International Security POL 5783 Spring 2016
January-May 2016 Prof. Arturo Sotomayor
M 6:00-8:45 PM, MS 4.02.64 [email protected]
Office hours: T-R 1:00-2:00 PM and M 5:00-5:50 PM (or by appointment) Phone: 210-458-7739
Course description
This seminar is designed as a survey course to guide graduate students to the large and complex international security literature. It is primarily designed for graduate students who have been previously exposed to international relations courses, but advanced undergraduate students are welcome (provided they have previous authorization from the Department of Political Science and Geography and the professor). This course is mostly devoted to analyzing and debating the uses of force (by multiple state and non-state actors) and the ways to prevent international conflict (such as political violence and war). The course assumes students are familiar with international relations theories and
comparative politics.
This course is by no means a comprehensive overview of the security and strategic studies fields. Due to the limited timeframe of a single semester, we will not be able to cover many of the topics and debates in the literature. By the end of the semester,
however, students will have the theoretical frameworks and analytical toolkit necessary to identify, read, and assess the quality of divergent positions on international security topics we do not cover.
The questions that we will discuss in class include: Is war necessary or avoidable? What is security? Who can use force? When can force be used in international relations? How can peace endure? What can the international community do to prevent war? Why is there terrorism and political insurgency? What factors make conflict and war more likely? Can disarmament increase the chances for peace? When is military intervention justifiable?
Method and structure
This course is structured as a true seminar; this means the professor will not spend class time lecturing on the course material. Class meetings will consist of discussions in which students have to focus on teasing out both the precise arguments and counterarguments present in the literature and the utility and validity of the arguments developed by different scholars.
division of labor with respect to the readings and develop a system for sharing information prior to class.
The course combines theoretical information with policy analysis. Methodologically, this course relies heavily on current policy debates and international relations theories and concepts. The overall aim is to link theory with practice by analyzing how theories and concepts apply concretely to real political and policy environments.
In addition to readings, the course will use film as a learning and pedagogical tool to analyze the subject matter of the course. The films are selected in part to provide cultural diversity, geographical balance and contemporary relevance, but also to demonstrate the contrasts between traditional and emerging security questions in international questions. The films provide additional intellectual insights to motivate and nourish class
participation. Students are expected to make links between the theoretically inspired readings and the movies.
To introduce students to the major issues in security studies, the course will have five separate units. Most of these units could be courses in themselves, so we will only scratch the surface of the existing literature.
1. The uses of force and the concept of security 2. Causes of war
3. How to maintain stability and avoid war? 4. How to put an end to war?
5. Other causes of violence and war.
Most of the topics that we will be discussed in this course are traditionally thought of as either comparative politics or international relations, but we will also touch upon themes from U.S. foreign policy.
Course expectations
At the end of the course, students should be able to critically engage, understand,
articulate and explain ideas and arguments about international security, broadly speaking. Students who complete this course successfully will be able to:
!Possess a solid grasp of the major theoretical schools of thought in international security, and be able to assess their strengths and weaknesses.
!Demonstrate knowledge of policy debates about a variety of key issues in international security.
!Understand debates about the role of coercive diplomacy, war, and democracy.
!Understand how international institutions and economic interdependence affect security outcomes.
!Understand the coercive strategies available to states and non-state actors, as well as the efficacy of these strategies.
international security.
!Apply contending theories to analyze, compare, and evaluate selected historical and current events, in class discussions, oral presentations and written assignments. !Develop and polish oral presentation skills to defend arguments in front of a critical audience.
!Find high-quality source material online and in the library, and recognize the hallmarks of expert, objective, vetted analysis.
!Independently design, research, and write a substantial paper of 15-17 pages that
explores and takes a stance on a significant debate about an international security issue of the student’s choosing.
One of the primary objectives of this course is for students to critically engage with the content of the course. The course introduces students to perspectives and ideas that may be unfamiliar and perhaps uncomfortable. The subjects to be addressed in the course can be difficult and may pose a challenge to the accepted views and beliefs of students. When the professor asks that students critically engage the material, he does not mean that students must agree with him or with any of the authors assigned for reading. Instead, students must be willing to develop an understanding of the content, be capable of articulating and explaining ideas and arguments introduced, and recognize that people think differently about a wide range of important political and social topics.
Course requirements and grading procedure
Attendance policy
Class attendance is mandatory. Students cannot miss classes unless they have a legitimate justification (which should never be submitted post-facto; that is after you missed classes) or a medical condition (with the appropriate medical justification). Attendance does not count toward participation grade. However, in order to participate effectively, students must be present. Missing class frequently interferes with a student’s grasp of the course material, thus adversely affecting the quality of his or her presentations and written work. If a student is unable to attend a class session due to a justifiable reason (such as a
medical condition or religious observance), then he/she is responsible for (1) reading all assigned readings for the missed session and (2) meeting with another student in the class to catch up on the content of the missed lecture and discussion.
To enforce attendance, there will be strict penalties for those students who regularly miss or skip classes during the semester. Students can miss no more than 2 classes (2 weeks worth of classes) before February 29 and no more than 3 classes (three weeks worth of classes) before April 29. In total, students cannot skip more than 3 classes (three weeks) throughout the semester. An automatic F will be assigned in the course to any student who skips more than 2 classes before February 29. Similarly, an automatic F will be assigned in the course to any student who skips more than 3 classes before April 29. There will be no exceptions to this policy, unless the student has a medical
a direct relative, with appropriate documentation), or a religious observance (only with the previous authorization of the professor).
Grading procedure
Class Participation (10% of grade)
Students are required to have completed the readings (marked with a + symbol below) before class and to participate in discussions. Students are also expected to keep up on relevant world events by reading the New York Times or another reputable source of international news, such as The Economist, Financial Times, LA Times.
Student presentations (20% of grade)
Students are required to organize class presentations. For that purpose, each student must choose at least three days to lead the opening 10-15 minute of the class discussion by presenting the arguments of the readings assigned in the syllabus (the ones not marked with a + symbol). Again, students much chose at least three different authors in three different class sessions and prepare accordingly a 10-15 minute presentation.
Class presentations must cover the following items: What is the main purpose of the reading?
What argument is the author introducing?
What main question is the author trying to answer (what is the main puzzle)? Why is the puzzle relevant?
What approaches is the author criticizing and why?
What theoretical position is the author advocating for and why? What type of evidence is the author using?
What method is the author using?
What are the main findings of the reading?
What type of policy implications is drawn from the article? Are you convinced by the argument? Why?
What critical elements are missing?
If you had to critically review the article, what criticism would you offer? What questions are unanswered?
Paper proposal in lieu of midterm exam (35%): requirement for final grade (no paper proposal= “F” in the course)
Students must write a long research paper on a topic chosen in consultation with the professor (but topic must be related to the overall theme of the course). The process of writing this research paper—not merely the final result—is the heart of the course, and students should plan to spend significant time throughout the semester conceptualizing and rethinking the topic and research strategy as the semester progresses. The frustrations of rigorous research are part of the learning experience of the course. Students will turn in a carefully written and preliminarily research proposal by Friday, February 19 at 1:00 PM (no extensions or late submissions allowed). Early submissions are most welcome. Please note that failure to submit a paper proposal will be translated into an
automatic “F” in the final grade (no exceptions made and no extensions granted, so consider this fair warning). A paper proposal must cover the following items:
What is the main question the paper addresses? Main puzzle.
Why is this question relevant? Justification of your question (Three paragraphs or one page).
What type of argument will the paper aim to develop? Main argument (Three paragraphs or one page).
What and who has written on the topic? Literature review (minimum of 5 pages). What academic references were consulted? Bibliography (minimum of 10 references, which must include books, journal articles, and other primary sources).
Students should rely on library resources and make appropriate arrangements with our librarian, DeeAnn Green, to gather data, information, and bibliography for the research proposal.
*Undergraduate students working on their honors thesis are allowed to work and develop their thesis proposals to fulfill this requirement.
Research paper (35% of grade): requirement for final grade, No paper = “F” in the course
Students must write a long research paper of 15-17 double-spaced pages on a topic chosen in consultation with the professor, due by 1:00 on Friday, April 29. In addition to conducting rigorous research and presenting a well-developed argument in a research paper, student must also pay attention to spelling, grammar and syntax. Poorly written and researched papers will be assigned an automatic “F” in the course.
How I Grade
piles: sometimes above average, average, and below average, sometimes A-F. There does not need to be an equal number in each pile (this is not a curving device), only a first sort on grade. Finally, to check myself, I reread starting with the best paper and going to the weakest (or vis versa) to make certain I have appropriately differentiated quality. I do not have any checklist of items I am looking for in answers. I am reading for the overall control you have over the subject matter of the question. I may develop a list of characteristics of "A" answers after grading the questions to communicate to the class when I hand the exam back. But this list is post-hoc rather than a rule I use to measure answers.
Numbers and Letters
I prefer to grade using letters. Typically I will use the full A-F scale. On examinations I will sometimes use points. Typically, such exams will be 100 points. Grades will be assigned according to the following scale:
Grading Scale (for graduate students) A 100-90
B 89-80 C 79-70
D 69-66
F 65 or below
Grading Scale (for undergraduates)
A 100-95 B- 82-80 D+ 69-68
A- 94 - 90 C+ 79-77 D 67
B+ 89-87 C 76-73 D- 66
B 86-83 C- 72-70 F 65 or below
Additional course policies
Zero tolerance policy for plagiarism and scholastic dishonesty
Plagiarism will not be tolerated under any circumstance. What is plagiarism? To steal and pass off the ideas or words of another as one's own; to use another's production without crediting the source; to commit literary theft or to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source. In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward. What are the consequences of getting caught? In my class, an act of plagiarism is reprimanded with an automatic failing grade in the course. Other UTSA sanctions may apply. Remember that plagiarism is considered an act of Scholarly Dishonesty, sanctioned by Sec. 203 of the Student Code of Conduct. For policies regarding violations of scholastic dishonesty, see the following UTSA link:
Please, always properly cite the source of information you use in your exams and assignments. Here are basic guidelines:
!If you reference an idea from another source or information that is not common knowledge, you must reference that source, including the exact page(s) on which you found the idea or information. (Examples of “common knowledge”: the years that someone served as President of a country’s national government or the fact that the Cold War ended.)
!If you use the exact words from a source, you must place those words between quotation marks, and you must reference the source, including the exact page(s) on which you found the quotation.
!If you paraphrase information or an idea in your own words, you will not use quotation marks but must still reference the source, including the exact page(s) on which you found the information or idea. If you find yourself merely tweaking words of the original text, you are not paraphrasing, and you should therefore instead leave the author’s words as they are and place quotation marks around them.
!The above rules apply to both paper and electronic—including Internet— sources.
For further guidelines on how to avoid plagiarism please refer to the following guidelines published by UTSA:
http://www.utsa.edu/osja/documents/pdfs/Plagiarism2008.pdf Remember, ignorance will not excuse a violation.
Full adherence to The Roadrunner Creed
UTSA is a community of scholars where integrity, excellence, inclusiveness, respect, collaboration, and innovation are fostered. Students are thus expected to follow The Roadrunner Creed, as stipulated at: http://www.utsa.edu/about/creed/
Writing assistance
This is not an English literature course, but proper use of spelling, style and syntax in writing assignments is required. Poor spelling and grammar will result in an equally poor grade. Students are thus highly encouraged to request writing tutoring from the UTSA’s Writing Center. To request an appointment with a tutor, please check their website at: http://www.utsa.edu/twc/
Communication with faculty and office hours
The best way to reach me, the professor, is by email or during my office hours. This term I will hold office hours on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 1:00-2:00 PM and Mondays from 5:00-5:50 PM. Please feel free to drop in at any time during my regularly scheduled office hours. To schedule additional office hours, please e-mail me at
and without an appointment, I may be unable to talk, due to my work schedule. My office is located at MS 4.03.57.
If you decide to contact me by email, please remember that I have a very busy agenda and can take up to 48 hours to reply to your inquiry. I do not answer to emails on Friday afternoons (after 3:00 PM) or during weekends.
Course etiquette
Students are expected to arrive on time for class and not leave early. The class will start at 6:00 PM sharp and class attendance will follow immediately. The class door will close at 6:05 PM sharp. Once the door is closed, students cannot come in or interrupt the class (no exceptions made). When entering the classroom, please turn all electronic devices on silent mode (including cell phones). Students are not allowed to check email or do other Internet searches during class nor can they talk or browse mobile phones. It is unacceptable to go on-line on any device while the professor is lecturing. Students are not allowed to bring food or eat inside the classroom (this includes chewing gum). When discussing controversial issues, all course attendees will engage in civil, respectful, and constructive discussions. Students cannot fall asleep during class and should take preventive measures (such as drinking coffee) to avoid public yawning while the class is in session. It is disrespectful and impolite to yawn in front of the professor. Failure to follow course etiquette can lead to class expulsion and even course failure at the discretion of the professor (YES THE PROFESSOR CAN FAIL STUDENTS IN THE COURSE FOR NOT ABIDING TO STRICT COURSE ETIQUETTE, consider this fair warning).
Special needs and accesses
Students requiring special accommodations should contact the professor in advance or meet with him during office hours to discuss how to meet their special needs this semester. In addition, students can also contact the Office of Disability Services (DSS), MS 3.01.16, telephone 458-4157 or visit their web site at http://www.utsa.edu/disability.
Readings
Suggested books for purchase (these titles are also available on library reserves)
Scott Sagan and Kenneth Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed 3rd. edition (New York: Norton, 2013)
Richard K. Betts, Conflict after the Cold War: Arguments on Causes of War (New York: Routledge, 2012)
Robert Art and Robert Jervis, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, 12 edition (New York, Palgrave, 2015).
Peter Katzenstein, The Culture of Natioqnal Security (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996)
Additional recommended books (these books are not available for purchase, but can be found at the UTSA library under reserves):
Severine Autessere, The Trouble with the Congo: Local Violence and the Failure of International Institutions (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Carl von Clausewitz, On War, Michael Howard and Peter Paret, ed. and trans. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984). (I strongly recommend this specific edition)
Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela Aall (eds.) Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflict. Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace.
Virgina Page Fortna, Does Peacekeeping Work?: Shaping Belligerents' Choices after Civil War, (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2008).
Stathis N. Kalyvas, The Logic of Violence in Civil War (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006).
Michael Kenney, From Pablo to Osama: Trafficking and Terrorist Networks, Government Bureaucracies, and Competitive Adaptation, (University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania University State Press 2007).
Roland Paris, At War's End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict, (New York: Cambridge University Press 2004)
T.V. Paul, Patrick Morgan, and James Wirtz, eds.Complex Deterrence: Strategy in the Global Age, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009).
Alfred Stepan, ed., Authoritarian Brazil. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press (1978). Charles Tilly, Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990-1992, Cambridge, Blackwell, 1990.
Charles Tilly, The Politics of Collective Violence (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Sun Tzu, The Art of War, trans. Samuel Griffith (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971). (I strongly recommend this edition).
Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw Hill, 1979). Coletta A. Youngers and Eileen Rosin (eds.), Drugs and Democracy in Latin America: The Impact of US Policy, (Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers 2005).
Course schedule and reading assignments
Readings marked with (+) are required; the other readings are for student presentations. January 11: The uses of force in international relations
+Robert Art and Robert Jervis, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, 12 edition (New York, Palgrave, 2015). Part II, pp. 141-231.
Sun Tzu, The Art of War, trans. Samuel Griffith (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971).
What is security?
David Baldwin, “The Concept of Security,” Review of International Studies 23, no. 1 (January, 1997): 5-26.
+David Baldwin, “Security Studies and the end of the Cold War”, World Politics 48, 1(1995): 117-141.
+Richard K. Betts, Should Strategic Studies Survive?, World Politics 50, 1(1997): 7-33. Barry Buzan, Jaap de Wilde, Ole Waever, Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Lynne Rienner, 1997), 21-49.
January 18: Martin Luther King Day (no classes)
January 25: What causes war?
+Robert Art and Robert Jervis, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, 12 edition (New York, Palgrave, 2015). Part II. The Nature of Anarchy, pp. 178-199.
+Richard K. Betts, Conflict after the Cold War: Arguments on Causes of War (New York: Routledge, 2012). Chapters on Part II, pp. 51-116.
+Carl von Clausewitz, On War, Michael Howard and Peter Paret, ed. and trans. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984). 75-100.
Jack Levy, “Domestic Politics and War,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18, no. 4 (Spring, 1988), 653-673.
Robert Jervis, “War and Misperception,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18, no. 4 (Spring, 1988), 675-700.
James Fearon, “Rationalist Explanations for War,” International Organization 49, no. 3 (Summer, 1995), 379-414.
How to maintain stability and avoid war? Balance of Power (realist perspectives)
+Richard K. Betts, Conflict after the Cold War: Arguments on Causes of War (New York: Routledge, 2012). Chapter by Gilpin and Blainey (part II), and chapter on China (included in part X with Betts and Christiansen).
+Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw Hill, 1979). John Mearsheimer, “Why We Will Soon Miss The Cold War”, The Atlantic Monthly; Volume 266, No. 2(1990): 35-50. http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/A0014.pdf February 1: How to maintain stability and avoid war? Collective Security and the United Nations (liberal-institutional perspectives)
+ Richard K. Betts, “Systems for Peace or Causes of War? Collective Security, Arms Control, and the New Europe, International Security, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Summer, 1992), pp. 5-27.
+Charles A. Kupchan and Clifford A. Kupchan, “The Promise of Collective Security,” International Security, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Summer, 1995), pp. 52-61.
Adam Roberts, “The United Nations and International Security,” Survival: The IISS Quarterly, Vol. 35, No.2(Summer 1993): 3-30.
Michael Doyle, 2001. “War Making and Peace Making: The United Nations’ Post-Cold War Record,” in Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, and Pamela Aall (eds.)
How to maintain stability and avoid war? The role of international institutions
+Robert Jervis, “Cooperation Under the Security Dilemma,” World Politics 30, no. 2 (January, 1978): 167-214.
+John Mearsheimer, “The False Promise of International Institutions,” International Security 19, no. 3 (Winter, 1994/1995): 5-49.
+Robert Keohane and Lisa Martin, “The Promise of Institutionalist Theory,” International Security 20, no. 1 (Summer, 1995): 39-51.
Charles Kupchan and Clifford Kupchan, “The Promise of Collective Security,” International Security 20, no. 1 (Summer, 1995): 52-61.
John Gerard Ruggie, “The False Promise of Realism,” International Security 20, no. 1 (Summber, 1995): 62-70.
Alexander Wendt, “Constructing International Politics,” International Security 20, no. 1 (Summer, 1995): 71-81.
John Mearsheimer, “A Realist Reply,” International Security 20, no. 1 (Summer, 1995): 82-93.
Peter Katzenstein, The Culture of National Security (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996). Chapters on alliances in Europe and the Middle East by Thomas Risse-Kappen and Michael N. Barnett.
February 8: How to maintain peace? Exporting democracy (liberal perspectives)
+Michael Doyle, “Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace,” American Political Science Review 99, no. 3 (August, 2005): 463-466.
Sebastian Rosato, “Explaining the Democratic Peace,” American Political Science Review 99, no. 3 (August, 2005): 467-472.
Branislav Slantchev, Anna Alexandrova, and Erik Gartzke, “Probabilistic Causality, Selection Bias, and the Logic of Democratic Peace,” American Political Science Review 99, no. 3 (August, 2005): 459-462.
+Jack Snyder and Edward, “Mansfield, Democratization and War,” Foreign Affairs, May/June 1995.
When to put an end to war? Military intervention
(November/December 1994), pp. 20-33.
Edward Luttwak, “Give War a Chance,” Foreign Affairs 78, no. 4 (July/August, 1999): 36-44.
Alex Bellamy, “The Responsibility to Protect and the Problem of Military Intervention,” International Affairs 84, no. 4 (Summer, 2008): 615-639.
+Martha Finnemore, "Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention," in Peter J. Katzenstein, ed., The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics (NY: Columbia University Press, 1996), pp. 153-185, also available in Betts Conflict after the Cold War.
February 15: How to put an end to war? Peacekeeping
+Virgina Page Fortna, Does Peacekeeping Work?: Shaping Belligerents' Choices after Civil War, (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2008), pp. 76-103.
Roland Paris, At War's End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict, (New York: Cambridge University Press 2004), chapters 6 and 9.
Severine Autessere, The Trouble with the Congo: Local Violence and the Failure of International Institutions (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), chapter 1 and 6.
The unintended effects of peacekeeping
Arturo C. Sotomayor, The Myth of the Democratic Peacekeeper: Civil-Military Relations and the United Nations (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014), chapter5 and conclusion.
+Chiyuki Aoi, Cedric de Coning and Ramesh Thakur (eds.), Unintended Consequences of Peacekeeping Operations (New York: United Nations University Press, 2005), chapters 1 and 10.
February 19 (Friday): Research paper proposal is due at 1:00 PM (no extensions allowed).
February 22: (film) Dr. Strangelove by Stanley Kubrick
February 29: Film discussion and how to put an end to war? Disarmament (Midterm grades are due)
John Mueller, “The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the Postwar World,” International Security Vol. 13, No. 2 (Fall 1988), pp. 55-79.
Matthew Kroening, “Think Again: American Nuclear Disarmament”, Foreign Policy, September 3, 2013, at: http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/09/03/think-again-american-nuclear-disarmament/
Richard Price and Nina Tannenwald, “Norms and Deterrence: The Nuclear and Chemical Weapons Taboos”, in Peter Katzenstein, The Culture of National Security (Ithaca:
Cornell University Press, 1996), pp. 114-152.
+Scott Sagan and Kenneth Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed 3rd. edition (New York: Norton, 2013).
Suzanne Nossel, “This Is What Will Happen if Congress Blows the Iran Nuclear Deal”, Foreign Policy, July 30, 2015.
March 7: How to put an end to war? Trade
+Betts, Conflict after the Cold War, chapters on Part VI.
+Jervis and Art, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, 12 edition (New York, Palgrave, 2015). Part III.
Mark Leonard, “Why Convergence Breeds Conflict,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2013.
Harold Trinkunas, “Rivalry, Trade, and Restraint on the Colombia-Venezuela Border”, in Maiah Jaskoski, Arturo C. Sotomayor and Harold Trinkunas, American Crossings: Border Politics in the Western Hemisphere (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2015), pp. 109-129.
Discussion: Can China and the U.S. avoid a war through trade and economic interaction? March 14-20: Spring Break (no classes), watch film Paths of Glory by Stanley Kubrick from home.
March 21: Film discussion and How to put an end to war? Civilian control of the military
Jack Snyder, “Civil-Military Relations and the Cult of the Offensive, 1914 and 1984,” International Security, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Summer, 1984), pp. 108-146.
+Richard H. Khon, “How Democracies Control the Military,” in Journal of Democracy, Vol. 8, 4(1997): 140-153.
+Samuel Huntington, The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations, Belknap/Harvard, 1957, pp. 7-18, 80-97.
Peter D. Feaver, “The Right to be Right: Civil-Military Relations and the Iraq Surge Decision”, International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4(Spring 2011): 87-125.
March 28: Film The Battle of Algiers by Gillo Pontecorvo (Drop date deadline)
April 4: Film discussion and what else causes violence and war? Insurgency, counter-insurgency, and terrorism
Insurgency
+Betts, Conflict after the Cold War, sections of part IX, chapters by Lawrence, Tse-Tung, and Huntington.
+Andrew Mack, “Why Big Nations Lose Small Wars: the Politics of Asymmetric Conflict,” World Politics 27, no. 2 (January, 1975): 175-200.
Stephen Biddle, Jeffrey Freidman, and Jacob Shapiro, “Testing the Surge: Why Did Violence Decline in Iraq in 2007?” International Security 37, no. 1 (Summer, 2012): 7-40.
Alfred Stepan, “The New Professionalism of Internal Warfare and Military Role Expansion.” In Alfred Stepan, ed., Authoritarian Brazil. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press (47–65).
Maiah Jaskoski, “The Colombian FARC in Northern Ecuador: Borderline and Borderland Dynamics”, in Maiah Jaskoski, Arturo C. Sotomayor and Harold Trinkunas, American Crossings: Border Politics in the Western Hemisphere (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2015), pp. 171-188.
Terrorism
+Betts, Conflict after the Cold War, sections of Part IX, chapters by Huntington, Crenshaw, Juergensmeyer, and Betts.
+Jervis and Arts, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, chapter by Jessica Stern.
+Martha Crenshaw, “The Causes of Terrorism,” Comparative Politics 13, 4(1981): 379-399.
S. Paul Kapur, “Deterring Nuclear Terrorists,” in Complex Deterrence: Strategy in the Global Age, T.V. Paul, Patrick Morgan, and James Wirtz, eds. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009): 109-130.
James Piazza, “Is Islamist Terrorism More Dangerous? An Empirical Study of Group Ideology, Organization, and Goal Structure,” Terrorism and Political Violence 21, no. 1 (Autumn, 2009): 62-88.
April 11: What else causes violence and war? Organized crime
+Michael Kenney, From Pablo to Osama: Trafficking and Terrorist Networks, Government Bureaucracies, and Competitive Adaptation, (University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania University State Press 2007), pp. 1-77.
+Coletta A. Youngers and Eileen Rosin, “The US War on Drugs: Its Impact in Latin America and the Caribbean,” in Coletta A. Youngers and Eileen Rosin (eds.), Drugs and Democracy in Latin America: The Impact of US Policy, (Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers 2005), pp. 1-13.
Peter Andreas, “Illicit Americas: Historical dynamics of Smuggling in U.S. Relations with its Neighbors”, in Maiah Jaskoski, Arturo C. Sotomayor and Harold Trinkunas, (ed.), Borders and Borderlands in the Americas, pp. 153-170.
Arturo C. Sotomayor, “Militarization in Mexico and its Implications”, in Brian Bow and Arturo Santa-Cruz, eds., The State and Security in Mexico: Transformation and Crisis in Regional Perspective (New York, NY: Routdledge, 2012), pp. 42-60.
April 18: What else causes violence and war? Civil wars and environmental conflict Civil wars
+Jervis and Arts, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, sections of part IV, chapters by Rotberg, Collier, Kaufmann, and Dobbins.
Stathis N. Kalyvas, The Logic of Violence in Civil War (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006), Chapter 1 and 2.
+Nicholas Sambanis, “What is a Civil War? Conceptual and Empirical Complexities of an Operational Definition,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 48, 6(December 2004): 814-858.
Lise Morjé Howard, “The Failures”, UN Peacekeeping in Civil Wars, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), pp. 21, 42-51. (Focus on Bosnia Herzegovina). Lise Morjé Howard, “The Failures”, UN Peacekeeping in Civil Wars, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008), pp. 21-28. (Focus on Somalia)
Environmental conflict
+Betts, Conflict after the Cold War, sections of part Jervis and Arts, International Politics: Enduring Concepts and Contemporary Issues, sections of part X, chapters by Weiner, Cooler, and Homer-Dixon.
Michael Brzoska & Christiane Fröhlich, “Climate change, migration and violent conflict:
vulnerabilities, pathways and adaptation strategies,” Migration and Development, Fall 2015, OI: 10.1080/21632324.2015.1022973. To link to this article:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21632324.2015.1022973
Michael L. Ross, “What Have We Learned about the Resource Curse?”, Annual Review of Political Science 18, pp. 239-259. Available at:
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/ross/Ross%20-%20What%20have%20we%20learned%20about%20the%20resource%20curse.pdf
+Emily Mejerding, “Climate Change and Conflict: Avoiding Small Talk about the Weather,” International Studies Review 15, 2(2013): pp. 185-203.
+ Sara McLaughlin Mitchell and Cameron Thies, “Resource Curse in Reverse: How Civil Wars Influence Natural Resource Production”, International Interactions 38, 2(2012): pp. 218-242.
C. Hendrix and Sarah Glaser, “Trends and triggers: Climate, climate change and civil conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa. Political Geography 26, 6(2007): 695-715.
