment.

b) The Liberalist perspective is synonymous with western theorization and is an extension of Western political, social, and economic imperialism and imposition of cultural hegemony. The question remains unanswered as to what will happen once there is the rapid and anticipated development of non-western societies and whether it will lead to a cultural clash.

c) There is a practical difficulty in liberalist discourse as to the justification, necessity, and legalization of the deployment of force in international politics. Moral and analytical justifications for force often conflict with political, financial, and ethical principles, as well as the violation of the principle of sovereignty: still the guiding principle of inter-state relationships.

d) All answers above have been cited as legitimate analytical problems with the liberalist perspective.

Oxford University Press, Online Resource Centre, Chapter 02.