I do not use Blackboard. I honestly don't know what the fascination is with the program. I will be using the blog to keep everyone posted on news, updates, and class issues. Even if we did have blackboard, I would not post grades there - I tend to think you should have to come to class to get your materials to understand the context of your grade.
If you want to start a discussion thread, email me and I will put one up here. You are encouraged comment on articles or questions I pose here and they will count for participation. I am always on IM (drbvaler) so we do not need chat services.
The email for POLS 184 TAs are rvc80@yahoo.com (Rebecca) and azimel2@uic.edu (Andris)
The question for this week, what do you think the important issues in International Relations will be during the semester (besides Iraq)?
Dr. Valeriano (Go Bears!)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Bella wants to know what is going on in the world
Welcome to Brandon Valeriano's International Relations Blog. This space will be used to keep my students, friends and colleagues updated with international news, research, class issues, and anything else I think is interesting. Please feel free to let me know if you think the blog is missing coverage of something.
Bella
Bella wants to know what is going on in the world
Random note
"Part of the genius of people like Einstein, or of any great artist for that matter, is the ability to see the obvious, the things we take for granted, and question it in a new way and make its inherent strangeness apparent." Overbye, NYTimes
Links
Music Favs
Me
About Me
- Brandon Valeriano
- Chicago/Lakeview-UIC, Il, United States
- My primary areas of research are Conflict Studies/International Relations and Race/Ethnicity Studies. I am presently working on projects that involve the study of international rivalries, classification systems of war, and Latino Foreign Policy issues.
Labels
- News (94)
- Course Info (33)
- Iraq (21)
- Iran (18)
- Latino (17)
- Funny (16)
- Rivalry (12)
- Lectures (11)
- Territory (10)
- Lecture (8)
- Personal (7)
- Research (7)
- Sports (7)
- russia (6)
- Latin America (5)
- Volunteer (5)
- Latinos (4)
- China (3)
- extra credit (2)
- new (2)
- Careers (1)
- Election 08 (1)
- alliances (1)
- nuclear (1)
- war (1)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(148)
-
▼
January
(23)
- New Paper
- 'Aqua Teen Hunger Force' Shuts Down Boston
- Slow News Day
- Holy Socks
- Rivalry Class
- Tortilla Crisis!
- psst...want some enriched uranium?
- Internal Rivalry - Iraq
- Iran in Space
- Lincoln Park Alderman Challenger
- Mayor Daley Visit
- State of the Union
- New Defense Secretary is a Hardliner
- The World Hates the US
- Class Stuff
- How to download an article
- China in Space
- Best we can home for?
- Volunteer Opt
- Independent Study
- Dissertation
- Syllabus 184
- Syllabus 389
-
▼
January
(23)
11 comments:
I think one of the issues would be how the international community would help the Darfur crisis. After the rwandan genocide, people are not quick to ignore the problem/genocide sudan is facing currently.The Janjaweed are systematically killing other tribes , which is known as Ethinic Cleansing just like in the 1994 Rwandan genocide.It is not a conflict for resources amongst the tribes, but a certain tribe is looking to elimiante the existence of another. My question is how did this Group of Sudanese become so powerful and why wont the Sudanese Govt allow a UN resolution promptly. Is it moral for the rest of the world to watch many die helplessly or launch an offensive against the Sudan Govt in other to get help to its people.
Yinka
pol 184
section(16201)
One of the more pressing issues recently in international relations deals with the use of time series cross sectional analysis in creating empirically valid results. I believe the use of lagged dependent variables should only be used when theoretically justified as opposed to Achen (2002) who argues against their use in general; additionally, the proper use of such autoregressive terms can be used to successfully determine 'total effects' for individual variables in the multivariate model. Concerns about inflated residuals are no longer relevant when total effects are calculated for the time series. Since we know that many substantive issues in international relations such as war and defense budgets violate the independence assumption of the classic linear regression model (as well as homoskedasticity/correlated errors), the proper use of time series statistical analysis with lagged effects becomes crucial for international relations scholars.
You should drop the course if you don't understand the above post :)
maltliquor has probably been drinking to many forties and thinks this is a research methods blog.
I think that besides Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon are going to be important issues including Iran's nukes.
I remember remember reading a times magazine in which even before 911 Bush had pinpointed iraq,afghanistan,iran,n.korea etc...
I think America is to focused on Iraq, and does not see the rising problem in Asia with China becoming a super power, and the unresolved problem with Taiwan. China is building up their military and might consider attacking Taiwan. Also north Korea's lust for nuclear weapons, should be addressed. I don't think America will be able to play world police for much longer, since other parts the world becoming more and more powerful. I believe we should start building better relations with the world instead of going to war everywhere. We are all different, thats why the world is divided into countries.
Sebastian
Pol184
I agree that China is likely to be one of the more important issues for this generation. Yet, there's lots of literature in IR that suggests serious conflict with China is not likely, even if they surpass America in power/capabilities. Consider China's increasing (though slowly) democratic nature, but more importantly, the amount of trade the United States and China share. One power-based theory in IR, Power TRansition theory, argues that a declining hegemon (perhaps the US) and rising power (China) are likely to have conflict when the rising power surpasses the hegemon. However, a shift in power is only a necessary condition for conflict: one of the countries must actually want to pursue conflict for it to happen. Now, considering the amount of economic interdependence between the US and China, this seems highly unlikely, even if China surpasses the US in power. Conflict just wouldn't make sense. And this is exactly why Clinton made great efforts to engage China to promote democracy and more trade. Even Nixon before him gave China MFN status.
So, in short, don't worry about China.
Yes i read that it is unlikely that we will get in conflict with china, but what if China attacks Taiwan, that is going to be a big dilemma for the US, and it is not only China alone, N. Korea. Asia all together. But why i am concerned with China is human nature, the more power you have, the more likely it is to engage in military conflict. Kind of like our reading on Thucydides
sebastian
Taiwan is a good point, but again, what sense would attacking make? Another important concept in IR is the notion of 'issue linkages'. States act strategically by linking multiple issues together. The US has done this consistently with China by threatening to suspend trade unless China makes human rights progress. I would imagine the US would do the same with Taiwan. If you link the issue of Taiwan to the issue of trade then it becomes very difficult for China to rationalize sacrificing a crucial economic partner over what is now mostly a symbolic obsession with Taiwan. And remember in the late 1990's China tossed a few missiles across Taiwan into the ocean and the US sent carriers over and there was a mini-standoff and then backing down. Nothing was accomplished. The leadership of China (which is more moderate now) realizes this. So, at worst, I would predict similar 'sabre rattling' scenarios with Taiwan, but nothing beyond that.
North Korea is an entirely different issue. Not sure what to think there. We need regional solidarity, most importantly China, in dealing with N.Korean leadership though.
To answer the questions/comments about Sudan. First of all, I think the international community is apt to ignore the problem, even in light of Rwanda. The issues that led the UN to not get involved in the problem still remain and they are structural.
Two, the Janjaweed got so powerful because the Sudanese government wants them to be powerful. Why do the work in the West when they can just get someone else to do it for them.
Third, why won't the Sudanese government allow the UN to be active in the region? Because of the concept of sovereignty. No one wants other countries to come into their land and judge them. Nor does the UN want to be somewhere they are not wanted.
>Taiwan is a good point, but again, >what sense would attacking make?
China would never attack Taiwan just for the heck of it, but they would if Taiwan declared independence or increased its military capabilities in such a way that it might China unable to invade in the future. So there are reasons why China might invade and they are unlikely to be connected to economic issues.
Post a Comment