Political Paper: Offense-Defense Theory

A paper I wrote for school: December 16, 2013

Examining Offense-Defense Theory

            The study of war is an important and consequential undertaking that can help us understand how and why conflicts arise. Offense-Defense theory specifically looks at the probability of war related to the dominance of the offense or defense in terms of a state's military capabilities. It hypothesizes that a world with a perceived offense dominance leads to a greatly likelihood of war. When offense is dominant, states have a powerful incentive to be the first to strike an opponent. A lack of information amongst actors in the international system, misperceptions and understanding about capabilities can falsely lead states down a path to a war they otherwise may not have entered. Moreover, a power shift between a declining and rising state can create a window of time between the two and create an increased likelihood of war during that time-frame. Lastly, false optimism and a states perception about the cost of war can greatly increase or decrease the probability of war occurring. Offense-defense theory can be used to understand conflict in the realm of international politics. Starting with offense dominance and ending with false optimism, I will examine each of the arguments in turn and take a look at how offense dominance increases the vulnerabilities of the security dilemma.

            Offense dominance theory focuses on the military dominance of the offense or defense during a certain period of time. The fact that offense is dominant can be real or perceived, however, it still has the same profound implications regarding the onset of conflict. Offense dominance implies that conquest of another country will be relatively easy and others are vulnerable to being attacked. Put another way, “offense-defense balance [can be defined] in terms of the ease of taking territory compared with the ease of holding territory when attacked” (Jervis 1978). Knowing this, war becomes more likely in a world that believes offense is more dominant on the battlefield. A number of factors lead to this conclusion, among them that states that view offense as dominant are less likely to use diplomatic means, negotiate, or act cooperatively with other states (Van Evera 2013:121). This creates an environment where disputes are not likely to be resolved through diplomatic channels and are therefore more likely to be decided in a military engagement. Also, states will behave more secretly about defenses and foreign policy, creating a situation in which there is even less information available. States become even more secretive because any information that the enemy can gain about its capabilities is harmful to its security. The secrecy caused by the outcome of less diplomacy and less communication brings even more miscalculations and mistrust amongst states. This fear and insecurity that offense dominance creates within states leads to an increased likelihood of expansion in order for the states to feel more secure and to resist other actors expanding very aggressively (Van Evera 2013:119). A state may feel it necessary to try to expand its borders to a more defensive perimeter that is easier to defense in order to feel more secure. Furthermore, offense dominance means that the first side to mobilize or attack first will have a greater advantage, a perceived first strike advantage, which greatly increases the incentive for a state to strike first. States feel that if they do not strike first they are giving up a huge advantage that can be fatal to any war that may break out. It can also lead to wars that neither side actually intended on, but due to a lack of information and the first strike advantage can occur… “Even if a state does not see starting a war as beneficial, it might suspect that an opponent, basing its calculus on the idea that a first strike might increase its chances of victory, would be tempted to strike first” (Maoz 1990). Often, this can lead to conflict spirals between states that cannot determine the intentions of the each other. A conflict spiral is explained further, “when offense has the advantage… arms races will be intense because when one country adds forces, its adversary will have to make a larger addition to restore its ability to defend” (Glaser 1997). So, each side is fearful of the other side attacking and adds to its capabilities to one up the other side, attempting to feel more secure. In other words, “insecurity and fear intensify as an arms race develops until finally it spirals out of control and some incident touches off a war no one really wanted but that all felt powerless to prevent” (Lamb 1988). Ultimately, due to a lack of information coupled with a state’s fear of security there is an increased probability of a dispute turning into a conflict spiral because of the security dilemma. In this way, an international environment in which offense has a advantage greater relative to defense, there is an increased likelihood of war. States have every incentive to work in secrecy, not engage in diplomacy, and strike first in a conflict. In this way, offense advantage worsens the vulnerabilities of the conflict spiral.

            Power transitions and the window logic that can accompany these shifts become heightened by an offense dominance world by increasing the incentive of a preventive war. A power transition occurs when a rising state and a powerful declining state start having their relative capabilities on a collision course, the rising state increasing and the declining state losing capabilities. The important thing to focus on during a power transition is on whether or not the rising power is satisfied or dissatisfied with the status quo. Another point, if the transition happens to occur rapidly, the dominant power may not have enough time to make enough concessions to satisfy the challenger (Packer Notes 2013). In a world of offense dominance, the risk of conflict during a transition increases due to the notion of a first strike advantage. The declining state cannot be sure about the intentions of the rising state, whether the rising state has limited aims or is trying to change the status quo. Therefore, the declining state faces a major choice. It has a great incentive to launch preventive war, which means it would choose to fight now before the state loses even more relative capabilities to the rising power (Packer Notes 2013). Due to the nature of a first strike advantage, the declining state may feel forced into a preventive war because it can never be truly sure of the intentions of the rising state, and the rising power will eventually have more capabilities than the declining state if it waits to strike. The longer the declining state waits to strike, the more disadvantaged it becomes if a war is to break out. This line of thinking creates windows of opportunity, or window logic, a time frame when a breakout of war in a power transition is more likely. The thought of a preventive war can be dated all the back to the Peloponnesian War, a simple thought of, “we must fight before we are weaker” (Van Evera, 2013; 76). The basic theory behind window logic is that a declining state in a power transition has a certain window of time that it can attack the rising power before the rising power becomes too strong or is able to launch its own strike. Therefore, the declining state adopts much more risky policies and the chance of a conflict breaking out during the window is heightened. A current real world example of the idea is Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon. The window of opportunity is the finite time that Israel has to strike those facilities before it becomes unfeaseable. As Iran inches closer to nuclear proliferation, the window begins to tighten and Israel may become more reckless or have an increased probability to strike. The approaching deadline of a nuclear power Iran may force Israel's hand in a short time frame. However, once Iran proliferates, the window closes and Israel would be hard tested to strike another nuclear power, and both sides understand this notion. Diplomacy may also takes a hit during a window of opportunity because windows lower the credibility of threats and offers. A declining state can never be sure if the rising state will keep its word once the rising state is in a more powerful position, by that time it is too late for the declining state to win a war. In other words, “declining powers cannot trust rising powers offers, because rising powers know the declining power cannot enforce the agreement later” (Van Evera, 2013; 80). This line of thinking leads one to believe that under the conditions of a power transition as well as an offense dominated world, there is going to be an increased likelihood of war.

            Another argument that can lead to an onset of war that otherwise may not occur is the idea of false optimism, that is leaders of a state falsely believing that they will win the war, or underestimating the cost of war. Let us start with a state that falsely believes they will win the war. This belief will cause states to be bolder when a crisis occurs and more likely to consider their adversary to be bluffing. A lack of information is crucial to this argument because when both sides have a misperception about the relative capabilities, the likelihood of war in order for the sides to prove they are right is more likely when neither knows for sure who is the strongest. Put another way, “If states agree on their relative power, this test is unnecessary; but if they disagree, a contest of arms can offer the only way to persuade the weaker side that it is the weaker and must concede” (Van Evera, 2013:15). Ultimately, it is impossible for a leader to correctly judge relative capabilities and the definitive test is war. When states misjudge the capabilities of their opponent or whether they believe the opponent will give in or is bluffing, leads to a greater likelihood of war. This is especially true if the common perception is that there is an offense-advantage in striking first, which leads states to believe that war can be over quickly. If the war is quicker, the war is presumed to be less costly and thus more feasible for a state to partake in. A government will shy away from wars that it believes will be costly but more likely to engage in a conflict that it believes will be quick and easy to win. Van Evera provides multiple examples of a false belief in a quick war, one of which being World War One, when Germany expected to crush France in four weeks and “finish off the rest of the Triple Entente in four months” (Van Evera, 2013:19). However, this can also work in the opposite way if a state is overly worried about defeat. As we stated about offense dominance and the security dilemma, if one state enhances its capabilities another state may feel threatened by this action. This false fear of defeat can lead states, “to launch a preemptive attack if they think they can avert defeat only by striking first, or to launch a preventive war if they think they can avert later defeat only by striking at the peak of their power” (Van Evera, 2013;15). Ultimately, false optimism and false fears of defeat are both likely to increase the chance of conflict between states. Under these conditions, states make miscalculations and falsely believe that they can win a war quick and effectively, leading to bold decision making and ultimately more conflict.

            In conclusion, offense-defense theory offers some interesting insight into why some conflicts occur and why some states may go to war when neither side actually wants war in the first place. Overall, it is important to keep the security dilemma in mind when understanding offense-defense theory because states may feel less secure when another state increases its capabilities. Offense dominance creates an environment that may worsen the security dilemma by having incentives that reward secrecy, first strike advantages, and create windows under which states must act.  War becomes much more likely when there is an environment of offense dominance, exacerbating many factors that contribute to conflict.

References

Glaser, C. L. (1997). The security dilemma revisited. World Politics, 50, 171-201.

Jervis, R. (1978). Cooperation under the security dilemma. World politics,30(02), 167-214.

Lamb, C. (1988). How to think about arms control, disarmament, and defense. Prentice Hall.

Maoz, Z. (1990). Paradoxes of war: On the art of national self-entrapment (p. 66). Boston: Unwin Hyman.

Packer Notes. Offense-Defense. 2013.

Van Evera, S. (2013). Causes of war: Power and the roots of conflict. Cornell University Press.

 

Flying Budget Airlines

Transportation to and from your destination can eat up the bulk of your travel expense. Traveling costs money. We all understand this basic fact and yet many of us overlook the actual cost of getting from Point A to Point B when studying abroad. I came to Europe with the idea that traveling by train (after hearing stories from an older generation) was going to be the optimal form of transport, being both cheaper and faster. Not so anymore. Welcome to 2015 Europe, where a flight between countries in Europe can run for $50.

Boarding our flight to Milan from Marrakech

Airlines have taken over as the cheapest and best way to travel in Europe. Low cost carriers such as Ryanair, Easyjet, and Vueling make flights feasible for those on a budget. Yes, they have bag restrictions and hidden fees in little fine ink, yes they attempt to sell you everything from handbags to lottery tickets during the flight, and yes you do have to pay for in flight goodies ranging from water to a kit-kat bar once on board. However, can you really do anything to justify not flying one of those airlines at a cost of 40 Euros from Italy to Morocco? The short answer is no. If your airline choice rests on whether you get an in flight snack or not, you're probably not a student studying abroad, or if you are, you clearly have no budget (It happens). Take a carry on bag, make sure to weigh it before you depart so you are not over their limit, buy a snack at the nearest convenience store or bring one with you, and enjoy the flight. One of my favorite flights while here was a Ryanair flight, the plane, a brand new Airbus, looked and felt cleaner than any other planes from established airlines I've flown. The crew was professional and the flight was enjoyable, everything from takeoff to landing went smooth.

The main downside to budget airlines. Your destination. Do you see that $50 Easyjet flight to Paris on advertised on their website? Well yes, technically they are getting you into Paris, but they are flying you to the Paris Orly Airport instead of the main airport, Charles de Gaulle. Of course the airport these budget airlines fly into is an hour or sometimes even more from the main city center (Orly is an example of just that). Not only can this be time consuming, as you have to find a train or bus upon landing, but it can also be costly. Flying back to Italy, low cost carriers mainly fly into Milan or Pisa and not Florence. A train from Milan to Florence can run upwards of 55 Euro. So research what airport you're flying into in advance and add up all the costs, everything from getting from getting to the airport originally, to getting to the train station from there and the price of each. At the end of the day, it might actually make economical sense to fly into Florence direct on Air France instead of into Milan on Ryanair. But each case is different and you have to do your research beforehand. Here's a travel story of mine to highlight some dangers of this type of travel... my roommates were coming back from Amsterdam and had flown into Milan Malpensa on a budget airline late on a Sunday night. First they had to take a bus from the airport into downtown Milan, about an hour long ride. Then they headed to the train station to buy tickets to Florence and what happened next?... there was only one train left going to Florence that night, and it only had first class tickets available. Over 80 Euro later, my roommates were headed back home to Florence, but that additional cost can make the whole idea of flying into Milan a waste of your time and money. Tack 80 euro onto a flight and it would have made sense to fly directly into Florence. Stuff like this happens when you travel, but a little research on train times could have easily prevented this.

My only advice when flying a low cost carrier is to be extra careful with every aspect of the trip details, from your ticket, to the luggage you are bringing. Some airlines, like Ryanair, require you to print your boarding pass a few days prior to flight and will not let you board without it, or they may charge you extra to board after finding a mistake on the pass. One horror story to prove this point, one of my roommates misspelled his name by one letter on his boarding pass and Ryanair refused to allow him to board, requiring him to purchase another ticket at the gate. So just make sure to double check everything. As far as luggage goes, if your backpacking and not staying a while, one carry on should be plenty. I did ten days of straight travel for Spring Break with nothing but my backpack and it worked out just fine. You'll manage and you will make it work.

In Pisa walking out to our flight to Marrakech

Budget airlines in Europe present a huge opportunity for students to travel throughout the continent on the cheap end. Additionally, the airports in Europe are very laid back relative to the American airports. Security does not take as much time as back home and you certainly won't feel as stressed. And you shouldn't, if you're at an airport, chances are you are headed on an adventure. Enjoy it. Another huge benefit is that trains and buses are generally linked from the airport to the city center or to other parts of Europe. Unlike the US, the entire transportation system is well integrated. Signs are usually in both the official language of the country and English as a second language so it is easy to find where you need to go and if you ever have trouble, ask someone. I've found Europeans to be more than helpful when giving directions to travelers.

Eating in Florence, Antico's

Another spotlight on a great panini place in Florence. Though this one is not a hidden gem, considering it is #1 on the travel website Trip Advisor. However, it's located on the street leading to our school here so it was only a matter of time before we found our way in. Tips on places to go and eat spreads like wildfire amongst abroad students, and Antico was a case and point. In the first few days here, some students had tried it out and loved it. Within days, there was a line out the door during lunch hours. Luckily, it was January and there was not the giant hoard of tourists that is here now, so we were able to still get our five euro panini in a decent amount of time.

Compared to my earliest post on Pino's, this place has a few notable differences. First off, it feels a lot more authentic and there are usually up to three Italian men working there at a time. A lot of students like to tell them to "surprise me" upon ordering. That's a green light for the panini masters to whip you up one of their favorite sandwiches as a "surprise". Unless you are a picky eater, this is a great way to order, especially if your italian is lacking. You can also specialize the "surprise" by exclaiming that you like something spicy, or some mortadella + a surprise part. That way they have a base with which to add to your panini and you won't be totally shocked when you get the result. As opposed to Pino's, there is no menu here that has pre-made selections as recommendations on it, you have to make up your own. These self proclaimed "panini magicians" are guaranteed to hand you over a fresh lunch, usually on a square piece of bread with the meats hanging out the end. There is also plenty of wine options and a table hanging off the edge that is self serve. You pay two euro on the inside when you get your panini and that entitles you to the self serve part of the wine. It's really on the honor system as the glasses and bottles are already outside, however this place makes enough money that I'm sure they don't get hurt on the free riders who decide to fill a small glass for free. The line is constantly out the door, I assume in part due to the rating on Trip Advisor and word of mouth. Most students try to take their visiting parents here at one point, which might tell you that the line is worth the wait.

The self service wine station outside

Small Tip: 4 or 5 stores down is a small convenience store that sells waters and sodas for much cheaper than inside Antico's. Grab your sandwich and head there to get a drink, then take a seat on the street and enjoy your lunch.

Link to: Review on Trip Advisor

The Overnight Train, Vienna

It’s hot, it’s cramped and I'm laying on one of six bunks in a compartment the size of a bathroom. There's maybe a foot and a half between my head and the bunk above me. When I lay flat staring up, it's hard not to imagine the bunk above you to come toppling down on top of you. Length wise, there is around 6'5", which leaves my toes brushing up against wall. Yes, welcome to the night train. I actually upgraded my ticket to a sleeping car for this trip, there was a seated option as well.

The jolly conductor stopped by a few minutes ago to offer a complimentary cup of “café” for tomorrow morning, as if that'll compensate for the presumed lack of sleep we'll be getting. Oh and a free mini water bottle as well, compliments of the very reliable, TrenItalia. Just a few days ago I was telling someone how much I enjoyed riding the trains throughout Europe. Space, space was one thing I harped on, the seats were comfortable! Well, now it looks like I'm going eat those words. But the night train is not for luxury, it's for convenience. 

My bunk

On one hand, the speed trains in Europe are 21^st century, they have Wi-Fi and they have pleasant seats alongside a table space for each passenger. You sit comfortably, with ample leg space as the countryside whisks past you at a couple hundred miles per hour. This was the expectation I had in mind for the night train. Why should it be any different? Let’s have a lounge area and a bar that’s open all night serving cold drinks. How about Wi-Fi so I can prepare for my interview tomorrow, a comfortable bunk so I can get some sleep. That mindset was completely shattered as soon as I saw the train pull into the station, well rather lurch into the station. You can immediately spot the difference between a speed train and any sort of regional train here in Europe. Bullet trains look the part, riding well into the station, the front of the train looks like the front of a Boeing 767, ready to break through the air, just like the nickname says, like a bullet. There's a certain swagger about the speed trains. The latter is a run down, "Thomas the Tank Engine" looking train that crawls into the station, seemingly content on having made it to it's next stop. These are the trains that were in the VHS train movies showcasing passenger train travel from 20-30 years ago. Well, night trains fit into the regional train category. Then again, what's the rush, I get to wake up to Vienna.

So it’s four of us in this cell;, first, an older gentleman who has kept to himself, reading a book to pass the time. Another I struck up a conversation with, a man from Rome going to Vienna for the first time. He has to be in his 30s and speaks very good English. We spoke about the differences between America and Europe, everything from healthcare, the role of the private sector and the public sector, education costs for university students, roads, bicycles, drinking outside with no consequence, and the concept of American consumerism. He was certainly pro European and, in a sense, slightly anti-American. For instance, he found it astonishing; as do many Europeans that the US has insurance for health care and that there are people who aren't covered, that the private sector places such a big role. Of course his sense of the American system was a demeaning one, insisting the European system is more humane. 

            The bunk itself is about 6 ½ feet long, and maybe 2 feet wide. Not the best living conditions, it seems they modeled it after the way Navy bunks would be. Let's not harp on the lack of space though, it's enough space to sleep and that's all that matters. I may not be able to sleep much though, as I'm quite excited for my trip. The only thing keeping my eagerness and adventure spirit in check is my interview schedule for 4pm tomorrow. It presents a few problems, one of which is preparation. As I said above, I really thought I would have free Wi-Fi on the train and be able to do my research on Stryker and prepare some notes. Well unfortunately that’s not the case. Another problem is going to be finding a quiet space in Vienna. I’m staying in a hostel and booked a bed in an 8 person room. Chances are it won’t be too quiet in there, but I may have to roll the dice. Furthermore, wherever I go tomorrow, I have to be back at the hostel at some point for this interview. The entire day when I am going around now, I will have to check the time and keep my whereabouts in my mind better. It limits my ability to go get lost in the city, to roam free, to discover what’s not on the guides. So I’ll have to go visit a few museums in the morning, get breakfast and lunch. And then prepare for the interview back at the hostel. So here’s to the night train situation, here’s to hoping for some hours of sleep, and here’s to a weekend in Vienna. Let’s get it on.

Morning:

A knock on the door. Roll over and ignore it for a few minutes. Another knock on the door. I look out and there is some light creeping under the curtains, it’s day time already? Here I was complaining about this train and it looks like I ended up sleeping well into morning. Although I woke up a few times here and there throughout the night, mostly due to the heat, on the whole it wasn’t a horrible night of sleep. The knock is the conductor for our car, and it’s 7am. It’s breakfast time, which is really just two rolls with butter and jelly to put on. Oh, and how could I forget the “café”. Looks like I’m a coffee drinker now. I thought I’d give it a try and it’s not as bad as I remember. It’s my first coffee in many years and I’m always making fun of coffee drinkers for being addicted to their cup of joe every morning. But here I was, a perpetually tired man in the mornings, and this coffee is like a miracle. Half the cup gone and now I’m feeling awake, alert, and ready to tackle Vienna. I can't complain about getting up too early anyway, we turned the lights out quarter to midnight. For the past hour these magnificent forests have been going by my window. So green and vast, it reminds me a bit of going through Switzerland, there are small villages tucked into the countryside, closely knit and seemingly orderly. Every now and then you can see an abandoned castle up on a hilltop, a memory of the older history of Austria. I have a feeling I am going to enjoy this weekend, interview and all. Now that the anxiousness of the night train is behind me. Can't forget a  goodbye to my compartment mates! My cup of coffee now finished.... Viena awaits me. Ciao.

Book Spotlight #2: "The Innocents Abroad"

"The Innocents Abroad" 

by: Mark Twain

Quote Highlight: "This book is a record of a pleasure trip... to suggest to the reader how he would be likely to see Europe and the East if he looked at them with his own eyes instead of the eyes of those who traveled in those countries before him." - Mark Twain

Good ole' Mark Twain. Referred to as "The great American author" by the likes of greats such as Ernest Hemingway... even Kurt Vonnegut named his son Mark in honor of Twain. Everyone loves Mark Twain. This book of his may not be as well known as his more famous novels like, "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" or "Tom Sawyer", but it's also written within a different context. At this point in his life, Twain was still in journalist mode. It's earlier in his career and he writes this book while on a steam ship journey throughout Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East. This reads more like your peering into Twain's own personal journal, gaining insight into his experiences abroad, though often through his satirical lens. Let me first give the back story on my own mindset while reading this book and how I came across it.

I purchased this book in one of the only English book shops in Florence, Italy, "The Paperback Exchange". Ideally located near the Duomo, it was a mere ten minute walk from where I was living at the time. So logically, this bookstore become a favorite spot of mine. I always enjoy having a book to read at night and so I came abroad with the latest Game of Thrones book in my arsenal. However, even that behemoth of a book only lasted me about a month. After concluding that, it was only about a week in the city before finding this shop to get my reading fix. While browsing, this book caught my eye for a number of reasons. First off, I read Mark Twain on the side and I always respect classic authors. I immediately picked it up to take a look. Also, at this point in my abroad expierence I was in the early stages of starting my own personal journal, and therefore I was subconsciously looking for advice and ideas on how to formulate my thoughts. So, here was a stellar author writing a journal styled novel about his expierence going abroad, and there I was abroad myself. The last hold up is always the sticker price, which turned out as not too bad and thus I headed to the checkout counter content with my choice.

Looking back at this a few months later, I will say reading this book has certainly aided my own journal writing  efforts. If I was able to craft my sentences with 1/1000 the skill of Twain, my journal might be something worth reading. That aside, it was quite pleasant to read about places that I was able to visit during my time in Europe that Twain also mentions and details in  this book. To see it through Twain's eyes 150 years before I did and then to compare that to the modern day was a cool experience and added to my perspective. This book also made me realize that travel really has some absurdity's about it, but the absurdity of traveling is part of what makes it worth your trouble. You're going to run into some crazy things, some crazy people, and some crazy foreign customs... but that's the idea. If travel wasn't foreign or crazy then what would be the point? Go about it with an open mind and enjoy it for what it is. Broaden your horizons, and broaden your views. At the end of the day you can always poke fun of any dumb things you do by writing about it later, just like Twain did.

This book begins with Twain outlining the advertisement for the voyage abroad that caught his eye. Starting off on the trip, as it departs from New York, he outlines daily life on the steam ship as they steam across the Atlantic. Twain does not hesitant to poke fun at and ridicule people he is accompanied by and people he meets along the way. In one sense, you begin to think Twain feels himself superior to almost all he encounters, but in another sense, you begin to see the reasoning behind his contempt. One instance, when the ship stops in Gibraltar and he explains that almost every person he runs into there feels the need to tell him about the myth of the rock of Gibraltar and this irks him to no end. If he could just look with his own eyes and not be told what he was looking at for a split second he might be able to enjoy the sight. You feel a sense of exasperation and Twain is ever so good at going into details of everything he is able to see and partake in. Satirical at plenty of points, I even found myself laughing here and there at the way Twain is able to paint certain circumstances as sheer absurdity.

Overall, I recommend this book to those who enjoy Twain as an author and are heading abroad. It's a good way to get additional context on what traveling was like two centuries ago. It worked for me and it might work for you.