8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 1/15

Fall 2009 Prof. Susan Waltz1:00-2:30

swaltz@umich.eduTues-Thurs

3227 Weill Hall1110 Weill Hall

Office hours Tues andThursGSI Peter Salingpsaling@umich.eduOffice hours TBA

THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

Ford School of Public Policy

SPP 560 Foreign Policy Analysis and the Management of International

RelationsThis course is designed as a policy-maker’s guide to the dynamics of contemporary internationalrelations. It emphasizes the processes of international policy-making, the political environment andcontext for policy-making and strategies available to policy makers. Prospective policy analysts,administrators, and advocates with interest in global issues and foreign policy need to understand whatmotivates and what constrains actors in international relations and global politics. To make good

 judgments, policy professionals should understand how and where the political units or organizations theyrepresent fit into the machinery of international politics, recognizing local opportunities and constraints.

This course is intended to provide insight into the dynamics of global politics and international relations.Nation states remain the primary actors in contemporary international relations, but increasingly they are

 joined by a range of non-state actors whose views and interests must be taken into account. How canwe understand the interests and interactions of these various actors, states and non-states? How dothey identify issues to address, and how do they devise effective strategies for dealing with policyconcerns? In this class we will consider courses of action open to various actors based on the attributesand capacity they bring to the situation, but we will also consider the constraints that are embedded in theinternational system, and in international institutions. To what extent can states achieve objectives ontheir own? To what extent is multilateralism a desirable strategy for international problem-solving? Inaddition to considering the choices and strategies open to various actors, this course looks at a number of institutional contexts in which international actors meet and conduct their affairs. In the internationalarena, states create institutional patterns, and these same institutions help shape their behavior. The UNand the Bretton Woods system have nearly identical memberships, but they often produce very differentsorts of policies--and occasionally they produce policies that are contradictory. How does this happen,and why?

In exploring such questions, this course aims to provide:

• basic familiarity with concepts and perspectives commonly used in analysis of internationalrelations (foreign policy and global governance)

• knowledge of the policy process• analytical skills and enhanced understanding of requirements for successful policy development• technical writing skills (emphasizing short papers, sharp organization, persuasive argument)• an opportunity to develop knowledge about several issues/problems currently on the international

agenda• an opportunity to hone, and test, analytical skills by applying them--as part of a small group--to

the analysis of one international issue

1

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 2/15

How will you develop these skills and knowledge base? In part through class discussion, but in at leastequal part through your own work in applying concepts to a particular substantive issue. Early in thecourse, you will be asked to indicate your personal interests from a list of current problems on the globalagenda, for example, fighting terrorism, or preserving biodiversity, or confronting the AIDS epidemic.From that input several student groups will be formed, each working on a different concern. Most of thepapers you write for this course will relate to this one topic, and during the last weeks of the course, eachgroup will present its work to the class during a roundtable. In this way, you will be able to apply theconcepts introduced in class and develop some level of knowledge/expertise on a variety of issues.

The course places great emphasis on writing and policy analysis. There will be several short writtenassignments and one longer policy analysis with several different parts. The policy analysis is part of agroup project; it is due at the end of the semester and should represent a culmination of your work over the semester. The short written assignments, as well as the longer project, are designed to help youdevelop specific skills related to policy analysis. Further information about the assignments and aboutgrading is provided in the Assignment Guide for the course.

In addition to the papers and roundtables, the main course requirement is to keep up with assignedreadings and participate in class discussions.

Course Outline and Readings

Coursetools and Class ListservA Coursetools site has been created for this course and it can be accessed throughhttps://ctools.umich.edu. Throughout the course, announcements, documents, and links may be postedto the site. We will also be setting up a class listserv and generally will announce new postings to theCTools site. Please check your email regularly.

ReadingsMost of the readings for this course are listed in the syllabus. (Some readings for topical issues will notbe chosen until October or early November). Virtually all of the readings are available on-line and can beaccessed in multiple ways (through live links on the syllabus posted to the Ctools site or through theuniversity’s electronic reserves). For student convenience, a coursepack with many of the requiredreadings is available at Dollar Bill Copying at 611 Church St. (A coursepack with every required readingwould probably be cost-prohibitive. Readings have been selected for inclusion in the coursepack basedon copyright fees to minimize cost to students. STUDENTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REQUIREDREADINGS, whether or not included in the coursepack.)

Additional materials have been placed on reserve in the Ford School Reading Room and will be used inclass discussion/assignments.

• KSG Case Studies, “Pakistani Textile Exports, Fast Track, and the US War on Terror: A Collisionof Foreign and Trade Policy Goals” (1825.0, 2006).

• Pew Case Study Center, “It’s Not Just the Economy, Stupid: Linking Free Trade and the War onTerror.” (Case 293, 2007).

Recommended for students without a strong background in IR:

Evans, Graham and Newnham, Richard. The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations(Penguin Reference), 1999.

Weiss, Forsythe, Coate and Pease. The United Nations and Changing

World Politics, Fifth Edition (Westview Press, 2007).

Kaufman, Joyce P. A Concise History of US Foreign Policy (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006).

2

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 3/15

Throughout the course and indeed, throughout your program at the Ford School, you may also wish tomake a regular practice of consulting some of the following journals, which address foreign policy, globalgovernance, IR, and current events:

Foreign AffairsForeign Policy World Policy Journal Global GovernanceMillenniumOrbisInternational Security World PoliticsInternational Studies Q

 Am. J of International Law Journal of Foreign Service Officers http://www.afsa.org/fsj/ 

You may also wish to consult the websites of a number of policy institutes (and potential employers!):

American Enterprise Institute http://www.aei.org/Brookings (foreign policy) http://www.brook.edu/fp/fp_hp.htmCato Institute http://www.cato.org/ Center for International Policy http://www.ciponline.org/Center for Strategic and International Studies http://www.csis.org/Carnegie Endowment for International Peace http://www.ceip.org/Foreign Policy Forum http://www.foreignpolicyforum.com/Global Policy Forum http://www.globalpolicy.orgInstitute for Policy Studies http://www.ips-dc.org/, parent of Foreign Policy in Focus

http://www.fpif.org/Rand Corporation (international studies) http://www.rand.org/interpol_area/Hoover Institute http://www.hoover.org/Council on Foreign Relations http://www.cfr.org/Stanley Foundation http://www.stanleyfoundation.org/Heritage Foundation http://www.heritage.org/Federation of American Scientists http://www.fas.org/  (arms monitoring and strategic studies)Congressional Research Service http://www.fpc.state.gov/c18185.htm International Peace Institute (formerly International Peace Academy) http://www.ipacademy.org/ 

3

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 4/15

COURSE OUTLINE

Some of the readings below present conceptual material (implying that you should read for content);others offer example of concepts, approaches, or policy writing (implying that you should read to

understand the illustration).

Readings marked as “teasers” are intended to help you see the relevance of some conceptual or theoretical material to current policy debates. Please read those quickly and move on.

If it’s not clear to you why a particular reading has been included, please ask!

Sept 8 Course IntroductionForeign Policy http://www.foreignpolicy.com (Bring to class if you have a hard copy)Foreign Affairs http://www.foreignaffairs.orgTeaser: “Davos 07: How Power Has Shifted.”

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/timothy_garton_ash/2007/01/davos_07 _how_power_has_shifted.html (and any e-replies you want to read)

(Distribute selection from Feinstein and Slaughter. “A Duty to Prevent” for in-classexercise Sept. 10.)

Part I: International Affairs, Alternative Templates and the Policy Process

Sept 10-15 What kind of issues commonly arise in international relations? What challenges confrontthe policy professional with an interest in contemporary world issues? What is the connotation of theword “policy”? What does a “policy paper” look like? Is there a reasoning process unique to policyquestions, and what is the relationship between policy work and academic research? This segment of the course includes an overview of the policy process and a presentation on backgrounders, thefirst main assignment in your policy project.

Readings for in-class discussion and exercises – Sept 10CP Congressional Research Service Reports, “AIDS in Africa,” May 2006

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/67156.pdf -- (for an in-class exerciseon FAQs and Backgrounders– read and bring text to class)

(in class exercise) Feinstein and Slaughter. “A Duty to Prevent.” Foreign Affairs 83(Jan-

Feb 2004). (abstract and 1-page section titled “Early Action”)

CASE Discussion, Sept 15: AfghanistanAhmed Rashid, “Afghanistan I and II” (Chapters 9-10) from Descent Into Chaos (NY:

Viking Books, 2008), pp. 171-218. (For anyone seeking additional backgroundinformation, AlertNet’s entry on Afghan Turmoil is recommended --http://www.alertnet.org/db/crisisprofiles/AF_REC.htm?v=newsdesk. )

Background Readings (Carlsnaes and Lepgold will be treated briefly in class Sept 10)Carlsnaes, Walter. “The Agency-Structure Problem in Foreign Policy Analysis,”

International Studies Quarterly , 36 (1992): 245-270.CP Lepgold, Joseph. “Is Anyone Listening: International Relations Theory and the Problem

of Policy Relevance.” Political Science Quarterly (Spring 1998): 43-62.Garrison, Jean (ed). “Foreign Policy Analysis in 20/20: A Symposium,” International

Studies Review 5 (2003): 155-2-2.George, Alexander L. Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy.

Washington, DC: U. S. Institute of Peace Press, 1993.

4

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 5/15

Part II: Frames, Ideology, Beliefs, Approaches, and Analysis

Sept 17-22-24 Over these 3 class periods, we will explore the sub-strata of policy work—the values,beliefs, and orientations that shape ideas and policy solutions. What is the role and place of opinion inpolicy work? Can we legitimately disagree about the place of opinion in good quality policy work? Note

that this issue reappears throughout the course, and especially on Nov 5. These questions lead naturallyto a discussion of the main theoretical perspectives that lie behind many well-regarded policypublications. If you are unaware of, or unfamiliar with, these perspectives, your ability to read andinterpret policy publications—and contribute to broad policy discussions--will necessarily be limited.Some of the readings below present, unpack or engage debates about these perspectives; othersemploy, embed or illustrate them. This segment of the course includes a presentation on framing and framing memos, the second major component of your policy project.

Readings for in-class discussion and exercises. We will probably refer to the Ikenberry chapter several times during these 3 class periods, so I have put it at the top of the list below. Moregenerally, we will progress through topics in the order of these readings and it will probably be to your advantage to read them in sequence. Note that several readings are very short and in many cases they were chosen simply to illustrate a concept. Readings most likely to be discussed in class are marked withan asterisk.* 

*Ikenberry, G. John, “Introduction: Woodrow Wilson, the Bush Administration and theFuture of Liberal Internationalism,” in The Crisis of American Foreign Policy (PrincetonUniversity Press, 2009).

*Rosenau, James N. Distant Proximities: Dynamics Beyond Globalization,Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004: 9-11 and 39-45 (on values—will likely be considered in class)

“Washington Recasts terror war as ‘struggle’”http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/07/26/news/terror.php (examples of framing)

*“Foreign Policy’s Big Moment Looks for a Big Idea” NYT Feb 23, 2003 (examples of framing)

Holbrooke, Richard. “Authentically Liberal” (Review Essay), Foreign Affairs July/Aug

2006, 170-176. (compare with NYT article above). (illustrates framing)CP Kaul, Grunberg, and Stern, Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st 

Century (NY: Oxford U Press, 1999), chapter 1. (perspective, framing)CP *Russett, Bruce; Harvey Starr; and David Kinsella. World Politics:

The Menu for Choice. Sixth Edition. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000.Excerpts on collective goods: pp. 352-358 and 445-453.Excerpts on national interest: pp. 120-122

*Book Review: “The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation of International Relations: The Struggle for the Soul of the Twenty-First Century byScott Thomas,” in Foreign Affairs, May/June 2005, p. 132. (pointing up role of values/beliefs and offering alternative frames)

*Walt, Stephen M. “International Relations: One World, Many Theories.” Foreign Policy(Spring 1998): 29-46.

CP *Viotti, Paul R. and Mark V. Kauppi. International Relations Theory: Realism,Pluralism, Globalism and Beyond. Third Edition. NY: Allyn and Bacon, 1999.(Selection: “Alternative Images” (pp 6-8); “Realists and their Critics” (pp. 82-88)and “Pluralists and their Critics” (pp. 222-225)

Hoge, James A. “A Global Power Shift in the Making,” Foreign Affairs (July-Aug 2004).Minxin Pei, “Think Again: Asia’s Rise” Foreign Policy, June 22, 2009

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/22/think_again_asias_rise*Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969-1976, Volume 1 “Foundations of Foreign

Policy,1969-1972” http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/i/21100.htm

5

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 6/15

Legro, Jeffrey W. and Andrew Moravcsik. “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” InternationalSecurity 24 (1999): 5-55.

“Condi is a Realist” – excerpt from Marcus Mabry, “Condoleezza Rice,” Foreign Policy(May/June 2007).

Rice, Condoleezza. “Rethinking the National Interest,” Foreign Affairs, July/August2008.

Waltz, Kenneth N. “Structural Realism After the Cold War,” International Security 25(2000): 5-41.

Meyer, Karl E. “Weighing Iraq on Morgenthau’s Scale.” World Policy Journal (Fall2003),

89-91.Boot, Max. “Think Again: NeoCons” Foreign Policy January/February 2004: 20-28

Additional Recommended Readings Related to Realism and Neoliberal Institutionalism

O’Neill, Kate; Balsiger, Jorg; and VanDeveer, Stacy. “Actors, Norms and Impact:

Recent International Cooperation Theory and the Influence of the Agent-Structure Debate,” Annual Review of Political Science, 2004: 149-75.

Brooks, Stephen G. and William C. Wohlforth. “American Primacy inPerspective.”Foreign Affairs 81 (July-August 2002): 20-33.

Mearsheimer, John J. “The False Promise of International Institutions.” InternationalSecurity. 19 (Winter 1994/95): 5-49

Ruggie, John. “The False Premise of Realism” International Security 20 (Summer 1995): 62-70

Mandelbaum, Michael. The Case for Goliath: How America Acts as the World’sGovernment in the 21st Century (Perseus Books: 2005).

Walt, Stephen. Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy (W.W.

Norton: 2005).

Additional Readings on Beliefs and Ideologies

Goldstein, Judith and Keohane, Robert. Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions,

and Political Change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993.

Holsti, Ole R, “Cognitive Dynamics and Images of the Enemy,” Journal of International

Affairs 21 (1976): 16-39.

Blum, Douglas W., “The Soviet Foreign Policy Belief System: Beliefs, Politics, and

Foreign Policy Outcomes,” International Studies Quarterly 37 (1993): 373-394.

Sept 29 Tackling Analysis. What is the dictionary definition of analysis? What are the impliedcommonalities among global trends analysis, political risk analysis, foreign policy analysis, contentanalysis? What is the relationship between academic research/analysis and policy analysis? This class

 period relates to the separate analysis papers required for your policy projects.

CP Kuperman, Alan J. The Limits of Intervention: Genocide in Rwanda. Washington, DC:

Brookings Institution Press, 2001: 1-4, 84-91 and 97-99. ( first pages presentidea of counterfactual analysis; following selections illustrate its application)

Polaski, Sandra. “Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha Round on Developing

Countries” Carnegie Foundation, 2006, Intro and Chs. 1-2 (pp. i-xii and 1-20)http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/BWfinal.pdf  (Case study for classdiscussion)

6

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 7/15

Additional Readings:

Tetlock, Philip and Aaron Belkin. “Counterfactual Thought Experiments,” inCounterfactual Thought Experiments in World Politics: Logical, Methological, andPsychological Perspectives. Philip Tetlock and Aaron Belkin, editors. Princeton,NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996, 3-25.

Neustadt, Richard E. and May, Ernest R. Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for 

Decision Makers. New York: Free Press, 1986.

Part III: Institutions, Actors, and Activities –Unpacking the Templates

To make, or assess, policy recommendations for issues that cross international boundaries, you need agood understanding of the various kinds of actors that exist, the institutions and frameworks within whichdecisions are made, and the broad types of policy tools and choices that can be made. Where you begindepends in some part on the kind of issue you’re looking at—and who the main actors are. Traditionalapproaches to IR emphasize the state, because for 300 years state interests have dominatedinternational relations and overshadowed institutional constraints (including international law). Thatremains the case for most international crises, but it is less true for many of the broad issue areas, liketrade, development, environmental concerns. In this course, we’ll begin with the broad issue areas, andreturn to the question of power and state interests later in the semester.

Oct 1 Institutions and Actors. Institutions? Think UN or WTO. Actors? Think China or Oxfam.Historically, large states have usually acted on their own (via bilateral foreign policy), independent of aninstitutional context. Increasingly, though, European states conduct foreign policy within the context of the EU, and the US likewise pursues some of its foreign policy objectives within the constraints of aspecific institutional setting. Small and medium states tend to pursue most of their foreign policy withininstitutional contexts. Obviously, you’re not in a good position to analyze or propose policy-relatedactions if you’re not familiar with the rules and patterns of institutional arrangements. Scholars have used“regime analysis” to study the relationship between international actors, and the institutional contexts inwhich they operate. Some questions to keep in mind as you read: How do actors and institutionsconstrain each other? In a very practical sense, who sets the rules for big multilateral organizations likethe UN or IMF? To what extent do the working rules favor large actors and reflect their interests? Whatdoes it take for a particular actor to exercise influence in a multilateral context? Can very small actors –

like the country of Mauritius, or a non-governmental organization—exercise effective influence? Can theyever trump a powerful state like the US? When do countries decide to act on their own, and when dothey work multilaterally? To what extent to international organizations have “agency” (act on their own)?

Hasenclever, Andreas et al. “Three Perspectives on International Regimes,” excerptfrom Theories of International Regimes (Cambridge University Press, 1997): 1-

7.Cox, Robert and Harold Jacobson. Excerpt from “The Framework for Inquiry.” In the

Politics of Global Governance: International Organizations in an InterdependentWorld, ed. Paul F. Diehl, 82-86. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1997. [we will reviewalgorithm in class and apply to IO analysis]

Rosenthal, Gert. “Scale of Assessments of the United Nations’ Budget” Global

Governance (July-Sept 2004). Read as case study application of Cox &

Jacobson.CP Hawkins, Lake, Nielson, and Tierney, “Delegation Under Anarchy: States, International

Organizations, and Principal-Agent Theory” in Hawkins et al, Delegation andAgency in International Organizations (Cambridge U Press, 2006), 1-37.

CP Hawkins and Jacoby, excerpts from “How Agents Matter,” in Hawkins, et al, DelegationAnd Agency (Cambridge U Press, 2006), p. 199 and 205-212

7

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 8/15

Additional Readings

Barnett and Finnemore, Rules for the World (Cornell University Press, 2004). (pp 1-44and 166-173 are on electronic reserves – highly recommended)

Drezner, Daniel W. Locating the Proper Authorities: The Interaction of Domestic and

International Institutions. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003.

Jervis, Robert. System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press, 1997.

Oct 6 Global Frameworks: The UN. The UN is one of two global frameworks. Its name iswell-recognized, but most Americans have little insight into its workings, or its (in)effectiveness. Our focus will be on recent efforts to reform the global body. First question: How is the UN currentlystructured? What doesn’t appear to be working? What led to reform efforts? (As future policy analysts,can you categorize the problems that required fixing? Does this list extend from recognized objectiveproblems, or is it more a function of values, opinion, ideology, etc?) What was decided in September 2005? What progress has been made? What dynamics shape the likelihood of deep reform?

Teaser: “UN Secretary General: The Score at Half Time” Economist, June 2009

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13825201  (and for more teasers, read some of the comments)

CP Weiss, Forsythe, Coate and Pease. The United Nations and Changing

World Politics, Fifth Edition (2007). Coursepak readings - Excerpts from“Introduction” (“The UN: Actor or Institutional Framework?” and “UN Politics”)and all of Chapter 4, “The Challenges of the 21st Century.”

Malone, David. “Introduction” in Malone, ed., The UN Security Council (Lynne Reinner,

2004), 1-13.

Wallensteen, Peter and Johansson, Patrik. “Security Council Decisions in Perspective,”

in Malone, ed., The UN Security Council (Lynne Reinner, 2004), 17-33.

UN Charter, http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html (esp. Chapters I, VI, VII and

VIII)

UN website, http://www.un.org/aboutun/mainbodies.htm and http://www.un.org/issues/

UN Peacebuilding Commission website http://www.un.org/peace/peacebuilding/ 

Students with possible interests in working at or with the UN are encouraged to consult:

IPI, “UN Reform” http://www.ipacademy.org/our-work/un-reform 

IPI, “Coping with Crisis” http://www.ipacademy.org/our-work/coping-with-crisis 

8

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 9/15

Additional Readings

Weiss, Forsythe, Coate and Pease. The United Nations and Changing World Politics,

Fifth Edition (2007)

Kennedy, Paul. Parliament of Man (Random House, 2006).

Mingst, Karen A. and Margaret P. Karns. The United Nations in the Twenty-FirstCentury. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2006.

 And for earlier writing and expectations about Ban Ki Moon:Traub, James. “Marching Orders for the UN’s Boss,” FP, Jan/Feb 2007

“UN’s Ban Ki Moon Emerges as Dogged Reformer” Christian Science Monitor, March 12,

2008. http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0312/p01s01-wogi.html 

Oct 8 Global Frameworks: The Bretton Woods System. (World Bank, IMF, WTO andsystem of foreign currency exchange.) What was the concern and vision that led to the creation of theBretton Woods system? How does it relate to the UN? Are the rules for decision-making within BWsimilar to or different from rules at the UN? Who “controls” the BW institutions? (And can we groupthese together, or do they require separate discussion?)

Teaser: “International Monetary Reform: IMF Not in the Game,” July 2009

http://brettonwoodsproject.org/art-564824 

Teaser: “Record World Bank Lending” July 2009

http://brettonwoodsproject.org/art-564849 

CP Barnett and Finnemore, Rules for the World (Cornell University Press, 2004), 45-72.

Bretton Woods Institutions,

http://brettonwoodsproject.org/institution/index.shtml#index-537848 

Nye, Joseph S., Jr. “Globalization’s Democratic Deficit: How to Make InternationalInstitutions More Accountable.” Foreign Affairs 80 (Jul/Aug 2001): 2-6.

Thoma, Mark. “The WTO Tipping Point,” Economist’s View blog, July 1, 2008

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/07/the-wto-tipping.html 

Additional Readings

Stiglitz, Joseph E. Globalization and Its Discontents. W.W. Norton, 2003: 3-22.Sachs, Jeffrey D. “Memorandum: How to Run the IMF,” Foreign Policy (2004): 60-64.Overseas Development Institute, “Bretton Woods Reform: Sifting Through the Options

in the Search for Legitimacy,” May 2006, pdf available athttp://se1.isn.ch/serviceengine/FileContent?serviceID=ISN&fileid=9E288426-F4F5-

12D4-EE34-9C3C671DCD0B&lng=en  (4 pages)* Ruggie, John. “The United Nations and Globalization: Patterns and Limitations of 

Institutional Adaptation,” Global Governance 9 (July-Sept 2003). [this articlecompares the approaches adopted by BW and UN on Millennium Development Goals] 

9

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 10/15

Oct 13 International Frameworks: Law. Where does international law fit in? If you want topropose a policy solution for issues that cross international boundaries, chances are it will involve somesort of legal arrangement, even if it is considered “soft law” (a politically binding agreement less formalthan a treaty). Students who have not previously studied IL frequently want answers to some very basicquestions: Who makes international law? To whom does it apply? Is it only used for rhetorical purpose—is it ever enforced? Is there more than one World Court? (What’s the difference between the ICJ and theICC, below?) If international law can’t solve, or resolve, the most difficult problems of IR – like the threatof war over Iran’s apparent nuclear proliferation—what good is it? The readings below should help withsome answers. What questions remain? What other questions do you have? How important is it for policy analysts to have a good grasp of the principles of IL?

Teaser: Confirmation Hearings for H. H. Koh as State Department Legal Advisor, April 2009. http://foreign.senate.gov/hearings/2009/hrg090428p.html   (Click on“HEARINGS” for video recording – full hearing runs nearly two hours. It is all interesting! See the 10-minute exchange between Senator Coker and Dean Kohat c. 58 minutes, re the role of the Advisor and the relevance of international law.

Teaser: “The Reckoning” –the story of the ICC (video)http://www.pbs.org/pov/reckoning/CP “The International Legal System,” Selection from Rourke, John T. International Politics

on the World Stage NY: Dushkin/McGraw-Hill: 311-19.Alvarez, Jose. “International Organizations: Then and Now,” American Journal of 

International Law , 100 (April 2006), pp 324-347

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 (scroll through to review headings, text)

http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf  International Court of Justice http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1 and Ecuador v.

Colombia, 2008 case re aerial sprayinghttp://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/138/14470.pdf  

International Criminal Court http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/About+the+Court/Frequently+asked+Questions/ICC Multimedia timeline

http://www.pbs.org/pov/reckoning/photo_gallery_icc_timeline.php UN News Service, “International Criminal Court Already Changing Behavior,” 2 July 2007

 http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=23120&Cr=criminal&Cr1=courtUNFCC, “Kyoto Protocol,” http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php 

Oct 15 Regional Intergovernmental Organizations. There are hundreds of IGO’s. What dothey all have in common? The EU and NATO are commonly recognized as the most “successful”regional IGO’s. What accounts for their success? For the EU, what factors contribute to centripetalforces, and with what centrifugal social forces must it reckon? NATO is the oldest military alliance—butwill it endure? What are the stresses and strains with which it must reckon? Suppose you find yourself in a context where you are asked to evaluate one or the other of these IGO’s in relation to some other actor (a state or an NGO). How important would it be for you to have prior, top-level understanding of thehistory of these organizations and the challenges and stresses they face? Would you need to be familiar with the international law (treaty) that established them? With the decision-making structures? Why or why not?

Teaser: BBC, “Q&A: The Lisbon Treaty,” 2009

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6901353.stm 

CP Sweet, Alec Stone. The Judicial Construction of Europe (NY: Oxford U Press, 2004),

pp. 235-244.

Europa website (“Gateway to the European Union”) http://europa.eu/index_en.htm 

10

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 11/15

Teaser: “NATO Summit Show Mood Grows Sunnier, but Trans-Atlantic Divides Persist,”

Radio Free Europe, April 2009http://www.rferl.org/content/NATO_Summit_Show_Mood_Grows_Sunnier_But_TransAtlantic_Divides_Persist/1602175.html 

Rubin, James. “Building a New Atlantic Alliance,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2008, pp.

99-110.

“NATO’s Role in Afghanistan,” http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_8189.htm

CP CRS, “NATO in Afghanistan: A Test of the Transatlantic Alliance,” 2008,

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33627.pdf  

The North Atlantic Treaty (document) http://www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/treaty.htm

NATO website http://www.nato.int/

Oct 20 – Fall Study Break, no class

Oct 22 Non-State Actors (NSA). If states are the most important actors in international relations andglobal governance, how and where do non-state actors fit into the picture? First, what sort of actors areincluded under this broad heading? To what extent do they have power and influence? Are they worth

studying (do they have an impact on policy or decision-outcome?) If we do want to study them, whatconcepts and analytical tools can help the policy analyst or advocate understand the real or potentialinfluence that non-state actors might wield? To what extent is the potential influence of a non-state actor constrained or enhanced by institutional setting?

Return to the issue of values and ideology, and the question of framing. What, if any, special advantagewould you expect NSA’s to enjoy? (You may want to keep this question in mind as you read Keck andSikkink, as well as Haas and Slaughter.)

Teaser: Paul, James “The Arria Formula”http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/mtgsetc/arria.htm 

Teaser: American Enterprise Institute, “NGO’s: The Growing Power of an UnelectedFew” http://www.aei.org/news/newsID.18081,filter./news_detail.asp 

CP Keck, Margaret E. and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders: AdvocacyNetworks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,1998, scan pages 1-15; read 16-38 carefully

Teaser: Naim, Moises. “Al Qaeda, the NGO” Foreign Policy March April 2002, 99-100.Slaughter, Ann Marie, “The Real New World Order,” Foreign Affairs 76 (1998): 159-71.Ernst B. Haas. Excerpt on epistemic community. When Knowledge is Power Berkeley,

CA: University of California Press, 1990, pp. 40-46Palmisano, Samuel. “The Evolving Global Enterprise” Foreign Affairs (May/June 2006)

Recommended:Wapner, Paul. “Politics Beyond the State: Environmental Activism and World Civic

Activism.” World Politics 47 (April 1995), 311-40.Sanjeev Khagram, “Restructuring the Global Politics of Development: The Case of 

India’s Narmada Valley Dams” in Khagram, Riker, and Sikkink, RestructuringWorld Politics: Transnational Social Movements (U Minn Press, 2002).

Oct 27 In Class discussion (in lieu of written mid-term exam)

CP B.S. Chimni, “International Institutions Today: An Imperial Global State in the Making,”

European Journal of International Law, 15 (2004) 1-37.

11

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 12/15

Oct 29-Nov 3 States, Sovereignty and Foreign Policy Priorities. Statesare considered the main actors in international relations—and indeed it has not been solong ago that they were considered the only actors worth studying. What is a state, andhow do states differ? In particular, what makes a state “strong”? What is sovereignty,and how does it relate to state strength and power? How does state strength, andoverall capacity, affect the nature and content of its foreign policy?

For in-class discussion (Oct 29)Teaser: “The Failed State Index,” Foreign Policy (July/August 2009).

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/06/22/the_2009_failed_states_indexKrasner, Stephen. “Sovereignty.” Foreign Policy (January/February 2001): 20-29.SWOT analysis http://erc.msh.org/quality/ittools/itswot.cfm and 

http://www.kerala.gov.in/keralacallingoct/tourism2.pdf  (as an example – analysis of tourism sector in Kerala India) and 

http://english.people.com.cn/200601/17/eng20060117_236196.html (news report on UNDP SWOT analysis in Cambodia)

Hey, Jeanne A.  Small States in World Politics: Explaining Foreign Policy Behavior Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2003: 1-11.

Class Discussion (Nov 3) US and Trade Policy [comparing case studies]

“Pakistani Textile Exports, Fast Track, and the US War on Terror: A Collision of Foreignand Trade Policy Goals”  (Kennedy 1825.0)

Pew Case Study Center, “It’s Not Just the Economy, Stupid: Linking Free Trade andthe

War on Terror.” (Case 293, 2007).

Recommended Readings (not required, but definitely worth reading.)Sofaer, Abraham D. and Thomas C. Heller. “Sovereignty: The Practitioners’

Perspective.” In Problematic Sovereignty, ed. Stephen D. Krasner, New York:Columbia University Press, 2001, 24-41 (excerpt)

Cox, Robert. “Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations.”Millennium, 12 (1983)162-175.

David, Stephen R. “Explaining Third World Alignment.” World Politics 43 (1990), 223-256.

Nov 5 Statecraft and Foreign Policy Analysis. During this class period, we will use some actualpolicy papers to explore some practical, but conceptual questions. The first major question is: how, in apractical sense, can we evaluate foreign policy? How do we gauge a foreign policy “mistake”? Is italways and only a matter of opinion (and values), or are there analytical tools that policy analysts canuse? The topic of “foreign policy mistakes” leads to a broader question – How do we assess the qualityof a foreign policy position or recommendation? What makes one policy “better” than another? How canwe evaluate “statecraft”? And….what is the place of values, beliefs, ideology, etc, in assessing thequality of a policy? What else besides values, beliefs, etc, bears on policy analysis?  [This class period directly relates to your policy project. Many of the sample policy documents—especially theoptions papers—can be used as “models” for your final paper.] 

Readings for Class Discussion on Nov 5

CP Baldwin, David A. “Success and Failure in Foreign Policy,” Annual Review of Political

Science 3 (2000): 167-182

CP Ross, Dennis. Statecraft (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2007): 21-23; 173-177; 187-215

12

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 13/15

Sample Policy Analyses and Options Papers (These papers illustrate the process of   policy analysis – read a sample, and compare general form/content with the policy statements below)

Krueger and Laitin, “’Mis-Underestimating Terrorism” Foreign Affairs (Sept/Oct 2004).

(more sophisticated but assessable data analysis)

Nasr, Vali. “Battle for the Middle East,” selection from The Shia Revival (NY: WW

Norton, 2006), pp 227-254 (analysis followed by options and recommendations)

China’s Rising Role in Africa,” Council on Foreign Relations, July 2005.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/8436/chinas_rising_role_in_africa.html (analysis)

CP Republican Policy Committee, “Backgrounder: Conflict in Liberia and US Policy Options,”

July 10, 2003. http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/2003/fr071003.pdf  (options)

Sample Policy Documents (These are the real thing: look at several)The National Security Strategy of the US, 2006 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/nsc/nss/2006/ The National Security Strategy of the US, 2002 (Bush Administration)

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/nsc/nss/2002/ A National Security Strategy for a Global Age, 2000 (Clinton Administration)

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/nss/nss_dec2000_contents.htm (This doc is long – “Preface” and “Fundamentals” sections are recommended)

Quadrennial Defense Review Report 2006www.defense link.mil/pubs/pdfs/QDR 2006 0203.pdf  

Quadrennial Defense Review Report 2001http://www.defenselink.mil/pubs/pdfs/qdr2001.pdf  

Heritage Foundation. “The 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review: Strategy and Threats.”April 20, 2005 http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/wm728.cfm 

Project for a New American Century. “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces,and Resources for a New Century” (2000)http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf andhttp://www.pnac.info/

Raman, B. “National Security Doctrine” (India), South Asia Analysis Group, paper 578

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers6/paper578.html 

Nov 10-12-17 The Makings of Foreign Policy: Domestic Determinants and Policy Process. Whatis the relationship between a country’s domestic politics—including the personality of key leaders and theinfluence of bureaucracy as well as the political concerns of constituents—and its foreign policy? Andwhose opinions, beliefs, ideologies have greatest influence? Over these 3 class periods, we will focuson the case of the US and consider these questions from different perspectives. The first perspectivefocuses on individual leaders, the second on the second tier of US foreign policy makers (State Dept etal), and the third will consider the role of Congress and public opinion. In general, to what extent does

the Levels of Analysis tool help sort out relevant (and causal) factors?

Overview (Nov 10)CP “Levels of Analysis” (instructor notes)CP Koh, Harold. “Why President Almost Always Wins in Foreign Affairs” excerpt from The

National Security Constitution: Sharing Power After the Iran-Contra Affair (YaleUniv Press, 1990), 117-133

Congress, Public Opinion, and the Purse Strings (Nov 10-12)

13

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 14/15

Shapiro, Robert, and Jacobs, Lawrence. “Who Leads and Who Follows? U.S.Presidents, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy” in Nacos, Shapiro, and Isemiaeds., Decision Making in a Glass House: Mass Media, Public Opinion andAmerican Foreign Policy in the 21st Century . NY: Rowman and Littlefield, 2000

Mead, Walter Russell. “The Jacksonian Tradition,” National Interest (1999-2000)http://denbeste.nu/external/Mead01.html

Putnam, Robert. “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics.” International Organization 42(Summer 1988): 427-460.

Mearsheimer, John and Walt, Steve. “The Israel Lobby” London Review of Books.http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html 

Does the Israel Lobby have too much power? Foreign Policy July/Aug 2006.US Senate Foreign Relations Committee http://foreign.senate.gov/US Senate Foreign Relations Committee http://foreign.senate.gov/Teaser: Senator Carl Levin, Chair of Senate Armed Services Committee, speech to

Foreign Policy Association, May 2009http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid13706306001?bclid=1343248661&bctid=24461803001 

Wallsten, Scott and Kosec, Katrina “The Economic Cost of the War in Iraq,” AEI-Brookings Joint Center Working Paper (Everyone should read 1 page abstract.Full article is optional) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=848408

Teaser: “US Arms Sales to Pakistan. New CRS Report”http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/11/us_arms_sales_to_pakistan_new_.php#more-179 

Foreign Policy Bureaucracy (Nov 12-17)Teaser: Obama on Group Think, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16076.html Teaser: Groupthink Quiz

http://www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/groupthinkquiz.html Hudson, Valerie. “Group Decisionmaking: Small Group Dynamics, Organizational

Process, and Bureaucratic Politics,” excerpted from Foreign Policy Analysis(Rowman and Littlefield, 2007), pp. 65-101.

Teaser: “The NSC’s Invisible Man” The Cable Column, Foreign Policyhttp://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/04/14/the_nsc

Rothkopf, David J. “Inside the Committee that Runs the World,” Foreign PolicyMarch/April 2005: 30-40.

National Security Council Website http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ Department of State website www.state.gov“Groupthink” http://www.abacon.com/commstudies/groups/groupthink.html 

Personality and Leadership (Nov 17)Russett and Starr, Individuals and World Politics (selection from Menu for Choice) pdf 

file on CTools site. See pages 178-185 on perceptions, and 186-191 on leadersand personality.

Yglesias, Matthew. “The Accidental Foreign Policy” (on Barak Obama) The Atlantic

Monthly June 2008, 28-30.Crossette, Barbara. “US Ambassador Praises UN Role, Mends Fences,” The

Interdependent VI (Spring 2008), 15-16.

Additional Readings (recommended, but not required for class)Allison, Graham. “Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” American Political

Science Review 63 (1969): 689-718.Krasner, Stephen D. “Are Bureaucracies Important? (Or Allison Wonderland)” Foreign

14

8/9/2019 560 Syllabus Fall 2009

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/560-syllabus-fall-2009 15/15

Policy (Summer 1972): 159-179.‘T Hart, Paul, Stern, Eric and Sundelius, Bengt., eds. Beyond Groupthink. Ann Arbor:

University of Michigan Press, 1997.

Walker, Stephen G., “A Cautionary Tale: Operational Code Analysis as a ScientificResearch Program,” in Progress in International Relations Research ed byElman and Elman. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003.

Levy, Jack S. “Political Psychology and Foreign Policy,” in Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology ed by Sears, Huddy and Jervis. NY: Oxford UniversityPress, 2003.

Etheredge, Lloyd S. “Personality Effects on American Foreign Policy,” AmericanPolitical Science Review 72 (1978): 434-451.

Hermann, Margaret and Preston, Thomas. “Presidents, Leadership Style, and theAdvisory Process.” In The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy, 351-368.

Nov 19 US Foreign Policy PrioritiesReading TBA (in conjunction with short assignment, probably selection from Fareed

Zakaria, The Post-American World, WW Norton, 2008 and Hillary Clinton’s

recent speech to CFR -http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/07/15/excerpts_from_clintons_foreign_policy_speech )

RecommendedKaufmann, Joyce. A Concise History of U.S. Foreign Policy (Rowman & Littlefield,

2006). (Chapter 5 “Beyond the Cold War” is on electronic reserves)

Nov 24 Contemporary US Foreign Policy: Crisis Management and Statecraft • Topic, readings TBA -- probably on Afghanistan

 

Part IV: Issues in International Affairs

Dec 1-3-8-10 Policy Roundtables

Dec 15 OR Dec 23 Policy Roundtable Debrief and final papers due

Please note: The Final Exam period for this course, scheduled by the University, is Wednesday,December 23 from 1:30-3:30. Normally, the final exam period is used for the course debriefing.A possible alternative is December 15 (1:00-2:30) – to be confirmed during the second week of class. Please note that attendance for this session will be mandatory.

15