University of Southern California s4

University of Southern California PUBD 522 Hard Power, Soft Power and Smart Power Wednesdays 2-4:50pm, ASC 225

Fall 2012 Prof. Mai’a K. Davis Cross [email protected]

Office Hours: Tuesdays 2-3pm, Wednesdays 12:30-1:30pm Location: VKC 343

Course Description

Power is central to the foreign policy of nation states. In international relations, power is defined most basically as when A gets B to do something that B would not otherwise do. But under what circumstances is power most effective? This course explores possible answers to this question through a conceptual and empirical examination of the various types of power, the actors who have power, and the contexts under which power is exercised. The instruments of power include a number of important tools, especially when soft power is taken into consideration. Soft power is defined as when A gets B to want what A wants. Smart power is the strategic combination of both hard and soft power. The tools of power include military, trade, leadership, diplomacy, public diplomacy, technology, identity, and ideas. To understand how these tools have been applied, topics in the course will include transnational networks and influence, the technology revolution, the power of persuasion, global and regional interdependence, the role of ideas and non-state soft power, economic power, “legitimate” power, and the rise and fall of hard/soft/smart power, among others. After laying the foundation for the understanding of the strategies, proper use, and desirability of certain forms of power, we will apply these ideas to specific case studies, assess the effectiveness of different forms of power, and deal with some key policy implications. To understand the impact of power, it is important to ask: who is power being directed towards? To what effect? The course will seek to balance conceptual and empirical discussions to enable students to apply theories of power to real world problems of interest. Course Requirements

Class Participation: Students will be required to complete all reading assignments (around 100 pages per week) in preparation for each class. Readings will be drawn from the five required texts as well as articles and chapters available on blackboard. Class participation is a crucial part of the course, and will constitute 20% of the overall grade. Attendance is required, and every absence must be excused by the professor in advance. Two or more unexcused absences will result in failure of the course.

1 Research Paper: The main writing assignment is a 15-20 page research paper (Times New Roman 12pt font, double-spaced, 1-inch margins). Each student must meet with the professor during office house to discuss and receive approval for research topics. The paper must show knowledge of the concepts and debates discussed in the readings as well as demonstrate significant empirical research (beyond the assigned readings) on a specific individual, group, institution (national or international), country, or geographic region. The paper must be structured around a discussion of soft, hard, and/or smart power. The deadlines associated with the paper are as follows:

 October 12: Paper topics must be approved by this date  October 24: One page paper proposal due by this date (send by email)  November 14: Full and complete draft of paper due  November 28: Students receive feedback on paper drafts by this date  December 5: Final paper due, mock professional conference

Response Papers: In addition to the major research paper, students must turn in two response papers (Times New Roman 12pt font, double-spaced, two pages in length). Discussion/response questions are posted on blackboard, but you do not need to limit yourself to one of these questions. Each paper must advance your own argument. These papers must respond to an issue presented in the readings, and avoid too much summary. Papers are due as a Word email attachment to the class by 10am on Wednesday. Late papers will have points deducted, but papers will not be accepted at all after 2pm on Friday. Any rescheduling of papers because of lateness will result in an entire letter grade drop (i.e. from A to B). A sign-up sheet for specific dates will be distributed during Week 2. Students can change these dates with at least several days advance notice.

Presentations: Students will give two formal presentations during the semester. First, in groups of two or three, students will give a 15-minute presentation on a smart power case study in class. Presentation topics do not necessarily have to coincide with the class topic for that week. Each presentation will be followed by Q&A. The use of PowerPoint and/or handouts, as well as any multi-media, such as video clips, images, or recordings is encouraged. Students will sign up for presentation dates during Week 2. Further instruction will be provided. Second, on the last day of class, students will participate in a mock professional conference. They will present their research papers individually, but organized into panels.

Grade Breakdown Research paper 50% Attendance & Class participation 20% Two response papers 10% Presentations 20%

Extra Credit: You may bring in a short news article related to the course and briefly present it at the beginning of class. You may also speak briefly about a talk you attended or other experience. Instructions: (1) briefly summarize and (2) explain how it is

2 relevant to a theme in the course. Email professor by noon on Friday if you plan to do this.

Academic Integrity USC’s regulations, norms, and standards on academic integrity are strictly enforced in this class. Every paper will be checked for plagiarism. Any student that has violated these rules will fail the course. Students are encouraged to review:  The Trojan Integrity Guide: http://www.usc.edu/student- affairs/SJACS/forms/tio.pdf  A Guide for Graduate Students: http://www.usc.edu/student- affairs/SJACS/forms/GradIntegrity/pdf

Book List (available at USC bookstore)

 Joseph S. Nye, The Powers to Lead, Oxford University Press, 2008.  Joseph S. Nye, The Future of Power, Public Affairs, 2011.  Peter van Ham, Social Power in International Politics, Routledge, 2010  Felix Berenskoetter, M.J. Williams, Power in World Politics, Routledge, 2007.  Inderjeet Parmar and Michael Cox, Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, Routledge, 2010.

Class Schedule In-Brief

Week 1: August 29 Introduction to the Course

Week 2: September 12 Conceptualizing Power

Part I: Traditional Notions of Power

Week 3: September 19 Military Power

Week 4: September 26 Economic Power & the Impact of Globalization

Part II: “New” Notions of Power

Week 5: October 3 Soft Power

Week 6: October 10 Soft Power cont.

Week 7: October 17 Social Power

Week 8: TBD Smart Power

3 Part III: Specific Power Strategies

Week 9: October 31 Information, Media, and Technology

Week 10: November 7 Diplomacy & Public Diplomacy

Week 11: November 14 The Power of Ideas (Draft Papers Due)

Week 12: November 28 Non-State Actors

Week 13: December 5 Mock Professional Conference (Final Papers Due)

Reading Schedule

(August 29, 2012) Week 1: Introduction to the Course

 Jack Snyder, “One World, Rival Theories,” Foreign Policy, November/December 2004. (blackboard)

 Ernest J. Wilson III. (2008) “Hard Power, Soft Power, Smart Power,” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616(1): 110- 124.

September 5, 2012: No Class. Professor Receiving Book Prize in Germany

(September 12, 2012) Week 2: Conceptualizing Power

 Students sign up for presentation & response paper dates

 Nye, “What is Power in Global Affairs?” in The Future of Power, pp. 3-24.

 David A. Baldwin. (2005) “Power and International Relations,” in Walter Carlsnaes (ed.) Handbook of International Relations, Sage, pp. 177-182 only.

 Schmidt, “Realist conceptions of power,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 43-62.

 Ringmar, “Empowerment Among Nations: A Sociological Perspective,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 189-203.

 Greg Treverton and Seth Jones. (2005) “Measuring Power: How to Predict Future Balances,” Harvard International Review 27: 54-8.

4 Recommended:

 Berenskoetter, “Thinking about power,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 1-21

 Guzzini, “The concept of power: a constructivist analysis,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 34-40.

 Stephen Walt. (1998) “International Relations: One World, Many Theories,” Foreign Policy pp. 29-44.

PART I: Traditional Notions of Power

(September 19, 2012) Week 3: Military Power

 Nye, “Military Power,” in The Future of Power, pp. 25-49.

 Greico, “Structural realism and the problem of polarity and war,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 64-81.

 Jacqueline Newmyer. (2009) “Oil, Arms, and Influence: The Indirect Strategy Behind Chinese Military Modernization,” Orbis 53(2): 205-219.

 Paul Bracken. (2000) “The Second Nuclear Age,” Foreign Affairs 79(1): 146-156.

 Joseph Joffe. (2007) “Power Failure: Why Force Doesn’t Buy Order,” The American Interest.

Recommended:

 H.R. McMaster. (2008) “Learning from Contemporary Conflicts to Prepare for Future War,” Orbis, 52(4): 564-84.

 Robert Art, “The Fungibility of Force,” The Use of Force. (6th edition), edited by Robert Art and Kenneth Waltz, pp. 3-21.

 Jack S. Levy. (1998) “The Causes of War and the Conditions of Peace,” Annual Review of Political Science 1:139-65.

(September 26, 2012) Week 4: Economic Power & the Impact of Globalization

 Nye, “Economic Power,” The Future of Power, pp. 51-80.

5  Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye. (2000) “Globalization: What’s New? What’s Not? (And So What?),” Foreign Policy 118: 104-119.

 Wolf Hassdorf, “Contested credibility: the use of symbolic power in British exchange-rate politics,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 141-161.

 David Leonhardt. (2009) “The China Puzzle,” New York Times Magazine, pp. 53- 7.

 Rose Gottemoeller, “The Evolution of Sanctions in Practice and Theory,” Survival, 49(4): 99-110.

 “Sanctions: History Lessons,” The Economist, 19 October 2006.

 Van Ham, “Place Branding,” Social Power, pp. 136-158.

Recommended:

 Helen Milner. (1998) “International Political Economy: Beyond Hegemonic Stability,” Foreign Policy 110: 112-123.

PART II: “New” Notions of Power

(October 3, 2012) Week 5: Soft Power

 Nye, “Soft Power,” The Future of Power, pp. 81-109.

 Janice Bially Mattern, “Why ‘soft power’ isn’t so soft: representational force and attraction in world politics,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 98-119.

 Leslie Gelb. (May/June 2009) “Necessity, Choice, and Common Sense: A Policy for a Bewildering World,” Foreign Affairs.

 Nye, “The Future of soft power in US foreign policy,” in Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 4-11.

 Zahran and Ramos, “From hegemony to soft power: implications of a conceptual change,” in Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 12-29.

 Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink. (1998) “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” International Organization 52(4), excerpt: pp. 891-909.

Recommended:

6  Joseph Nye, “Notes for a soft-power research agenda,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 162-172.

 Steven Lukes, “Power and the battle for hearts and minds: on the bluntness of soft power,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 83-97.

(October 10, 2012) Week 6: Soft Power cont.

 Yanzhong Huang and Sheng Ding. (2006) “Dragon’s Underbelly: An Analysis of China’s Soft Power,” East Asia 23(4): 22-44.

 Suzuki, “The myth and reality of China’s ‘soft power’,” Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 199-211.

 Jacques Hymans, “India’s Soft Power and Vulnerability,” India Review, 8(3): 234-65. July-September 2009.

 Hill, “Cheques and balances: the European Union’s soft power strategy,” Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 182-196.

 Taverner, “The Military use of soft power – information campaigns,” Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 137-150.

 Scott-Smith, “Soft power in an era of US decline,” in Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 165-177.

Recommended:

 David Pilling, “China Needs More than a Five-Year Charm Offensive,” Financial times, November 9, 2011.

 Ian Manners. (2002) “Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?” Journal of Common Market Studies 40(2): 235-258.

(October 17, 2012) Week 7: Social Power – Guest Professor Phil Seib

 Peter van Ham, Social Power in International Politics, pp. 1-68.

 Lock, “Soft Power and Strategy,” in Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 32-48.

 Layne, “The unbearable lightness of soft power,” in Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 51-73.

7 Recommended:

 Jeremy Rifkin, “How the 99% Are Using Lateral Power to Create a Global Revolution,” November 8, 2011.

October 24 2012: No class, Professor has speaking engagements in Spain & France; Week 8 class will be rescheduled

(TBD) Week 8: Smart Power

 Nye, “Smart Power,” The Future of Power, pp. 207-234.

 Nye, The Powers to Lead, Oxford University Press, 2008. Chapters 1-4 (pp. 1- 108).

 Mai’a K. Davis Cross, “Europe: A Smart Power,” International Politics, Vol. 48 (6), pp. 691-706.

Recommended:

 Massimo Calabresi, “Hillary Clinton and the Rise of Smart Power, “Time Magazine, November 7, 2011.

 Suzanne Nossel. (2004) “Smart Power,” Foreign Affairs, pp. 131-141.

 Joseph Nye. (2009) “Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power,” Foreign Affairs.

 CSIS Commission on Smart Power, “A Smarter, More Secure America,” Center for Strategic & International Studies. Executive Summary, Forward, and Introduction.

 John J. Hamre, Joseph Nye, and Richard Armitage. (2007) “Smart Power,” The American Interest, pp. 34-41.

Part III: Specific Power Strategies

(October 31, 2012) Week 9: Information, Media, and Technology

8  Krige, “Technological leadership and American soft power,” in Parmar & Cox (eds), Soft Power and US Foreign Policy, pp. 121-134.

 Peter van Ham, “Media and Globalization,” Social Power in International Politics, pp. 91-113.

 Nye, “Diffusion and Cyberpower,” The Future of Power, pp. 113-151.

 Wesley Clark and Peter Levin. (Nov/Dec 2009) “Securing the Information Highway: How to Enhance the United States’ Electronic Defenses,” Foreign Affairs.

 Andrei Lankov. (Nov/Dec 2009) “Changing North Korea: An Information Campaign Can Beat the Regime,” Foreign Affairs.

 Ervand Abrahamian. (2003) “The US Media, Huntington, and September 11,” Third World Quarterly 24(3): 529-544.

Recommended:

 Steven Livingston. (1997) “Clarifying the CNN Effect: An Examination of Media Effects According to Types of Military Intervention,” The Joan Shorenstein Center, Harvard University, Research Paper R-18.

 May-Britt Stumbaum. (Oct 2009) “Risky business? The EU, China, and dual-use technology,” Occasional Paper 80, Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies.

 Ernest J. Wilson III. (2005) ““What Is Internet Governance and Where Does It Come From?” Journal of Public Policy, 25(1): 29-50.

 Jack Goldsmith and Tim Wu. (2006) Who Controls the Internet: illusions of a borderless world, New York: Oxford University Press.

(November 7, 2012) Week 10: Diplomacy & Public Diplomacy

 Juergen Kleiner. (2008) “The Inertia of Diplomacy,” Diplomacy & Statecraft 19(2): 321-349.

 Mai’a K. Davis Cross, (2011) “Building A European Diplomacy: Recruitment and Training to the EEAS,” European Foreign Affairs Review. Vol. 16 (4), pp. 447- 464.

 Peter van Ham, “Public Diplomacy,” in Social Power, pp. 114-135.

 Craig Hayden. (2007) “Arguing Public Diplomacy,” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 2: 229-254.

9  Eriko Ishikawa. (2008) “A New Dimension in Japanese Public Diplomacy,” The Tokyo Foundation.

 David Leheny. (2006) “A narrow place to cross swords: soft power and the politics of Japanese popular culture in East Asia,” in P.J. Katzenstein, Takashi Shiraishi (eds.) Beyond Japan: The Dynamics of East Asian Regionalism, Ithaca: Cornell University Press. pp. 211-233.

Recommended:  Rainer Schlageter. (2006) “German Public Diplomacy,” at the Present And Future of Public Diplomacy: A European Perspective. Madrid Conference on Public Diplomacy.

 “Public Diplomacy – The German View,” Speech by Dr Albert Spiegel, Head of the Federal Foreign Office Directorate-General for Cultural Relations and Education Policy, at the British Council Staff Conference on 18/19 March 2002.

 Pierre Pahlavi. (2007) “Evaluating Public Diplomacy Programmes,” The Hague Journal of Public Diplomacy 2: 255-281.  Anna Michalski. (2005) “The EU as a Soft Power: the Force of Persuasion,” in Jan Melissen ed., The New Public Diplomacy, Palgrave. pp. 124-142.  Michael Holtzman. (2007) “Fixing Public Diplomacy,” The American Interest, 42-46.

 Stephen Keukeleire. (2003) “The European Union as a diplomatic actor: internal, traditional, and structural diplomacy,” Diplomacy & Statecraft 14(3): 31-56.

 Paul Sharp. (1999) “For Diplomacy: Representation and the Study of International Relations,” International Studies Review 1(1): 33-57.

 David Spence. (2009) “Taking Stock: 50 Years of European Diplomacy,” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 4: 235-259.

 Adam Watson. (2004) “Diplomatic Need of New and Less Developed States,” Diplomacy: The Dialogue Between States. Rev. ed., London: Routledge. pp.158– 75.

 Chi-Kwan Mark. (2009) “Hostage Diplomacy: Britain, China, and the Politics of Negotiation 1967-9,” Diplomacy & Statecraft 20: 473-493.

 Eytan Gilboa (2008). “Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy,” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616(1): 55-77.

 Peter J. Katzenstein, “Open Regionalism: Cultural Diplomacy and Popular Culture in Europe and Asia,” Prepared for the 2002 American Political Science Association Annual Meeting.

10 (November 14, 2012) Week 11: The Power of Ideas

 Draft Papers Due

 In-class exercise

November 21, 2012: Thanksgiving

(November 28, 2012) Week 12: Non-State Actors

 Peter Haas. (1998) “Do Regimes Matter? Epistemic Communities and Mediterranean Pollution Control,” International Organization 43(3): 377-403.

 Mai’a K. Davis Cross, (2012) “Rethinking Epistemic Communities Twenty Years Later,” Review of International Studies, (blackboard)

 Keck and Sikkink, “Transnational advocacy networks in international politics,” (excerpt in Essential Readings in World Politics) pp. 253-262. (blackboard)

 Anne-Marie Slaughter (2004). Chapter 1, A New World Order, Princeton University Press, (excerpt in International Politics) pp. 554-563. (blackboard)

 Van Ham, “Institutions and Law,” Social Power, pp. 69-90.

Recommended for sub-state actors:

 Jonathan Shwartz. (2004) “Environmental NGOs in China: Roles and Limits,” Pacific Affairs 77(1): 28-49.

 Sebastian Mallaby. (2004) “Fighting Poverty, Hurting the Poor,” Foreign Policy 144: 50-58.  Johanna Siméant. (2005) “What is going global? The internationalization of French NGOs ‘without borders’,” Review of International Political Economy 12(5): 851-883.  Jan Melissen. (2008) “Diplomacy and the City: Local Governments in Contemporary Diplomatic Practice,” Paper presented at the International Studies Association’s Annual Convention, San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA.  Susan Milner. (2007) “Cultural Identities and the European City,” in The European Puzzle, in Marion Demossier (ed.), The European Puzzle, Berghahn. pp. 183-201.

Recommended for transnational actors:  Lipshutz, “On the transformational potential of global civil society,” in Power in World Politics, pp. 225-242

11  Miles Kahler (ed.) Networked Politics: Agency, Power, and Governance, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009.  Clair Gough and Simon Shackley, “The Respectable Politics of Climate Change: The Epistemic Communities and NGOs,” International Affairs, 2001, 77(2): 329- 345.

Recommended for international actors:

 Erik Voeten. (2005) “The Political Origins of the UN Security Council's Ability to Legitimize the Use of Force,” International Organization 59(3): 527-557.

 Barnett and Finnemore, Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. pp. 16-44. (chapter 2)

 Joseph Nye. (2001) “Globalization’s Democratic Deficit: How to Make International Institutions more Accountable,” Foreign Affairs 80(4).

 Richard Falk and Andrew Strauss. (2001) “Toward Global Parliament,” Foreign Affairs 80(1).  Zbigniew Brzezinski (2009). “An Agenda for NATO: Toward a Global Security Web,” Foreign Affairs 88(5).

(December 5, 2012) Week 13: Mock Professional Workshop

 Final Papers Due

 Student Presentations of Research