GOVT 540.005: International Relations George Mason University Spring 2018 Instructor: Arnold C. Dupuy adupuy@gmu.edu Monday evenings; 7:20 10:00 PM Founders Hall, ARLFH477 Office hours: Adjunct office, 6 th Floor. Mondays, 6:00 7:00 PM or by appointment 1. COURSE DESCRIPTION International relations are primarily concerned with the sovereign nation state, its determination to acquire, maintain and administer power or influence, and where each state fits in the broader global system. Every state has unique goals regarding how it wields power and influence outside its borders. Indeed, even the smallest of states must to some extent engage with its neighbors to protect its interests, resulting in a fascinating dynamic of alliances, rivalries and interactions. These interstate interactions can be peaceful or violent, disruptive or benign. Moreover, this global system can undergo dramatic change in relatively short periods; examples being Syria and Ukraine, or more long-term, as we are seeing in China s economic, political and military rise in East Asia. Ultimately, it is a look inside human interaction and the ways we have chosen to organize ourselves in relation to each other around the power dynamic. To make sense of this often confusing and volatile condition, this course will expose the student to a range of theories designed to add structure to the analysis of the global political order. Essentially, these theories provide a lens with which to observe, categorize and interpret the geopolitical order. Think of these theories as analytic tools given to us by their authors. Additionally, the course provides a venue for the students to discuss these
theories with their classmates and instructor regarding content of the readings, with the goal of applying them to real-world situations. Integrated within this curriculum we will review current events as case studies to test the efficacies of these theories. These real-world case studies are intended to help students become critical and analytical thinkers and to better relate to world events. It is through the combination of theory and case study analysis that students will develop and hone their abilities to determine patterns of state behavior, as well as outcomes of world politics and international relations. It is encouraged that students share sources that might enhance the discussion or provide additional context. As noted earlier, the students will become familiar with the major theories of international relations, the commonalities and differences, as well as intellectual gaps, all with the goal of understanding today s world within the impressive literary heritage of political theory. The main questions guiding the discussion should consider whether theory helps us understand the nature of international politics. More specifically, can it help explain ground-breaking events such as the end of the Cold War, the rise of Putin s Russia, or the emergence of nationalism, terrorism and non-state actors? 2. STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES Regular attendance and Class Participation It is vital that students read the assigned material and attend all the classroom meetings to benefit from the discussions and general interaction. Students should also familiarize themselves with current events, and keep up with the news via major media outlets. This should include domestic and foreign news sources to obtain a balanced perspective. Please note that class participation is 30% of a student s grade, and I will routinely call on students during class to answer questions or contribute to the discussion. In-class presentations and literature critique Beginning on the second week, selected students will submit a 3-page literature critique of one of the assigned reading for that week. Additionally, those students will provide a
ten-minute oral presentation of their paper. The papers will be provided in hard copy at the beginning of class. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments offered in the texts you analyze. 1. The literature critique should be organized as follows: a. Description of the work: main argument; building blocks of the argument; make sure you have a statement summarizing what the piece is about on the first page. a. Methodology (how the author achieved his/her stated goals): Did the author present historical, statistical, anecdotal evidence to support his/her argument? Was the evidence sufficient? Did it address the argument? Was the evidence presented in a sequential and logical manner? Was the argument presented in a clear fashion? b. Organization of the material and sources: Is the material easy to follow? Does it make a compelling case? Are the sources reliable? Are they biased (i.e. reflecting only one side of the argument)? c. Personal critical evaluation: Has the author achieved his/her goal? Is the material a contribution to the field? What could the author have done to improve the piece under review? Strengths, weaknesses and limitations of main argument? The literature critiques and the corresponding presentations will account for 30% of the grade. Each student will conduct at least 3 literature critiques and presentations throughout the semester. Research paper Each student will write a research paper of about 12-15 pages on a topic relevant to the subject of the course. Students are required to contact the instructor prior to deciding on a paper topic. A one-page proposal for this paper is due no later than March 9; early submissions are encouraged. The research paper is due on May 4, 2018, submitted via email. The paper accounts for 40% of a student s grade, and should reflect: 1) research and analytical skills (no opinion pieces or essays are acceptable); 2) knowledge of
international relations theories; 3) solid writing skills. Students can identify a topic of personal interest and apply international political theory to the understanding of the selected topic, or do innovative research to test a theory discussed in class. The following should be reflected in the final paper: b. Research question. Ex. Does Neo-realism provide a useful framework of analysis for Russian actions in Ukraine? c. Main Argument: Ex. In the case of the Russian actions in Ukraine, Neorealism offers little explanatory power. d. Working Hypotheses: Ex. If international social and political norms constitute the main driver(s) of the Russian actions in Ukraine, then Neorealism only partly explains developments in the region. e. When you first approach the instructor with a topic, be prepared to offer the following: 1. a statement of paper topic, 2. research question, 3. working hypothesis, 4. expected findings. Students should also familiarize themselves with the Graduate Honors Code, available on the GMU website. GMU is an Honor Code university; please see the Office for Academic Integrity for a full description of the code and the honor committee process. GMU takes academic integrity seriously, so if in doubt, ask. 3. COURSE READINGS AND SCHEDULE Most texts for this course will be available via electronic journal archives, such as JSTOR, accessible through the GMU library website. Others will be available on the course website. Contact me immediately if you cannot find the reading assignments in one of these two ways. Week 1 (January 22, 2018): Introduction and levels of analysis Thucydides, The Melian Dialogue, Hobbes, Leviathan (XIII-XIV; XVII, XXI, XXX). Robert Jervis, Theories of War in an Era of Leading-Power Peace, American Political Science Review 96:1 (2002), 1-14.
David Singer, The Level of Analysis Problem in International Relations, World Politics 14:1 (1961), 7792. Mancur Olson, Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development, American Political Science Review 87(3): 567-576. Week 2 (January 29, 2018): Realism and Neo-Realism Hans Morganthau, Politics Among Nations; Chapter 1, The Six Principles of Political Realism. Brian Rathbun, A Rose by Any Other Name: Neoclassical Realism as the Logical and Necessary Extension of Structural Realism, Security Studies 17(2): 294-321. Robert Jervis, Cooperation under the Security Dilemma, World Politics 30:2 (1978) 167-214. John Mearsheimer, Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War, International Security 15:1 (1990), 5-56. Kenneth Waltz, Structural Realism after the Cold War, International Security 25:1 (Summer, 2000), 5-41. Week 3 (February 5, 2018): Liberalism/Utopianism Immanuel Kant, Perpetual Peace. The Liberty Fund Michael Doyle, Liberalism and World Politics, American Political Science Review 80:4 (1986), 1151 69. Michael Barnett and Martha Finnemore, The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations, International Organization 53(4): 699-732. Stanley Hoffmann, "Liberalism and International Affairs," from Janus and Minerva (Westview Press, 1986), 394-417. Kenneth Oye, Explaining Cooperation under Anarchy: Hypotheses and Strategies, World Politics 38:1 (1985), 1-24. John M. Owen, How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace, International Security 19:2 (1994), 87-125. Week 4 (February 12, 2018): Constructivism
Ted Hopf, The logic of habit in International Relations, European Journal of International Relations 16(4): 539-561. Jeffrey Checkel, The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory, World Politics 50:2 (1998), 324-348. Alexander Wendt, Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics, International Organization, 46:2 (1992), 391-425. John Ruggie, What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge, International Organization, 52:4 (1998), 855-885. Kathryn Sikkink, Transnational Politics, International Relations Theory, and Human Rights, Political Science and Politics 31:3 (1998), 516-523. Week 5 (February 19, 2018): International Institutions John Mearsheimer, The False Promise of International Institutions, International Security 19:3 (1994/95), 5-49. Robert Keohane and Lisa Martin, The Promise of Institutionalist Theory, International Security 20:1 (1995), 39-51. Charles A. Kupchan and Clifford A. Kupchan, The Promise of Collective Security, International Security 20:1 (1995), 52-61. John Gerard Ruggie, The False Premise of Realism, International Security 20:1 (1995), 62-70. Alexander Wendt, Constructing International Politics, International Security 20:1 (1995), 71-81. Week 7 (February 26, 2018): Domestic Politics and International Relations Robert Putnam, Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games, International Organization 42:3 (1988), 427-460. James Fearon, Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes, American Political Science Review 88:3 (1994), 577-592. Peter Gourevitch, The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics International Organization 32:4 (1978), 881-912. Graham Allison, Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis, American Political Science Review, 63:3 (1969), 689-718.
Jessica Weeks, Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve, International Organization 62(1): 35-64. Elizabeth Saunders, War and the Inner Circle: Democratic Elites and the Politics of Using Force, Security Studies 24(3): 466-501. Week 8 (March 5, 2018): Leader Psychology and International Relations Alexander George, The Operational Code: A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision-Making, International Studies Quarterly 13:2 (1969), 190-222. Robert Jervis, War and Misperception, The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18:4 (1988), pp. 675-700. Jack Levy, Prospect Theory, Rational Choice, and International Relations, International Studies Quarterly 41:1 (1997), 87-112. Rose McDermott, Prospect Theory in International Relations: The Iranian Hostage Rescue Mission, Political Psychology 13:2 (1992), 237-263. [Spring Break; March 12-16, 2018] Week 9 (March 19, 2018): International Political Economy Kevin H. O Rourke and Jeffrey G. Williamson, When did Globalization Begin? NBER Working Paper 7632, April 2000. Helen Milner, Globalization, Development, and International Institutions: Positive and Normative Perspectives, Perspectives on Politics 3:4 (2005), 833-854. Michael Ross, Political Economy of the Resource Curse, World Politics 51 (1999), 297-322. Stephen Krasner, State Power and the Structure of International Trade, World Politics 28:3 (1976), 317347. Immanuel Wallerstein, The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System, Comparative Studies in Society and History 16:4 (1974), 387-415. David Art, The German Rescue of the Eurozone: How Germany is Getting the Europe It Always Wanted, Political Science Quarterly 130(2): 181-212. Week 10: (March 26, 2018) International Politics and Nuclear Weapons
Thomas Schelling, "Bargaining, Communication, and Limited War," Journal of Conflict Resolution 1:1 (1957), 19-36. Robert Powell, The Theoretical Foundations of Strategic Nuclear Deterrence, Political Science Quarterly 100:1 (1985), 75-96. Kenneth Waltz, Why Iran Should Get The Bomb, Foreign Affairs 91:4 (2012), 2-5. James M. Lindsay and Ray Takeyh, After Iran Gets the Bomb: Containment and Its Complications, Foreign Affairs, 89:2 (2010), 33-49. Barry Posen and Barry Rubin, The Containment Conundrum: How Dangerous Is a Nuclear Iran? Foreign Affairs 89:4 (2010), 160-168. Alexander H. Montgomery and Scott D. Sagan, The Perils of Predicting Proliferation, Journal of Conflict Resolution 53:2 (2009), 302-328. Week 11: (April 2, 2018) International Relations after the Cold War William Wohlforth, Realism and the End of the Cold War, International Security 19:3 (1994/95), 91-129. Francis Fukuyama, The End of History? National Interest 16 (1989). Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Affairs, 72:3 (1993), 22-49. Stanley Hoffmann, Clash of Globalizations, Foreign Affairs 81:4 (2002), 104-115. John J. Mearsheimer, Why We Shall Soon Miss the Cold War. Atlantic Monthly 226: 2 (1990). G. John Ikenberry, Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order, International Security 23:3 (1998-1999), 43-78. Week 12 (April 9, 2018): Ethics and International Relations Nicholas Rengger, On the Just War Tradition in the Twenty First Century, International Affairs 78:2 (2002), 353-363. Maurice Cranston "Are There Any Human Rights?" Daedalus 112:4, Human Rights (Fall, 1983), pp. 1-17. Stanley Hoffmann, Reaching for the Most Difficult: Human Rights as a Foreign Policy Goal, Daedalus, 112:4 (Fall, 1983), 19-49.
Thomas Pogge, Severe Poverty as a Human Rights Violation, UNESCO Poverty Project, Ethical and Human Rights Dimensions of Poverty: Towards a New Paradigm in the Fight Against Poverty, 2003. Andrew Kuper and Peter Singer, Debate: Global Poverty Relief, Ethics and International Affairs 16:1 (2002), 107-128. Week 13 (April 16, 2018): Civil War and Intervention International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect (Ottawa: International Development and Research Center, 2001). Virginia Fortna, "Does Peacekeeping Keep the Peace? International Intervention and the Duration of Peace after Civil War," International Studies Quarterly 48:2 (2004), 269-292. Kristian Gleditsch, Idean Salehyan and Kenneth Schultz, Fighting at Home, Fighting Abroad: How Civil Wars Lead to International Disputes, Journal of Conflict Resolution 52:4 (2008), 479-506. James Fearon and David Laitin, Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War, American Political Science Review 97:1 (2003), 75-90. Edward D. Mansfield and Jack Snyder, Democratization and the Danger of War, International Security 20:1 (1995), 5-38. Barbara Walter, The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement, International Organization 51(3): 335- Week 14 (April 23, 2018): Nationalism and Borders (TBD) Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 1983 Barry R. Posen, Nationalism, the Mass Army, and Military Power, International Security 18(2): 80-124. Lars-Erik Cederman, T. Camber Warren, and Didier Sornette, Testing Clausewitz: Nationalism, Mass Mobilization, and the Severity of War, International Organization 65(4): 605-638. E.J. Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism since 1780, Chapters 1-2 Stacie Goddard, Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy: Jerusalem and Northern Ireland, Chapter 2, 7
Week 15 (April 30, 2018): Issues in international security Nicholas Miller, The Secret Success of Nonproliferation Sanctions, International Organization 68(4): 913-944. Alan Kuperman, A Model Humanitarian Intervention? Reassessing NATO s Libya Campaign, International Security 38(1): 105-136. John Mueller, The Terrorism Delusion: America s Overwrought Response to September 11, International Security 37(1): 81-110. Alastair Iain Johnston, How New and Assertive is China s New Assertiveness? International Security 37(4): 7-48. Joshua W. Busby et al, Climate Change and Insecurity: Mapping Vulnerability in Africa, International Security 37(4): 132-172. May 4, 2018: Final Papers Due May 5, 2018: Last Day of Classes