Syllabus, GSIS. GISA 220 : American Politics and American Foreign Policy

Transcription

1 Syllabus, GSIS GISA 220 : American Politics and American Foreign Policy (3 Credits, Fall, 2014) Ⅰ. Instructor Professor : Jaechun Kim Phone : / Office : J710 jaechun@sogang.ac.kr Class Hour : Tuesdays 2:00-4:45 /Class Website: hompi.sogang.ac.kr/jaechun Office Hour : 10:00-12:00 (Mondays and Tuesdays); 14:00-16:00 (Wednesdays Language : English Ⅱ. Course Description and Objective This course will explore the politics and political system of the US and American conduct of world affairs, which everybody agrees have significant impact on the politics of other countries and logic of international relations. The first half of the course will be devoted to the discussion of American politics and political system how the politics work in the US and some of the distinct characteristics of US politics. During the second half of the semester, we will be studying the making of US foreign policy. Unlike many other courses on US foreign policy which adopt outside-in approach to the subject, this course will strive to analyze the US foreign policy from inside-out perspective. That is to say, we should learn what s happening inside the US if we get to know what Americans do outside their territorial bound. Although we will discuss topical issues of US foreign policy toward the end of the semester, the main focus of the course will be on domestic sources (governmental, political, and societal sources) of US foreign policy. 1

2 As with other courses of mine, this course will employ two pedagogical approaches. A traditional lecture style will be employed mainly during the first portion of most class sessions. It is hoped that this will give way to a more seminar-like format during the latter half of class sessions. As graduate students, I expect you to be able to help in creating an atmosphere of intellectual curiosity and discovery. Ⅲ. Prerequisites and Background A couple of basic courses on International Relations. Ⅳ. Textbook, References and Reading Assignment There will be required and assigned readings for each session, and second half of each session will be structured around student-led presentations and discussions of the assigned readings for the week. For each class one or two students will be asked to write brief comment papers (2-3 single-spaced pages) on weekly discussion questions and readings. (Pre-assigned discussion questions are subject to change as the instructor sees fit!!!). The comment papers should strive to tackle these questions, instead of summarizing the assigned readings. Based on these comment papers, they are expected to make a short (5-10 minutes) presentation to lead off the class discussion. Presenters are advised to post presentation materials on the class website so others can refer to them. Please submit the comment papers before the presentation in the beginning of the class. Required Theodore J. Lowi, Benjamin Ginsberg, and Kenneth A. Shepsle, American Government: Power and Purpose; 8th edition (2004). You can get the most updated, 12th edition of this book from online bookstore. American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21st Century, Fourth Edition by Bruce W. Jentleson 625 pages Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company; 4th edition (February 1, 2010). *Other required readings will be posted on the class website on regular basis. Please make a habit of visiting the site. 2

3 Suggested David T. Canon, John J. Coleman, and Kenneth R. Mayer, The Enduring Debate: Classic and Contemporary Readings in American Politics; 3rd Edition (2002) James Q. Wilson, American Government; 6th edition (2002) Peter Woll eds., American Government: Readings and Cases; 15th Edition (2003) David McKay, David, Houghton, and Andrew Wroe, Controversies in American Politics and Society, (2002) Barbara A. Bardes, II, Mack C. Shelley, and Steffen W. Schmidt, American Government and Politics Today: The Essentials; 11th edition (2003) Kenneth Janda, Jeffrey M. Berry, and Jerry Goldman, Challenge of Democracy; 7th edition (2002) Eugene R. Wittkopf, Charles W. Kegley, and James M. Scott, American Foreign Policy: American Foreign Policy; 6th edition (2002) John T. Rourke, Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in American Foreign Policy; 2nd edition (2002) Paul R. Viotti eds., American Foreign Policy: Documents and Papers; 1st edition (2003) Bruce W. Jentleson, Special Update to American Foreign Policy: The Bush Administration and the Dynamics of Choice (2001) G. John Ikenberry eds., American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays; 5th Edition (2004) Eugene R. Wittkopf and James M. McCormick eds., The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence (2004) 3

4 *This syllabus is subject to change during the semester. Ⅴ. Grading Policy and Evaluation Grading Weights Mid Term Exam 30 % Final Term Exam 40 % Report & Class Participation 30 % 100% Ⅵ. Course Schedule (The schedule is also subject to change slightly as the instructor sees fit!!!) Week Contents Method etc. 1 ORGANIZATION OF THE CLASS ORIENTATION AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM: MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM *Dispersion of Power I Federalism *Dispersion of Power II Separation of Power among Three Branches of Government 2 Lowi et al. pp Uri Friedman, 'American Exceptionalism' Stephen M. Walt, The Myth of American Exceptionalism Federalist Paper #15 and #51 Canon et al. eds. pp Alexis de Toqueville, Democracy in America (1835) Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba, The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations (1963) The Federalist Papers 4

5 James Q. Wilson, Interests and Deliberation in the American Republic, or, Why James Madison Would Never Have Received the James Madison Award, PS 4 (December 1990) Samuel P. Huntington, American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony (1981) *Alexander Hamilton was one of the ardent advocates of a stronger federal (central) government. But anti-federalists feared that the new federal government would wield too much power vis-à-vis state (local) governments. In Federalist, No. 15, Hamilton tries to placate this fear by pointing out that the new federal government would be sufficiently in check. Do you think the federal government of the US today is sufficiently in check as Hamilton argues, or is the exercise of its authority so vast as to give credence to anti-federalist fears? Would the Founding Fathers be dismayed or pleased with the scope of the central government s powers today? That is, does the federal (central) government have too much power relative to the states? If this is the case, what do you think had contributed to the growing power of federal government of the US? *In Federalist, No. 51 (a very important document), James Madison argues that the principle of separation of powers and checks and balances would operate to limit the authority of the central government. How? Discuss at least one current issue in the US involving these principles and the constitutional issues at stake. PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS I PROBLEM OF DIVIDED GOVERNMENT *Congress: The First Branch *The President: From Chief Clerk to Chief Executive 3 Lowi et al. pp (for Weeks 3 &4) David Mayhew, Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and 5

6 Investigations (1991) Juan Linz and Arturo Valenzeula eds., The Failure of Presidential Democracy (1994) Fred W. Riggs, The Survival of Presidentialism in America: Para-constitutional Practices, International Political Science Review 9 (1988) Charles O. Jones, The Presidency in a Separated System (1994) Morris P. Fiorina, Divided Government (1992) *Divided government (in which Congress is being controlled by a party or coalition of them other than the president s party) as opposed to unified government is a feature unique to the presidential political system, hence American politics. How does the divided party control make a difference in American politics? Or does it make any difference at all? (In order to answer this question, you might want to Browse Mayhew s Divided We Govern. I have a copy of the book, so feel free to loan it from me.) *The most striking feature of presidential democracy as opposed to parliamentary democracy is that a party or a coalition of parties in control of the legislature can be different from the one in charge of the executive. Both legislative and executive branches of the government enjoy democratic legitimacy, since the legislators and the president were selected by popular elections. But it is possible that the majority of the legislature might represent a different political choice from that of the voters supporting the president. This problem of dual legitimacy might cause serious conflicts and crises in presidential systems. How does the uniqueness of American political institutions and practices limit the impact of such conflicts? PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS II PROBLEM OF IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY? 4 6

7 Canon et al. eds. pp Stephen Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush (1993) Richard E. Neustadt, Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan (1990) David Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection (1974) Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer eds., Congress Reconsidered (1997) Roger H. Davidson and Walter J. Olseszek, Congress and Its Members (1998) *During the Vietnam War, many Americans worried that the American Presidency had wielded too much power over other governmental branches. In the late 1960s, the term Imperial Presidency entered the vernacular of American journalism and academia. However, it is said that the Watergate Scandal and the impeachment of Clinton had weakened American presidency to a certain extent. To what extent do you think the office of the president has been weakened by the investigation and impeachment of the former President Bill Clinton? (For Monica Lewinski Scandal and Impeachment of Bill Clinton, refer to *The Imperial Presidency may result from crises situations as we recently witnessed after the 9.11 terrorist attacks. Many pundits have argued that the 9.11 incident paved the ways for the comeback of Imperial Presidency in the US. Do you agree with this observation? What are the evidences in support of such observation? Or do you think that the American Presidency is still sufficiently in check by other political actors and institutional mechanisms? POLITICAL PARTIES AND ELECTIONS 5 Lowi et al. pp

8 Canon et al. eds. pp Arend Lijphart, The Pattern of Electoral Rules in the United States: A Deviant Case among the Industrialized Democracies, Government and Opposition 20 (1985) James W. Ceasar, Political Parties and Presidential Ambition, Journal of Politics 50 (1978) G. Bingham Powell, American Voter Turnout in Comparative Perspective, American Political Science Review 80 (1986) Anthony Downs, An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957) *In the 2000 American presidential election, the candidate who obtained more popular votes lost the bid for the office of presidency because he came short in terms of electoral votes. Do you think the current system of electing American president is basically flawed? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the current Electoral College system? (For the case study of 2000 presidential election, refer to the following websites. ) *The American Supreme Court basically decided the winner of the 2000 American presidential election. In your opinion, was it the right decision for the Supreme Court to step in and ruled the way it did? Is the American Supreme Court a very much a political institution, whose member pays more attention to the political cycle and public opinion than one might expect? *In the 2004 American presidential election George W. Bush won 51% of the populate votes, 3.5miliion more than John Kerry. It was a big improvement on 2000, when Bush lost the popular vote against Gore. Bush s victory was remarkable considering the Iraq war had split the nation and the economic recovery was shaky. Half the voters said they thought things were going badly in Iraq and, in economic terms, at home. Then what explains a performance that was better than in 2000 and more impressive than seemed likely during a race that remained neck-and-neck until voting day? *How would you explain the low voter-turnout in the US elections? 8

9 What does this mean? Does it mean that the American people are apathetic toward the politics? Question for 2012 US election: *Please present important outcomes of 2012 election by presenting information about who (candidates) got how much from where and whom. Maybe you might want to report to the class the results of congressional and gubernatorial elections as well. *Why do you think Obama won? How do you foresee his policies (both domestic and foreign) during the second term? GROUPS AND INTERESTS Lowi et al. pp Canon et al. eds. David B. Truman, The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public Opinion (1960) Robert A. Dahl, Who Governs? Democracy and Power in and American City (1961) Robert A. Dahl, Pluralism Revisited, Comparative Politics 10 (1978) C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite (1956) *Toqueville argued that freedom of association would be a necessary guarantee against the tyranny of the majority. In the Federalist, No. 10, Madison also pointed out that the competition among groups in society for political power produces the best approximation of overall public good. Explain mechanisms through which interest groups politics can counter the tyranny of majority and produce the best approximation of overall public good. *Founding Fathers of the US were suspicious of factions this is one reason why most of them disliked the idea of political parties. But 9

10 factions were eminent where liberty thrived. Founding Fathers thought that the mischief of factions could be checked by the multiplicity of factions and a system of representation based on varied constituencies. Were Founding Fathers right? *Who really governs in the US? Is the pluralist model of politics more accurate description of the way policies are formulated and executed in the US than the power elite model? PATTERN AND HISTORY OF US FOREIGN POLICY *Isolationism vs. Internationalism *American Exceptionalism in the US Foreign Policy Making Jentelson pp Kissinger in Jentelson pp LaFeber in Jentelson pp Samuel Huntington, American Ideals versus American Institutions, Political Science Quarterly 97 (1982) Theodore Lowi, The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States (1979) Michael Hunt, Ideology and US Foreign Policy (1988) Walter Russell Mead, Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World (2002) *What exactly is meant by Wilsonian foreign policy tradition? Please explain the backdrop against Wilsonianism emerged in the US, the way in has evolved, and impact it has had on the making of US foreign policy. 8 Mid-term(subject to change) 9 GOVERNMENTAL SOURCES OF US FOREING POLICY MAKING 10

11 Jentelson pp ; ; Schlesinger, Jr. in Jentelson pp James M. Lindsay, Congress and the Politics of U.S. Foreign Policy (1994) *By law the Department of the State bears primary responsibility for the conduct of the US foreign affairs and for coordinating US activities overseas and the Secretary of the State is the president s foremost foreign policy advisor. But since WWII it has lost its influence in the formulation of American foreign policies. Why? What is the role of State Department in making of US foreign policy vis-à-vis other relevant governmental actors? How important are they? CONGRESSIONAL AND SOCIETAL SOURCES OF US FOREIGN POLICY MAKING Jentelson pp ; Holsti in Jentelson pp Strobel in Jentelson pp Jeffrey W. Knopf, How Rational Is ''The Rational Public''? : Evidence from U.S. Public Opinion on Military Spending(1998) Ole R. Holsti, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy: Challenges to the Almond-Lippmann Consensus(1992) *Evaluate both Almond-Lippman Consensus and Rational Public Thesis. Which perspective do you think better explains influence of public opinion and mass public on US foreign policy making? 11 AMERICAN FOREIGN ECONOMIC POLICY AND HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY 11

12 Jentelson pp I. M. Destler, American Trade Politics (2005) I. M. Destler, Making Foreign Economic Policy (1980) *Some scholars advocate giving the US president broad authority to conclude trade agreements with other countries, subject only to fast-track review by Congress. Still others argue that to ensure workers rights and environmental safety, Congress needs to avoid limiting its review and possible amendment of trade agreements. What are the bases of each argument? Should the US president have fast-track trade negotiation authority to protect national interests of the US? Or should the Congress have more sweeping review of trade agreements to protect domestic interests? (Of course, you will have to explain what fast-track authority is first for this presentation. Please conduct your own research to answer this question.) AMERICAN HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY AND PUBLIC DIPLOMACY Jentelson pp Fukuyama in Jentelson pp Huntington in Jentelson pp Mansfield and Snyder pp BEN D. MOR, Public Diplomacy in Grand Strategy(2006) QDDR 2010: Leading Through Civilian Power(2010) CRS Report for Congress, Diplomacy for the 21st Century: Transformational Diplomacy(2007) Michael Stohl; David Carleton; Steven E. Johnson, Human Rights and U.S Foreign Assistance from Nixon to Carter(1984) David Carleton and Michael Stohl, The Role of Human Rights in U.S. Foreign Assistance Policy: A Critique and Reappraisal(1987) David Carleton and Michael Stohl, The Foreign Policy of Human Rights: 12

13 Rhetoric and Reality from Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan(1985) Clair APODACA, U.S. Human Rights Policy and Foreign Assistance: A Short History(2005) *Why does the US place renewed emphasis on public policy? How is new public policy of the US different from that during the Cold War era? What were the rationales behind calling for transformational diplomacy? Is Obama s public policy any different from that of George W Bush? *What has been the role of human rights in driving US foreign policy? How do you evaluate the US foreign policy to promote human rights and prevent humanitarian crises? THE RISE OF CHINA AND THE POLICY RESPONSES OF THE U.S 13 Christopher Layne, CHINA S ROLE IN AMERICAN GRAND STRATEGY: PARTNER, REGIONAL POWER, OR GREAT POWER RIVAL? From Christensen, Thomas J., Fostering Stability or Creating a Monster? The Rise of China and U.S. Policy toward East Asia(2006) Wooseon Choi, Structure and Perceptions: Explaining American Policy Toward China( ) Online Publication Date: 01 October 2007 Aaron L. Friedberg, The Future of U.S.-China Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable?(2005) *It is argued that the US-China relations will determine the nature of International Relations in the 21 c. How do you foresee the relationship between the two countries in coming years? How is it going to affect International Relations? *Many scholars agree that the US-China relations will be very critical for the stability of international order. What has been the US policy toward China in the post-cold War era? And what should be the US policy toward China in the future? 13

14