DOCSLIB.ORG

INTERNATIONAL SECURITY Global Affairs S275E / Political Science S188E Yale Summer Session 2021 Syllabus Version Date: March 10, 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY Global Affairs S275E / Political Science S188E Yale Summer Session 2021 Syllabus Version Date: March 10, 2021 Yale University Department of Political Science Jackson Institute for Global Affairs INTERNATIONAL SECURITY Global Affairs S275E / Political Science S188E Yale Summer Session 2021 Syllabus Version date: March 10, 2021 Professor Nuno P. Monteiro www.nunomonteiro.org [email protected] Class: Mondays and Wednesdays 10:00-11:30 EDT; Office Hours: Mondays and Wednesdays 11:30-12:30 EDT. COURSE OUTLINE AND OBJECTIVES This course introduces students to the main theories and issues in international security. The focus is both theoretical and analytical. The course aims at providing students with the fundamental tools necessary to understand basic problems in international security now and in the future. We will cover the basic approaches to the study of international security – realism, liberalism, and constructivism – and then explore key topics in international security including: the roots of competition and cooperation among states; the causes of war; the sources of military effectiveness; the effects of nuclear weapons on world politics; the dynamics of international crises; the rise of China; and U.S. grand strategy. Note to Global Affairs students: This course (GLBL S275E) can be taken in lieu of GLBL 275 during the academic year in fulfillment of the major’s requirements. COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND GRADING There are no pre-requisites for this course. The course will consist in a series of seminar sessions with pre- assigned readings and pre-recorded lectures. Students are expected to do all the readings and watch all asynchronous content prior to each session, as well as attend and participate in all sessions. The sessions will focus on critically discussing the assigned readings. Final grades will be assigned as follows: • Participation in discussions: 20%; • Five short (3-page) response papers: 5 x 16% = 80%. Note: In order to receive an overall passing grade, students must receive a passing grade in both components of the final grade. In other words, failing one component of the course will lead to a failing grade in the overall course. DESCRIPTION OF ASSIGNMENTS Participation: Students should do all the readings and watch all the prerecorded asynchronous lectures for each session in advance and come to the synchronous sessions prepared to contribute to class discussion by bringing questions that stem from the readings. As should be obvious, participation does not mean just attendance. Please be an active participant in the synchronous discussions. Response Papers: Each student will post a 3-page reaction to the readings for five different sessions, one per week. Papers should be written on letter-sized paper, using Times New Roman or equivalent font, size 12, double-spaced, with one-inch margins all around. Your response papers should be posted on the Canvas website or emailed to me by 8:00pm the day before the class meeting in which we will discuss these readings. Short papers received after these deadlines but before the relevant meeting begins will be dropped one full letter grade. Short papers will not be accepted after the relevant meeting starts. Each of the short papers will be worth 16% of the final course grade. These short statements should include an analysis of the weaknesses of arguments and evidence presented by the authors. (You should not summarize the readings; assume that everybody else has done the reading as well and understands the basic arguments.) You do not have to discuss all of the readings assigned for the session; you may discuss just one or two pieces, or you can pick a broader range and compare them to each other (or to readings for earlier sessions). Likewise, within each reading you select to engage, you do not have to discuss the whole piece. You may do so, but you may equally well focus on a section, a paragraph, or even a sentence that piqued your interest. You are welcome to choose any five sessions in which to write your reaction papers, provided you do one per week throughout the duration of the course. COURSE POLICIES Policy on Plagiarism: Please note the following: • You need to cite all sources used for papers, including drafts of papers, and repeat the reference each time you use the source in your written work; • You need to place quotation marks around any cited or cut-and-pasted materials, IN ADDITION TO footnoting or otherwise marking the source; • If you do not quote directly – that is, if you paraphrase – you still need to mark your source each time you use borrowed material; otherwise you have plagiarized; • It is also advisable that you list all sources consulted for the draft or paper in the closing materials, such as a bibliography or roster of sources consulted; • You may not submit the same paper, or substantially the same paper, in more than one course; • If topics for two courses coincide, you need written permission from both instructors before either combining work on two papers or revising an earlier paper for submission to a new course. It is the policy of Yale College that all cases of academic dishonesty be reported to the chair of the Executive Committee. Please make sure to consult the relevant section of the Yale College regulations available here. Policy on Electronic Devices: Please keep other applications other than Zoom off during the synchronous sessions. Monteiro | International Security| Summer 2021 2 READINGS The selected texts were chosen to represent the major theoretical positions and empirical findings on the mains problems and issues in international security. They provide a wide range of views and differ in both the evidence they provide and their persuasiveness. As a whole, the selection is designed to encourage critical evaluation of existing academic literature. In order to best achieve this goal, keep in mind the following questions when doing the readings: What is the argument the author is trying to make? Why does it matter? What are its strengths and weaknesses? How convincing is it? What are possible counter-arguments? Above all, how does the argument advance our understanding of international politics? All readings are available in PDF format on the course website on the Canvas server, under the “Files” tab in folders created for each session. Below, the readings for each session are listed in the order you should do them. COURSE SCHEDULE Module 01 – June 07, 2021 Traditions of Thought in International Security: Realism and Its Critics • Hans J. Morgenthau, “Six Principles of Political Realism,” in Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 5th Ed., Revised, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1978), pp. 4-15; • John Mearsheimer, “Structural Realism,” in International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki, and Steve Smith, editors (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006): 71-88; • Helen Milner, “The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory: A Critique,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 17, No. 1 (1991), pp. 67-85; • Stacie E. Goddard, “When Right Makes Might: How Prussia Overturned the European Balance of Power,” International Security, Vol. 33, No. 3 (2008/09), pp. 110-142. Module 02 – June 09, 2021 Traditions of Thought in International Security: Liberalism and Its Critics • Andrew Moravcsik, “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,” International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 4 (1997), pp. 513-553; • John Oneal and Bruce Russett, “The Kantian Peace: The Pacific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885-1992,” World Politics, Vol. 52, No. 1 (1999), pp. 1-37; • Valerie M. Hudson, Mary Caprioli, Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill, Rose McDermott, and Chad F. Emmett, “The Heart of the Matter: The Security of Women and the Security of States,” International Security, Vol. 33, No. 3 (2008/09), pp. 7-45; • Beate Jahn, “Liberal Internationalism: Historical Trajectory and Current Prospects,” International Affairs, Vol. 94, No. 1 (2018), pp. 43-61; • Ian Hurd, “The Case Against International Cooperation,” International Theory, First View, pp. 1-22. Monteiro | International Security| Summer 2021 3 Module 03 – June 14, 2021 The Causes of Competition and Cooperation • Charles L. Glaser, “The Security Dilemma Revisited,” World Politics, Vol. 50, No. 1 (1997), pp. 171- 201; • David A. Lake, “Escape from the State of Nature: Authority and Hierarchy in World Politics.” International Security, Vol. 32, No. 1 (2007), pp. 47-79; • Jennifer Mitzen, “Ontological Security in World Politics: State Identity and the Security Dilemma,” European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 12, No. 3 (2006), pp. 341-370. Module 04 – June 16, 2021 The Logic of Political Violence • Carl von Clausewitz, On War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984) edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret, introductory essays by Paret, Howard, and Brodie, two notes by the author, Book I chapters 1-8, Book VIII; Module 05 – June 21, 2021 The Causes of War • James D. Fearon, “Rationalist explanations for war,” International Organization, Vol. 49, No. 3 (1995), pp. 379-414; • Erik Gartzke, “War is in the Error Term,” International Organization, Vol. 53, No. 3 (1999), pp. 567- 587; • Alexandre Debs and Nuno P. Monteiro, “Known Unknowns: Power Shifts, Uncertainty, and War,” International Organization, Vol. 68, No. 1 (2014), pp. 1-31; • Ahsan I. Butt, “Why Did the United States Invade Iraq in 2003?” Security Studies, Vol. 28, No. 2 (2019), pp. 250-285; • Tanisha M. Fazal, “Dead Wrong? Battle Deaths, Military Medicine, and Exaggerated Reports of War’s Demise,” International Security, Vol. 39, No. 1 (2014), pp. 95-125. Module 06 – June 23, 2021 Military Effectiveness • Stephen Biddle, Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern Battle (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006), chapters 1, 3-4 and choose one of 5-9; • Caitlin Talmadge, The Dictator’s Army: Battlefield Effectiveness in Authoritarian Regimes (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2015), Introduction & chapter 1. Monteiro | International Security| Summer 2021 4 Module 07 – June 28, 2021 Nuclear Weapons • Robert Jervis, The Meaning of the Nuclear: Statecraft and the Prospect of Armageddon (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989), chapter 1; • Keir A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village, Daniel H
    Reviews Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village, Daniel H. Deudney (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2006), 384 pp., $35 cloth, $24.95 paper. With Bounding Power, Daniel Deudney Long in gestation, Bounding Power is a makes a masterly contribution to the ren- vigorously argued and sophisticated book, aissance of classical political theory in which contains a number of important contemporary thought about world poli- strands of discussion that combine to tics; in this regard he follows Michael make the case for what Deudney labels ‘‘re- Doyle and others in demonstrating how a publican security theory.’’ One important fresh reading of the historical traditions strand of the book is its reconstruction of that lie behind contemporary theoretical the concepts of anarchy (an absence of formulations can generate new per- authoritative order) and hierarchy (order spectives on both theory and practice. In established through subordination), and the case of Doyle’s work, a key theme has their reorientation around Deudney’s new been exploring the intellectual roots of formulation, ‘‘negarchy,’’ characterized by liberalism in international relations and the presence of mutual restraints with a thecontoursofliberalpeacetheory—the primary role in generating ordered rela- idea that liberal democracies are not tionships. Two of the heroes of Deudney’s disposed to go to war against each other. intellectual reconstruction are Hobbes and For Deudney, meanwhile, the central Locke. Hobbes develops his argument for subject is republicanism, and in particular sovereign power as a means by which to the idea that the republican tradition depart from anarchy, whereas Locke ar- of thought about security—with its re- gues for the need to enhance freedom cognition of the interplay of changing without jeopardizing law and order.
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of US Hegemony
    The Decline of U.S. Hegemony: Regaining International Consent A Senior Honors Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for graduation with research distinction in Politic al Science in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University by Kevin Slaten The Ohio State University March 2008 Project Advisors: Alexander Thompson, Department of Political Science Jennifer Mitzen, Department of Political Science 1 The Decline of U.S. Hegemony: Regaining International Consent1 Kevin Slaten2 The Ohio State University, USA This study uses United Nations General Assembly voting data between 1992 and 2005 as well as public opinion surveys from many countries to examine American authority and hegemony in international relations. The data is also used to compare the strength of that authority between the administrations of William Clinton and George W. Bush. In comparing the two time periods, it appears that the U.S. had significant authority over NATO countries in comparison to non­NATO countries during the Clinton years, and that authority declined significantly during the Bush presidency. After establishing these conclusions, potential outcomes of an international system characterized by declining authority are overviewed. Finally, based upon the findings, three options for future American policy are elaborated. Since September 11, the American administration has chosen to confront contemporary threats to national and global security – terrorism, rogue regimes, drug trafficking, and WMDs – with a Bush Doctrine that leaves little room for negotiation. Moreover, in March of 2003, the U.S., without United Nations approval, invaded and proceeded to occupy Iraq. In June of 2006, America’s closest ally, Great Britain, had a public that only held a 56% favorable opinion of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Realist and Liberal Positions on the Role of International Organizations in Maintaining World Order
    European Scientific Journal June 2016 edition vol.12, No.17 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431 The Realist and Liberal Positions on the Role of International Organizations in Maintaining World Order Dr. Ersan Ozkan Hatay Police Department, Hatay/TURKEY Doc. Dr. Hakan Cem Cetin Bilecik Police Department, Bilecik/TURKEY doi: 10.19044/esj.2016.v12n17p85 URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n17p85 Abstract In the international relations (IR)’ theoretical and empirical studies, international regime studies emerged as a reaction to inadequacies of the concepts of authority, international order and organization. Over more than half a century, realism has been skeptical of international law. In both classical and neorealist approaches, states are depicted as seeking to maximize power and producing a balance of power. This study examines two paradigms, realism and liberalism, in an attempt to take a closer look at what each of these schools has to offer to the international relations. To be able to carry out such an evaluation each of these paradigms will be analyzed with respect to their positions on the following principles: unit of analysis, key concepts, behavioral dynamics, interstate system, peace and war, and last but not least explanatory power. Discussing the strengths and weaknesses of each of these paradigms will help in determining which of these approaches is the most persuasive. Keywords: Realism, neo-realism, liberalism, international regimes, international organizations, global governance Introduction In International Relations (IR)’ theoretical and empirical studies, international regime studies emerged as a reaction to inadequacies of the concepts of authority, international order and organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Routledge Handbook of Security Studies Liberalism
    This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 01 Oct 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK Routledge Handbook of Security Studies Myriam Dunn Cavelty, Thierry Balzacq Liberalism: a Theoretical and Empirical Assessment Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315753393.ch2 Thomas C. Walker, David L. Rousseau Published online on: 13 Jul 2016 How to cite :- Thomas C. Walker, David L. Rousseau. 13 Jul 2016, Liberalism: a Theoretical and Empirical Assessment from: Routledge Handbook of Security Studies Routledge Accessed on: 01 Oct 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315753393.ch2 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. 2 LIBERALISM: A THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL ASSESSMENT Thomas C. Walker and David L. Rousseau In the study of politics, liberalism ‘has been employed in a dizzying variety of ways’ and carries multiple meanings (Bell 2014: 682).
    [Show full text]
  • Rousseau, David L., Thomas C. Walker. 2012. "Liberalism."
    2 Liberalism David L. Rousseau and Thomas C. Walker Liberalism is an expansive concept that carries a variety of meanings for students of pol- itics. For Doyle (1997: 206), ‘liberalism resembles a family portrait of principles and institutions, recognizable by certain characteristics – for example, individual freedom, political participation, private property, and equality of opportunity’. In the realm of International Relations (IR), students look to liberalism to explain how human reason, progress, individual rights and freedoms can give rise to more peaceful interstate relations. Liberals predict that stable democracies and economically interdependent states will behave differently in several respects. First and most importantly, democratic states are less likely to initiate and escalate conflicts with other states (also known as the ‘demo- cratic peace theory’). Second, democratic states are more likely to engage in international trade and investment, and the resultant interdependence will contribute to peace. Third, democratic states are more likely to seek cooperative solutions through international institutions. While there are significant differences between individual liberal thinkers, all have a general faith in the pacifying effects of political liberty, economic freedom, interdependence and international association. Before proceeding, it is important to dispel one persistent myth that has clouded understandings of liberalism: the association between early forms of liberal inter- nationalism and normative-laden versions of idealism. For example, Howard (1978: 11) defined ‘liberals’ as ‘all those thinkers who believe the world to be profoundly other than it should be, and who have faith in the power of human reason and human action so to change it’. But liberal theory provides much more than imagining a world as it should be.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Critical Security in the 21 Century: the Resonating Voices of Thucydides James Rochlin
    Critical Security in the 21 st Century: The Resonating Voices of Thucydides James Rochlin * Abstract: What makes Thucydides’ work so incredibly alive and relevant for global politics today is the analytic of how the story is told. Three points stand out in this regard. First, the The Peloponnesian War features a momentous epistemological jump. One facet of this, among so many, is that divinity is swept aside and humans become the masters of their own destiny. Next, despite its recent reputation for being a classic text of Realism, Thucydides’ work is not subject to the stultifying shackles of ideological boundaries. It is vastly eclectic and non-doctrinaire. Finally, the unraveling of the 27-year epic war is told through a multitude of competing voices that evokes the reader to interpret the text’s ultimate meaning. It is this element that injects so much life into the text, since rather than being subjected to the dictation of ‘truth’ through an author’s monologue, the reader must assume the role of judge and truth producer. These themes of epistemic rupture, human agency, eclecticism and situated truth are vital in relation to analyzing the current juncture in world politics, especially regarding the opportunities and perils of navigating through a sweeping transformation of the global constellation of power. Keywords : Thucydides, critical theory * Professor at University of British Columbia ALTERNATIVES TURKISH JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL REALTIONS www.alternativesjournal.net 1 Introduction I began re-reading the classic strategic literature and embarking on some new reads in the late 1980s and early 1990s, after being inspired by the writings of Robert Cox and RBJ Walker.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe As International Actor: Maximizing Nation-State Sovereignty by Laurent Goetschel* Fellow for European Studies Swiss Peace Foundation P.O
    Program for the Study of Ge7ll'l£11ly and Europe Working Paper Series #6.3 Europe as International Actor: Maximizing Nation-State Sovereignty by Laurent Goetschel* Fellow for European Studies Swiss Peace Foundation P.O. Box CH . 3000 Berne 13 spfgoetsche [email protected] Tel 41 31 311 55 82 Fax 41 31 311 5583 Abstract The continually increasing literature on foreign- and security-policy dimensions of the European Union (EU) has provided no remedy for the widespread helplessness in gaining a purchase on Europe as an international actor. The basic hindrance to understanding this policy comes from an all-too-literal interpretation of the acronym involved: the CFSP is understood as a total or partial replacement of the nation-states' foreign and security policy. This article aims to point the way to a new understanding of the CFSP in which this policy is not based on the integration of nation­ state foreign and security policy. I suggest that the proper way to grasp the phenomenon of the CFSP is to describe it as an international regime whose goal is to administer links between economic integration and foreign- and security­ policy cooperation in the sense of maximizing the sovereignty of member states. This requires, on the one hand, the prevention of "spillovers" from the economic area that could interfere with the foreign- and security-policy indepen­ dence of member states. On the other hand, it demands applying the EU's economic potential to reinforce the foreign- and security-policy range of member states. Due to the logic of this policy, CFSP priorities and fields of ac­ tion differ profoundly from those of a national foreign and security policy.
    [Show full text]
  • SS395: Advanced International Relations Theory (International Security Studies) USMA Department of Social Sciences
    SS395 Syllabus SS395: Advanced International Relations Theory (International Security Studies) USMA Department of Social Sciences Course Overview: In Introduction to International Relations (SS307/357), you explored the drivers of group behavior (or why people, organizations, and states “do what they do”) and the causes of conflict and cooperation in the international system. As a survey of the field, the introductory course exposed you to concepts, traditions, and theories from across the study of international relations or world politics.1 In SS395, we will closely examine one critical force that drives world politics—international security. The purpose of this course is to provide you a solid foundation in the field of international security studies, including a grasp of key concepts and case studies relevant to the field today and throughout history. In Block 1 (Foundational Concepts in International Security), we will explore how the field of international relations connects to the sub-field of international security studies. We will examine central concepts in the field of international security studies. We will focus on two key questions that we will address throughout the course: how do we define security and conflict? How do actors in the international system use force as a tool to achieve goals and influence others? In Block 2 (Theories of Conflict), we will explore one central question that will be central for your research paper: What causes conflict, and what prevents it? We will use Greg Cashman’s literature review on theories of conflict, entitled What Causes War? in order to apply theory to this central empirical question and cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Security Seeking Under Anarchy 129
    Security Seeking under Jeffrey W. Taliaferro Anarchy Defensive Realism Revisited Does the international system provide incentives for expansion? If so, should the United States seek to guarantee its long-term security through a grand strategy of preponderance (or primacy) and pursue opportunities to weaken potential great power com- petitors, such as China? Alternatively, does the international system provide more disincentives than incentives for aggression? If this is the case, should the United States seek to guarantee its long-term security through a grand strategy of selective engagement? Two strands of contemporary realism provide differ- 1 entSecurity Seeking under answers Anarchy to these questions. Offensive realism holds that anarchy—the absence of a worldwide govern- ment or universal sovereign—provides strong incentives for expansion.2 All states strive to maximize their power relative to other states because only the most powerful states can guarantee their survival. They pursue expansionist policies when and where the beneªts of doing so outweigh the costs. States un- der anarchy face the ever-present threat that other states will use force to harm or conquer them. This compels states to improve their relative power positions Jeffrey W. Taliaferro is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Tufts University. I wish to thank Dale Copeland, Bernard Finel, Benjamin Frankel, Benjamin Miller, Jennifer Ster- ling-Folker, and the anonymous reviewers for International Security for comments on various drafts. I am responsible for any remaining errors or omissions. Earlier versions of this article were presented at the 1999 annual meetings of the International Studies Association and the American Political Science Association.
    [Show full text]
  • The Globalization of Insecurity: How the International Economic Order Undermines Human and National Security on a World Scale
    HAOL, Núm. 5 (Otoño, 2004), 113-126 ISSN 1696-2060 THE GLOBALIZATION OF INSECURITY: HOW THE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORDER UNDERMINES HUMAN AND NATIONAL SECURITY ON A WORLD SCALE Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed Institute for Policy Research & Development, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected] Recibido: 15 Julio 2004 / Revisado: 13 Agosto 2004 / Aceptado: 15 Septiembre 2004 / Publicado: 15 Octubre 2004 Resumen: National and human security has throughout the world, largely in the South. The been fundamentally undermined by policies impact of globalization has also significantly promoted by the key institutions of exacerbated the emergence of conflicts largely globalization. Adopting a state-centred in the South, which directly undermines national conceptualization of security demonstrates how and individual security. globalization at once weakens and fragments the state, while militarizing both the state and sub- In the first chapter, I begin by outlining a state actors, contributing systematically to the theoretical framework for examining the impact emergence of intra- and inter-state conflicts. A of globalization on security at multiple of levels human-centred framework, however, focusing of analysis. I discuss two distinct but on the impact of globalization on individuals overlapping conceptualizations of security: and communities, shows that this process is firstly, economic security as a function of further linked to the generation of structural human security (at the level of individuals); and violence across national boundaries. Both these secondly, economic security as a function of national -and human- level processes are national security (at the level of the state). mutually interdependent and impact on one Thirdly, I put forward a description of another reciprocally.
    [Show full text]
  • Resistance to Hegemony Within the Core: Domestic Politics, Terrorism, and Policy Divergence Within the G7
    Resistance to Hegemony within the Core: Domestic Politics, Terrorism, and Policy Divergence within the G7 Thomas J. Volgy, Kristin Kanthak, Derrick Frazier, and Robert Stewart Ingersoll 2005-7 About the Matthew B. Ridgway Center The Matthew B. Ridgway Center for International Security Studies at the University of Pittsburgh is dedicated to producing original and impartial analysis that informs policymakers who must confront diverse challenges to international and human security. Center programs address a range of security concerns—from the spread of terrorism and technologies of mass destruction to genocide, failed states, and the abuse of human rights in repressive regimes. The Ridgway Center is affiliated with the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs (GSPIA) and the University Center for International Studies (UCIS), both at the University of Pittsburgh. This working paper is one of several outcomes of the Ridgway Working Group on Challenges to U.S. Foreign and Military Policy chaired by Davis B. Bobrow. Resistance to Hegemony within the Core: Domestic Politics, Terrorism, and Policy Divergence within the G7 Thomas J. Volgy, Kristin Kanthak, Derrick Frazier, and Robert Stewart Ingersoll Our approach to the topic of resistance to American hegemony differs in some fundamental ways from most of the contributions to this project. First, we place resistance to hegemonic power in a context focused on changes in hegemonic strength; we believe that the nature, location, and salience of such resistance should vary with the strength of the hegemon. As we note below, declining hegemonic structural strength affects both hegemonic strategies of maintaining world order, and the importance of resistance among critical allies and the institutions within which they work to maintain the status quo.
    [Show full text]
  • International Security - Bertel Heurlin and Kristensen
    INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS – Vol.II – International Security - Bertel Heurlin and Kristensen INTERNATIONAL SECURITY Bertel Heurlin and Kristensen Danish Institute of International Affairs, Copenhagen, Denmark Keywords: war and peace, international relations history, national and international security, the state, nuclear weapons, international history, regional security, the concept of security, theoretical history, international organisations. Contents 1. Introduction 2. International security: past and present 2.1. New forms of international security 2.2. The concept of security 2.2.1. Security after the cold war 2.2.2. Six levels of security actors 2.2.3. The individual as victim: threats to physical and economic survival 2.2.4. Society as the victim: threats to identity 2.2.5. The state as victim: threats to sovereignty 2.2.6. The region as victim: threats to stability and coherence 2.2.7. The international society as the victim: threats to permanence of the society of nations 2.2.8. The globe as victim: threats to sustainability 2.3. Security strategies in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries 2.3.1. War 2.3.2. Balance of power security 2.3.3. Concert security 2.3.4. Collective security 2.3.5. The United Nations 2.3.6. Community security 2.3.7. NATO 2.4. The cold war: the Third World War 2.4.1. Nuclear weapons 2.4.2. Common security 2.4.3. Comprehensive security 2.4.4. TheUNESCO risk society – EOLSS 2.4.5. The regulation society 2.5. The new worldSAMPLE order CHAPTERS 2.5.1. New wars and international security 2.5.2.
    [Show full text]