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. Lieber and Daryl G. Press, The Myth of the Nuclear Revolution: Power Politics in the Atomic Age (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2020), chapter 1 and 2; • Alexandre Debs and Nuno P. Monteiro, “The Strategic Logic of Nuclear Proliferation,” International Security, Vol. 39, No. 2 (2014), pp. 7-51; • Carol Cohn, “Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals,” Signs, Vol. 12, No. 4, (1987), pp. 687-718.
Module 08 – June 30, 2021 International Crises • Thomas Schelling, Arms and Influence (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966), chapters 1-3; • Robert Powell, “Nuclear Brinkmanship, Limited War, and Military Power,” International Organization, Vol. 69, No, 3 (2015), pp. 589-626; • Nina Tannenwald, “‘The Nuclear Taboo,’ The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non- Use,” International Organization, Vol. 53, No. 3 (1999), pp. 433-468;
Module 09 – July 05, 2021 The Rise of China • Thomas J. Christensen, “Fostering Stability or Creating a Monster? The Rise of China and U.S. Policy toward East Asia,” International Security, Vol. 31, No. 1 (2006): 81-126; • Jennifer Lind, “Life in China’s Asia: What Regional Hegemony Would Look Like,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 97, No. 2 (March/April 2018), pp. 71-82; • Stephen Biddle and Ivan Oelrich, “Future Warfare in the Western Pacific Chinese: Antiaccess/Area Denial, U.S. AirSea Battle, and Command of the Commons in East Asia,” International Security, Vol. 41, No. 1 (2016), pp. 7–48; • Michael Beckley, “The Emerging Military Balance in Asia: How China's Neighbors Can Check Chinese Naval Expansion, International Security, Vol. 42, No. 2 (2017), pp.78-119.
Module 10 – July 07, 2021 U.S. Grand Strategy and the Future of International Order • Barry Posen, “Command of the Commons,” International Security, Vol. 28, No. 1 (2003): 5-46. • John J. Mearsheimer, “Imperial by Design,” The National Interest, No. 111 (January/February 2011), pp. 16-34;
Monteiro | International Security| Summer 2021 5 • Nina Silove, “Beyond the Buzzword: The Three Meanings of ‘Grand Strategy,’” Security Studies, Vol. 27, No. 1 (2017), pp. 27-57; • G. John Ikenberry, “The End of Liberal International Order?” International Affairs, Vol. 94, No. 1 (2018), pp. 7-23; • Inderjeet Parmar, “The U.S.-led Liberal Order: Imperialism by Another Name?” International Affairs, Vol. 94, No. 1 (2018), pp. 151-172; • Charles L. Glaser, “A Flawed Framework: Why the Liberal International Order Concept is Misguided,” International Security, Vol. 43, No. 4 (Spring 2019), pp. 51-87.
Monteiro | International Security| Summer 2021 6