Handout // April 27, 2000

Handout // April 27, 2000
17.423

Current Events: Rogue Regimes

I. National Missile Defense: Any more Questions?

A. What are the motives/arguments of supporters?
1.) Who are they?

2.) Do they believe it will work?

3.) What sort of cost/benefits do they see?

4.) Do they want to "lock in" commitment? Kill arms control?

B. What has Russia said recently? (Russia signed START II . . .) 1.) Does it matter?
C. Is the threat from Russia or the threat from Rogue Regimes more important? 1.) IT MAY TRULY BE A NEW WORLD: Russia should realize this, undeterrable states with WMD are the REAL THREAT.
II. Rogue Regimes: Personalities and Policies A. What is a "Rogue Regime"? Is this a good label? Help or hurt US policy?
1.) How scary are Rogue Regimes?

2.) Are they undeterrable?

3.) Are WMD a great "leveler"?

4.) Do they threaten the US directly, or US interests overseas, or are these indistinguishable notions?

5.) How do US views differ from the views of US allies?

B. Is it "personal" politics? Does the personality of the dictator matter most, or is it the "state"? Why does this matter? Does US diplomacy respond "personally"?

C. The Big Question: to contain or engage? To contain AND engage?

1. Containment tools:
a. International Courtsprosecution for terrorism; (Domestic Prosecution of War Crimes)

b. Sanctions

i. military sanctions

ii. economic sanctions

c. Shows of strength and armed intervention

d. Support for opposition movements or covert operations

e. Diplomacy: efforts to strengthen "balances""the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

f. International censure (UN resolutions, etc., labeling states "rogues" in order to isolate them).

g. Increased intelligencewhat advantages/disadvantagesshould this be pursued?

h. Other tools?

2. Tools of engagement:
a. Payment/bribes for "good" behavior.

b. Conditional economic relations.

c. Conditional military aid.

d. Conditional international acceptance.

e. Security guarantees.

f. Other?

D. Exploring Sanctions: military and economic.
1.) When are they most effective?
a. To deter? (/contain/slow down)

b. To compel?

c. To destabilize?

d. To isolate?

2.) Consider unilateral v. multilateral sanctions?
a. Are unilateral sanctions useful? In what way?

b. Are multilateral sanctions much better if they are still leaky?

c. In what ways does it matter if US allies oppose US sanctions? Hurt US credibility? Weaken NATO?

3.) Do motives behind sanctions matter?
a. US ideals? (freedom, democracy, human rights)

b. Domestic politics?

c. Does the US lose credibility when it acts on ideals and then changes its mind for strategic/realist reasons? Or does it lose flexibility when it sticks too tightly to ideals?

d. Protect US interests overseas.

e. Protect Americansat home and abroad?

4.) Retribution v. Rehabilitation?
a. What is retribution?

b. What is rehabilitation?

c. If sanctions fail to rehabilitatecan/should they be changed to "fix" the policy? Does the US lose credibility?

d. Do you like the "window of opportunity" v "basement of fear" distinction by Tanter? Many are motivated by opportunity and fearwhat to make of this?

E. Military Force: Covert operations and preemption of WMD
1.) Is it legitimate to attempt to overthrow "rogue" leaders? (Support the opposition? Is there a line that should not be crossed?)

2.) Is it legitimate/necessary to preempt WMD?

3.) Are "shows of strength" legitimate and/or effective?

F. How/when is engagement effective?
1.) Only when a rogue is rational?

2.) When will rogues read engagement as appeasement? Bribe the US?

3.) Can the US avoid being bribed? Are bribes cheaper and safer than military confrontation, or more dangerous?

III. North Korea; Iran; Iraq; Syria; Libya. A. Profile:
1.) How big? How rich?

2.) Who is the leadership?

3.) What is the history?

4.) What WMD capability do they have?

B. What is US Policy?

C. Is it effective?

D. What else should the US be doing?

E. What are US allies doing?

IV. Other States to consider as rogues, or serious threats?