POLS 6250 International Relations Seminar Course Syllabus Last update: Saturday 5 th January, 2019

Transcription

1 POLS 6250 International Relations Seminar Course Syllabus Last update: Saturday 5 th January, 2019 Professor: Anna Pechenkina Class meeting: Thursdays at 3:00-5:50PM in 310 GEOL Office: 328D MAIN anna.pechenkina@usu.edu Office Hours: Thursdays at 10:AM to noon & by appointment Description: This course introduces graduate students to the social science of international relations (IR). First, we will survey important theoretical assumptions made by theoretical paradigms of Realism, Liberalism, Institutionalism, Constructivism, and Feminism. Second, we will discuss how newer theoretical approaches to the study of international relations, e.g., the Bargaining approach, build upon or depart from the older ones. Third, we will evaluate the logic of proposed arguments and the evidence presented in support of those arguments. Class meetings will follow a seminar format with occasional, brief lectures to introduce new topics or situate debates. Course objectives: To gain factual knowledge about terminology, classifications, methods, and trends in the discipline of IR; To learn to analyze and critically evaluate ideas and arguments expressed by scholars of IR; To further develop skill in expressing oneself in writing. Course website: Course information, syllabus, assignments, and grades are available at USU Canvas. Readings: All readings are available through USU Canvas. Suggested Questions for Critical Evaluation of Readings: Doing readings prior to coming to class is essential in this course. Use the following questions as your reading guide: 1. Summary of the theoretical points: What is the research question that this paper is trying to answer? 1

2 What is the dependent variable? What is the independent variable? What is the causal mechanism that allegedly links dependent and independent variables? What are the assumptions that this paper is making (explicit or implicit)? Why are they necessary? Are any of them unrealistic? Who are the relevant actors? What are their preferences and interests and where do they come from? At what level of analysis is the argument? Where does the argument fit into the theoretical landscape of IR and who would disagree? What is the relative importance of agency versus structure? 2. Summary of the evidence presented (if any): What empirical evidence does the paper provide? Is the evidence systematic or anecdotal? What are the the empirical findings of this paper? At what level of analysis is the evidence? What is the sample of cases that is being analyzed? Do you think this is the appropriate sample to test the question, or maybe there is a selection bias? Do you think the empirical evidence supports the argument? Are there any alternative explanations for which the empirical evidence does not account? What empirical evidence would falsify the argument of the paper? 3. Critical evaluation: Do you think that the direction of the causal relationship is correct? Can the causality work in the opposite direction as well? How narrow are the assumptions stated? Do the assumptions limit the findings? (e.g., if one assumes that leaders are not motivated by reelection, what happens to the findings?) How generalizable is the evidence presented to other: regions/countries? (E.g., if the data come from one country s historical record, does this country s political regime or other characteristics make it difficult to apply it to other states?) time periods in human history? why? Can you think of any new hypotheses that come out of the theoretical explanations or your criticism, and that you can test empirically? Can you think of an alternative way to test the argument empirically? Can you think of any policy-relevant implications? Should governments change some of their current policies in light of the theory or the evidence presented in the paper? What did you like about the piece? in what directions could this line of research be continued? 2

3 Grades: In-class participation (33%): To function as a class, your participation is valuable and it is needed. You can participate by asking questions and making quality contributions to class discussion. Your participation is assessed by how much you engage the assigned readings. I will call on students to identify and discuss various aspects of the readings. For each reading, we will summarize the argument, discuss its contribution to IR, and probe the argument and evidence for strengths and weaknesses. Use the questions in the previous section to guide your reading of each piece. These questions will shape our discussion. If you withhold participation, it stifles and hinders the ability of our class as a mini research community to further our knowledge. Students who show up to every class but do not say a word can expect a C for this portion of their grade. Peer Reviews (33%): You will write three reviews of already published papers throughout the semester. The purpose of this is to learn how to critically and constructively analyze work in political science. You will need to pick 2 limitations (i.e., problems or areas for improvement) and explain how they undermine/extend the work in question. A good place to start is to answer the questions in section 3 Critical evaluation of the reading guide on pp.2-3. Format: pages-long; single-spaced; 12-point font; Times New Roman; 1 inch margins; header should contain only your name. The structure should be 1-2 paragraph(s) of summary and then 1.5 pages of discussion of at least 2 limitations. Normally, any paper may be criticized focusing on the following types of limitations: 1. Logic of the argument. 2. Applicability to other cases. 3. (Potential) measurement of variables. 4. Further (not mentioned in the paper) implications of the argument. Each person will review a different paper, and you will sign up for the papers to review at the beginning of the semester. The list of items for peer review is marked with an asterisk. Sign up via USU Canvas by Jan 24, 2019 at 11:59PM. Since we will not have class meetings during weeks 12 and 13, at least one of your peer reviews needs to be uploaded during those weeks. Peer reviews are due at 11:59PM on Wednesdays before the class meetings, for which the papers are assigned. Final Exam (take home) OR Final Research Paper (34%): You have an option of either submitting a final exam or a research paper as your final project in the course. The final exam will be composed of questions that require the analysis of theoretical material and its applications to world events. You will write between pages to answer the questions. You will receive the exam on December 6th and and it will be due during the finals week. 3

4 The final paper will need to raise an original research question on a topic related to international relations, provide a literature review for that question, develop expectations/hypotheses, and propose a research design to address said question. The paper will be pages-long and will be due during the finals week. I encourage you to discuss your research question with me ahead of time. The final project consists of four assignments: outline (due week 12); first draft (due week 13); presentation (week 15) and final draft (week 16). Evaluation Assignment: Max Points: Your Points: Percent of Grade: Participation % 3 peer 11% each % Outline of the final project (week 12) 70 7% First draft of the final project (week 13) 70 7% Final draft (week 16) % Total 1, % Grades: Grades Percent: A % A % B % B % B % C % C % C % D % F 59.99% and below 4

5 USU Policy on Academic Integrity: Please consult Article VI-1 of the USU Student Code. Disability: If you wish to request an accommodation due to a documented disability, please inform me and contact the Disability Resource Center as soon as possible. Course Schedule: The schedule below should give you a general framework for what topics we will cover during the semester. A continually updated version of this schedule will be available on USU Canvas. When in doubt, resort to the website version of the schedule. Please refer to the website for the specific pages that you are expected read of each assigned reading. Part I: IR as a Social Science Week 1: Introduction to the course Dina A. Zinnes Three Puzzles in Search of a Researcher. Presidential Address. International Studies Quarterly Watch VICE Special Report: A World in Disarray. Michael C. Munger Tips on How to Write Less Badly. The Chronicle of Higher Education Beth Miller, Jon Pevehouse, Ron Rogowski, Dustin Tingley, and Rick Wilson How To Be a Peer Reviewer: A Guide for Recent and Soon-to-be PhDs. PS: Political Science & Politics Week 2: Philosophy of science and overview of the field R. Harrison Wagner War and the State. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press., pp David Lake Why Isms Are Evil: Theory, Epistemology, and Academic Sects as Impediments to Understanding and Progress. International Studies Quarterly Paul C. Avey and Michael C. Desch What Do Policymakers Want From Us? Results of a Survey of Current and Former Senior National Security Decision Makers, International Studies Quarterly58(2):

6 Imre Lakatos Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, eds. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, pp , James D. Fearon Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science. World Politics Week 3: Units of analysis and methods of inquiry Singer, J. David International Conflict: Three Levels of Analysis. World Politics. Bear Braumoeller and Anne Sartori The Promise and Perils of Statistics in International Relations. In Sprinz and Wolinsky-Nahmias, eds., Models, Numbers and Cases: Methods for Studying International Relations, pp University of Michigan Press. Andrew Bennett Case Study Methods: Design, Use, and Comparative Advantages. In Sprinz and Wolinsky-Nahmias, eds., Models, Numbers and Cases: Methods for Studying International Relations, pp University of Michigan Press. Stephen Walt Rigor or Rigor Mortis? Rational Choice and Security Studies. International Security Kenneth Waltz Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. Dessler, David Beyond Correlations: Toward a Causal Theory of War. International Studies Quarterly. Part II: Major Approaches to IR Week 4: Realism. International system as a source of state preferences Kenneth Waltz Theory of International Politics. Chapters 6, 8 John J. Mearsheimer Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W. W. Norton, 2001, pp *Douglas Lemke Power Politics and Wars without States. American Journal of Political Science. Thucydides, The Melian Dialogue. Gilpin, Robert The Theory of Hegemonic War. Journal of Interdisciplinary History. Paul Schroeder Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory. International Security. 6

7 Week 5: Institutionalism. International system as a source of state preferences Robert O. Keohane and Lisa L. Martin The Promise of Institutionalist Theory. International Security. *Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore The Politics and Pathologies of International Organizations. International Organization. *Jana von Stein The International Law and Politics of Climate Change: Ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention and the Kyoto Protocol. Journal of Conflict Resolution. Kenneth A. Oye Explaining Cooperation under Anarchy: Hypotheses and Strategies. World Politics. David Lake Anarchy, Hierarchy, and the Variety of International Relations. International Organization. Mearsheimer, John The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security. Lisa Martin and Beth Simmons Theories and Empirical Studies of International Institutions. International Organization. *Jana von Stein Do Treaties Constrain or Screen? Selection Bias and Treaty Compliance. American Political Science Review. Jana von Stein Exploring the Universe of UN Human Rights Agreements. Journal of Conflict Resolution. Week 6: Early Rationalist approach and Bargaining I *Robert Jervis Cooperation under the Security Dilemma. World Politics. James D. Fearon Rationalist Explanations for War. International Organization. *Branislav L. Slantchev How Initiators End Their Wars. American Journal of Political Science. Thomas C. Schelling Arms and Influence. Chapters 1, 2, 3. *James D. Fearon Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation. International Organization. R. Harrison Wagner Bargaining and War. American Journal of Political Science. Robert Powell War as a Commitment Problem. International Organization. R. Harrison Wagner War and the State. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press., pp Week 7: Bargaining II and Liberalism I *James D. Fearon Fighting rather than Bargaining. Unpublished manuscript. 7

8 Robert Putnam Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization. *Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, James Morrow, Randolph Siverson, and Alastair Smith An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace. American Political Science Review. Andrew Moravcsik Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. International Organization. *James D. Fearon Domestic Politics, Foreign Policy, and Theories of International Relations. Annual Review of Political Science. Week 8: Liberalism II. Domestic politics as a source of state preferences *Bennett, D. Scott Towards a Continuous Specification of the Democracy-Autocracy Connection. International Studies Quarterly. *Jessica L. P. Weeks Strongmen and Straw Men: Authoritarian Regimes and the Initiation of International Conflict. American Political Science Review. *Michaela Mattes and Jessica L. P. Weeks Hawks, Doves, and Peace: An Experimental Approach. American Journal of Political Science. Graham Allison Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis. American Political Science Review. Jonathan Bendor and Thomas H. Hammond Rethinking Allison s Models. American Political Science Review. *Erik Gartzke The Capitalist Peace. American Journal of Political Science. *Jessica L. P. Weeks and Sarah Croco War Outcomes and Leader Tenure. World Politics. Part III: Non-Mainstream Approaches to IR Week 9: Feminism. Gender in IR. Identity approach to IR *Mary Caprioli and Mark A. Boyer Gender, Violence, and International Crisis. Journal of Conflict Resolution. *Charli Carpenter Women and Children First : Gender, Norms, and Humanitarian Evacuation in the Balkans in International Organization. *Deborah Jordan Brooks and Benjamin A. Valentino A War of One s Own: Understanding the Gender Gap in Support for War. Public Opinion Quarterly. J. Ann Tickner Gender in International Relations Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security Colombia University Press. Chapter 1. 8

9 Mary Caprioli Feminist IR Theory and Quantitative Methodology: A Critical Analysis. International Studies Review. Valerie M. Hudson, Mary Caprioli, Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill, Rose McDermott, and Chad F. Emmett. 2008/09. The Heart of the Matter: The Security of Women and the Security of States. International Security. Nicola Pratt The Queen Boat case in Egypt: sexuality, national security and state sovereignty. Review of International Studies. Week 10: Spring break Week 11: Constructivism. Ideational approach to IR Alexander Wendt Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization. *Nina Tannenwald The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non-Use. International Organization. *Stacie E. Goddard Uncommon Ground: Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy. International Organization. John Gerard Ruggie What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge. International Organization. Wendt, Alexander Collective Identity Formation and the International State. American Political Science Review. *Jon C. Pevehouse Democracy from the Outside-In? International Organizations and Democratization. International Organization. Rawi Abdelal et al Identity as a Variable. Perspectives on Politics Part IV: Inter-Subfield Applications of IR Theory and Special Topics Week 12: Intrastate conflict; outline is due *Barbara Walter The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement. International Organization. * Yuri Zhukov External Resources and Indiscriminate Violence: Evidence from German-Occupied Belarus. World Politics. *Daniel Posner The Political Salience of Cultural Difference: Why Chewas and Tumbukas are Allies in Zambia and Adversaries in Malawi. American Political Science Review *Stathis N. Kalyvas The Logic of Violence in Civil War. Yale University Paper. *Macartan Humphreys and Jeremy Weinstein Handling and Manhandling in Civil War. American Political Science Review. 9

10 *James D. Fearon and David Laitin Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War. American Political Science Review. Christopher Blattman and Edward Miguel Civil War. Journal of Economic Literature. *Macartan Humphreys and Jeremy Weinstein Who Fights? American Journal of Political Science. Week 13: Terrorism; first draft is due *Ethan BdM The Quality of Terror. International Organization. *Efraim Benmelech, Claude Berrebi, and Esteban F. Klor Counter-Suicide-Terrorism: Evidence from House Demolitions. The Journal of Politics. *Virginia Page Fortna Do Terrorists Win? Rebels Use of Terrorism and Civil War Outcomes. International Organization. Week 14: Option 1: New methodological approaches. Option 2: Conflict management. Option 3: Foreign aid Week 15: Presentations of research projects Week 16: Final project is due 10