DOCSLIB.ORG

Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010 Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010 UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO POL 459/2216 The Military Instrument of Foreign Policy Prof. A. Braun Trinity College Munk Centre (416) 946-8952 Rm. 309N This combined undergraduate-graduate course analyses the relationship of military force to politics. Nuclear war and deterrence, conventional war, revolutionary war and counter- insurgency are examined from the perspectives of the US, Russia and other contemporary military powers. Foreign policy provides the context within which one should examine the existence of and the utility of the military instrument of foreign policy. And, as Harry Brandon has said, foreign policy begins at home. Therefore, the introductory part of the course deals with the theory and politics of civil-military relations and examines the military establishments of the major powers with special emphasis on those of the USA and Russia/CIS. This section will also explore the problems of measuring equivalence. The second part investigates the various theories of conflict, the problems of nuclear war and deterrence, the diverse forms of conventional war, and the efficacy of war termination strategies. The final section contains case studies of some of these problems. The aim of this course is to help acquaint students of international relations with the vital importance of the military instrument in the formulation and implementation of foreign policy and in the functioning of the international system. It is also hoped that thus they will be able to employ additional tools of analysis in the study of international relations. Format and requirements: The course will employ a seminar format. After an introductory lecture the course will be turned into a seminar in which students present brief (15 to 20 minutes) weekly reports followed by discussion. Each student is responsible for two of these oral presentations during the course. In addition, students will write two papers of four thousand to five thousand words each. (Graduate students: one research paper of nine to twelve thousand words). The two papers will be worth 30% each and class presentations and participation will contribute the final 40%. Prerequisite: POL 208Y, or permission of instructor. Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010 Essay Due Dates: First essay: November 23, 2009 Second essay: March 8, 2010 Late Penalty: 2% per day (includes weekends) Agenda (with some of the key readings) 1) Civil - Military Relations *Michael P. Noonan, “Mind the Gap: Post-Iraq Civil-Military Relations in America”, Foreign Policy Research Institute, FPRI article, 1/2008. *Michael Desch, “Civil-Militarism: The Civilian Origin of the New American Militarism”, Orbis, Vol. 50, No. 3, Summer 2006. * Robert Hislope, “Crime and Honor in a Weak State: Paramilitary Forces and Violence in Macedonia”, Problems of Post-Communism, May-June 2004, pp. 18-27. * Amanda J. Dory, “American Civil Security: The U.S. Public and Homeland Security”, The Washington Quarterly, Winter 2004. * Jack Snyder, “Civil-Military Relations and the Cult of the Offensive, 1914 and 1984”, from Military Strategy and the Origins of the First World War, edited by Steven E. Miller, Sean M. Lynn-Jones, and Stephen Van Evera, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991, pp. 20-58. Sam C. Sarkesian, “The Price Paid by the Military”, Orbis, Vol. 45, No. 4, Fall 2001, pp. 557- 568. Kurt Dassel, “Civilians, Soldiers and Strife: Domestic Sources of International Aggression”, International Security, Vol. 23, No. 1 Summer 1998 pp. 107-140. Joseph J. Collins and Ole R. Holsti, “Correspondence: Civil-Military Relations: How wide is the Gap?” International Security, Fall 1999, pp. 199-207. Ole R. Holsti, “A widening Gap between the US Military and Civilian Society? Some Evidence, 1976-96” International Security, Winter 1998/9, pp. 5-42. J. Michael Brower, “Civil-Military Conflict at the Pentagon? Let’s Hope so”, Military Review, November-December 1999, pp. 72-3. Constantine P. Danopoulos and Daniel G. Zirker, eds. Civil Military Relations in the Soviet and 3 Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010 Yugoslav Successor States, Westview, 1996. Don M. Snider and Miranda A. Carlton Carew eds., U.S: Civil Military Relations: In Crisis or Transition? Washington CSIS Books 1995. Eliot A. Cohen, "A Revolution in Warfare", Foreign Affairs, March/April 1996, pp. 37-55. S. Andreski, Military Organization and Society, London, Routledge & Kaegan Paul 1968. Myron Rush, "Guns Over Growth in Soviet Policy" International Security, Vol. VII, No. 3 (Winter 1982/83) pp. 167- 179. Dimitri, K. Simes, "The Military and Militarism in Soviet Society" International Security, VI, No. 3 (Winter 1981/82) pp. 112 - 143. R. A. Preston & S.F. Wise, Men in Arms, New York, Holt Rinehart & Winston 1979. Roman Kolkowicz & Andrzej Korbonski, eds., Soldiers, Peasants & Bureaucrats, London, Allen & Unwin 1982. Robert F. Ober Jr., "Power and Position in the Kremlin" Orbis Vol. 26, No. 4, Winter 1983, pp. 849 - 869. Waltz, Man, the State and War, New York, Columbia University Press 1959. Morris Janowitz, The Professional Soldier, Glencoe, Ill, Free Press 1960. , "Armed forces and Society: A world perspective", in J. Van Doern ed., Armed Forces and Society: Sociological Essays, The Hague, Mauton, pp. 15 - 38. , Military Institutions and Coersion in the Developing Nations, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1977. , & Steven D. Westbrook eds., The Political Education of Soldiers, Beverly Hills Calif.) Sage Publications 1983. * S. P. Huntington, The Soldier and the State, New York, Wiley 1957. Timothy J. Colton, Comissars, Commanders and Civilian Authority, Cambridge, Harvard, U.P. 1979. Kenneth E. Boulding, "The University, Society and Arms Control", The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. VII, No. 3, 1962, pp. 458-63. 4 Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010 A. Perlmutter, The Military and Politics in Modern Times: On Professions, Practorians and Revolutionary Soldiers, New Haven. * S. E. Finer, The Man on Horseback: The role of the military in politics, New York, Praeger 1962. A. Yarmolinsky, The Military Establishment: Its Impacts on American Society, New York, Harper & Row 1970. 2) Force and Politics * Christopher Layne, “The Waning of U.S. Hegemony – Myth or Reality”, International Security, Summer 2009, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 147-172. * Rashed Uz Zaman, “Strategic Culture: A ‘Cultural’ Understanding of War”, Comparative Strategy, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2009, pp. 68-88. * Christopher Hemmer, “Grand Strategy for the Next Administration”, Orbis, Vo. 52, No. 3, Summer 2007. *Patrick J. McDonald, “Revitalizing Grand Strategy: America’s Untapped Market Power”, The Washington Quarterly, Summer 2007. *Franco Algieri, “A Weakened EU’s Prospects for Global Leadership”, The Washington Quarterly, Winter 2007. * James F. Hoge Jr., “A Global Shift in the Making “, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2004. * C. Dale Walton, “The Strategist in Context: Culture, the Development of Strategic Thought and the Pursuit of Timeless Truth”, Comparative Strategy, Jan./Feb./March 2004. * Lawrence Freedman, “War”, Foreign Policy, July/August 2003, pp. 16-26. Athanassios H. Platias and Constantinos Koliopoulos, “Grand Strategies Clashing”, Comparative Strategy, Oct./Dec. 2002, pp. 365-376. * Glenn H. Snyder, “Mearsheimer’s World-Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security” A Review Essay, International Security, Summer 2002, pp. 149-173. Tiejun Zhang, “Chinese Strategic Culture: Tradition and Present Features”, Comparative 5 Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010 Strategy, April-June 2002, pp. 73-90. Jeffrey Landis, “The Moral Imperative of Force: The Evaluation of German Strategic Culture in Kosovo”, Comparative Strategy, Vol. 21, No. 1, January-March 2002, pp. 21-46. Richard B. Foster, “Strategy and the American Regime”, Comparative Strategy, Vol. 19, No. 4, October-December 2000, pp. 287-300. Charlie Lyon, “Operation Allied Force: A Lesson on Strategy, Risk, and Tactical Execution”, Comparative Strategy, Vol. 20, No. 1, January-March 2001, pp. 57-76. Aurel Braun, “All Quiet on the Russian Front? Russia, Its Neighbours and the Russian Diaspora” in Michael Mandelbaum ed., The New European Diasporas, New York, Council on Foreign Relations, 2000, pp. 81-159. Andrew Moravcsik, “Taking Preferences Seriously: Liberalism and International Relations Theory” International Organization (Autumn 1997), http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/INOR/Moravcsik.pdf Richard K. Betts, “Is Strategy an Illusion?” International Security, Vo. 25, No. 2, Fall 2000, pp. 5-50. David V. Nowlin and Ronald J. Stupak, War as an Instrument of Policy, Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1998. Daniel Byman and Mathew C. Waxman, “Kosovo and the Great Air Power Debate”, International Security, Spring 2000,, pp.3-38. Eugene Gholz, Daryl G. Press and Harvey M. Sapolsky, “Come Home, America: The Strategy of Restraint in the Face of Temptation”, International Security Vol. 21, No. 4, Spring 1997 pp. 5-48. M. Wallace "The Role of Arms Races in the Escalation of Disputes" Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 23, 1979, pp. 3-16. * Carl von Clausewitz, On War, edited and translated by Peter Paret, Michael Howard, and Bernard Brodie (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976), Ch. 1 (pp. 75-89). * Raymond Aron, Clausewitz: Philosopher of War, Boston (Mass.) Routledge & Kegan Paul 1983. * Christopher Layne, "Kant or Cant", International Security, Fall 1994, pp. 5-49. 6 Pol 459/2216 – 2009/2010 John M. Owen, "How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace", International Security, Fall, 1994, pp. 87-125. Colin S. Gray, The Soviet - American Arms Race, Bradsfield (U.T.) Cower Publishing Co. 1982. Alvin H. Bernstein "The Arms Race in Historical Perspective" Orbis, Vol. 27, No. 3, Fall 1983, pp. 761- 69. A.F.K. Organski, World Politics, 2nd ed., Ch. 13. Bernard Brodie, "On the Objectives of Arms Control" International Security, Vol. 2, No. Summer 1976, pp. 17 - 36. John J. Kohout, et al, "Alternative Grand Strategy Options for the United States", Comparative Strategy, Vol. 14, No. 4, 1995 pp. 361-421. Robert Art, "To What Ends Military Power", International Security, Spring 1980, pp. 14- 35. Klaus Knorr, "On the International Uses of Military Force in the Contemporary World", Orbis, Vol. 21, Spring 1977, pp. 5 - 27. H.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Relationship Between Democratisation and the Invigoration of Civil Society in Hungary, Poland and Romania
    The Relationship between Democratisation and the Invigoration of Civil Society in Hungary, Poland and Romania Mehmet Umut Korkut Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of DPhil Central European University, Department of Political Science May 2003 Supervisor: PhD Committee: András Bozóki, CEU Aurel Braun, University of Toronto Reinald Döbel, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster Zsolt Enyedi, CEU Anneci÷ime ve BabacÕ÷Õma, Beni ben yapan de÷erleri, Beni özel kÕlan sevgiyi, Beni baúarÕOÕ eden deste÷i verdikleri için . 1 Abstract: This is an explanation on how and why the invigoration of civil society is slow in Hungary, Poland and Romania during their democratic consolidation period. To that end, I will examine civil society invigoration by assessing the effect of interest organisations on policy-making at the governmental level, and the internal democracy of civil society organisations. The key claim is that despite previously diverging communist structures in Hungary, Poland and Romania, there is a convergence among these three countries in the aftermath of their transition to democracy as related to the invigoration of civil society. This claim rests on two empirical observations and one theoretical argument: (1) elitism is widely embedded in political and civil spheres; (2) patron-client forms of relationship between the state and the civil society organisations weaken the institutionalisation of policy-making. As a result, there is a gap between the general and specific aspects of institutionalisation of democracy at the levels of both the political system and civil society. The theoretical argument is that the country-specific historical legacies from the communist period have only a secondary impact on the invigoration of civil society in the period of democratic consolidation.
    [Show full text]
  • Studia Politica 42015
    www.ssoar.info The politics of international relations: building bridges and the quest for relevance Braun, Aurel Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Braun, A. (2015). The politics of international relations: building bridges and the quest for relevance. Studia Politica: Romanian Political Science Review, 15(4), 557-566. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-51674-8 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC-ND Lizenz This document is made available under a CC BY-NC-ND Licence (Namensnennung-Nicht-kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung) zur (Attribution-Non Comercial-NoDerivatives). For more Information Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de The Politics of International Relations Building Bridges and the Quest for Relevance 1 AUREL BRAUN The 21 st Century sadly is proving to be a volatile and violent one where the hopes of the immediate years of the post-Cold War era have proven to be ephemeral. International Relations, (IR) at first blush, appears to be ideally positioned as a discipline to help us understand or even cope with the extreme dissonance of the international system. A discreet academic field for a century now, but in fact one of the oldest approaches, IR seems to brim with promise to offer explanation, identify causality and enable cogent prediction. After all, in an era where we emphasize interdisciplinary studies and across-the-board approaches IR appears to be a compelling intellectual ecosystem.
    [Show full text]
  • Jack L. Snyder Robert and Renée Belfer
    Jack L. Snyder Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Relations Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies, Department of Political Science Columbia University December 4, 2019 1327 International Affairs Building 420 W. 118 St. New York, NY 10027 work tel: 212-854-8290 e-mail: [email protected] fax: 212-864-1686 Education Ph.D., Columbia University, political science (international relations), 1981. Certificate of the Russian Institute, Columbia University, 1978. B.A., Harvard University, government, 1973. Teaching Columbia University, Political Science Department, full professor, 1991; tenured associate professor, 1988; assistant professor, 1982. Graduate and undergraduate courses on international politics, nationalism, and human rights. Publications: Books Power and Progress: International Politics in Transition (Routledge, 2012), a selection of my articles on anarchy, democratization, and empire published between 1990 and 2010, with a new introduction, conclusion, and chapter on “Democratization and Civil War.” Co-authored with Edward Mansfield, Electing to Fight: Why Emerging Democracies Go to War (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2005). Lepgold Prize for the best book on international relations published in 2005. Foreword Book of the Year Gold Award in Political Science for 2005. Choice Magazine Outstanding Academic Title, 2006. From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict. W. W. Norton, 2000. Indonesian edition, 2003. Chinese edition, Shanghai Press, 2017. Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition. Cornell University Press, 1991. Korean edition, 1996. Chinese edition, 2007. The Ideology of the Offensive: Military Decision Making and the Disasters of 1914 Cornell University Press, 1984. “Active citation” web version of ch. 7, 2014, at https://qdr.syr.edu/. 2 Edited books Co-editor with Stephen Hopgood and Leslie Vinjamuri, Human Rights Futures (Cambridge University Press, 2017); author of chapter, “Empowering Rights,” and co- author of introduction and conclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011-2012 CJFE's Review of Free Expression in Canada
    2011-2012 CJFE’s Review of Free Expression in Canada LETTER FROM THE EDITORS OH, HOW THE MIGHTY FALL. ONCE A LEADER IN ACCESS TO INFORMATION, PEACEKEEPING, HUMAN RIGHTS AND MORE, CANADA’S GLOBAL STOCK HAS PLUMMETED IN RECENT YEARS. This Review begins, as always, with a Report Card that grades key issues, institutions and governmental departments in terms of how their actions have affected freedom of expres- sion and access to information between May 2011 and May 2012. This year we’ve assessed Canadian scientists’ freedom of expression, federal protection of digital rights and Internet JOIN CJFE access, federal access to information, the Supreme Court, media ownership and ourselves—the Canadian public. Being involved with CJFE is When we began talking about this Review, we knew we wanted to highlight a major issue with a series of articles. There were plenty of options to choose from, but we ultimately settled not restricted to journalists; on the one topic that is both urgent and has an impact on your daily life: the Internet. Think about it: When was the last time you went a whole day without accessing the membership is open to all Internet? No email, no Skype, no gaming, no online shopping, no Facebook, Twitter or Instagram, no news websites or blogs, no checking the weather with that app. Can you even who believe in the right to recall the last time you went totally Net-free? Our series on free expression and the Internet (beginning on p. 18) examines the complex free expression. relationship between the Internet, its users and free expression, access to information, legislation and court decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • St. George Campus 2018-2019 POL459/2216Y: the Military
    St. George Campus 2018-2019 POL459/2216Y: The Military Instrument of Foreign Policy Professor A. Braun [email protected] Office hours: Trinity College, Room #309N Munk School, 1 Devonshire Pl. Mondays, 12-1pm (other times by arrangement) Telephone: 416-946-8952 Synopsis: This combined undergraduate-graduate course analyzes the relationship of military force to politics. Nuclear war and deterrence, conventional war, revolutionary war, terrorism, counter-insurgency, cyberwar, and drone warfare are examined from the perspectives of the U.S., Russia, China, and other contemporary military powers. Foreign policy provides the context within which one should examine the existence of and the utility of the military instrument of foreign policy. And, as Henry Brandon has said, foreign policy begins at home. Therefore, the introductory part of the course deals with the theory and politics of civil-military relations and examines the military establishments of the major powers with special emphasis on those of the USA, Russia/CIS, and China. This section will also explore the problems of measuring equivalence. The second part investigates the various theories of conflict, the problems of nuclear war and deterrence, the diverse forms of conventional war, and the efficacy of war termination strategies. The final section contains case studies of some of these problems. The aim of this course is to help acquaint students of international relations with the vital importance of the military instrument in the formulation and implementation of foreign policy and in the functioning of the international system. It is also hoped that thus they will be able to employ additional tools of analysis in the study of international relations.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnic Minorities and Politics in Post- Socialist Southeastern Europe
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-15912-9 — Ethnic Minorities and Politics in Post-Socialist Southeastern Europe Edited by Sabrina P. Ramet , Marko Valenta Frontmatter More Information i Ethnic Minorities and Politics in Post-Socialist Southeastern Europe Southeast European politics cannot be understood without taking into account ethnic minorities. This book provides a comprehensive introduction to the politics of ethnic minorities, examining both their political parties and issues of social distance, migration, and ethnic boundaries, as well as issues related to citizenship and integration. Coverage includes detailed analyses of Hungarian minority parties in Romania, Albanian minority parties in Macedonia, Serb minority par- ties in Croatia, Bosniak minority parties in Serbia, and various minor- ity parties in Montenegro, as well as the Movement for Rights and Freedoms, a largely Turkish party, in Bulgaria. Sabrina P. Ramet is a professor of Political Science at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, in Trondheim, Norway. Born in London, England, she was educated at Stanford University, the University of Arkansas, and UCLA, receiving her Ph.D. in Political Science from UCLA in 1981. She is the author of twelve scholarly books (three of which have been published in Croatian translations) and edi- tor or co- editor of thirty- two published books. Her books can also be found in French, German, Italian, Macedonian, Polish, and Serbian translations. Her latest book is Gender (In)equality and Gender Politics in Southeastern Europe: A question of justice , co- edited with Christine M. Hassenstab (2015). Marko Valenta is a sociologist and a Professor at the Department of Social Work and Health Science at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, in Trondheim, Norway.
    [Show full text]
  • G8 and G20 Experts at the Munk School of Global Affairs
    G8 and G20 Experts at the Munk School of Global Affairs Alan Alexandroff • Cell: 416‐617‐9627 • [email protected] • Globalization and banking, finance • International politics, economics, and trade in the global economy • The BRICs, especially China, and the architecture of global governance Dr. Alexandroff received his PhD in Government from Cornell University in 1979 and his LLB from McGill Law School in 1984. He taught political economy and international relations at Queen’s University, McGill University, and the University of California at Los Angeles. He practiced civil litigation and government/business relations at Torys in Toronto. After leaving full‐time law practice in 1992, he established a number of programs at the Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto. Currently, Dr. Alexandroff is the Research Director of the Program on Conflict Management and Negotiation ( PCMN) at the Munk School of Global Affairs. In this role, he established a joint program between PCMN and the University of Toronto’s School of Continuing Studies—the Certificate Program in Dispute Resolution. Within this program he has taught courses dealing with the alternate dispute resolution, strategic negotiation, cross‐cultural negotiation, international relations, and the management of public disputes conflict. As Research Director, Dr. Alexandroff has focused a great deal of attention on the accession of China to the World Trade Organization. In 2000, Dr. Alexandroff was appointed Fellow‐in‐Residence in International Policy at the
    [Show full text]
  • "Cool Neighbors": Sweden's EU Presidency and Russia
    "Cool Neighbors": Sweden's EU Presidency and Russia Eva Hagström Frisell Ingmar Oldberg July 2009 Russia/NIS Center Ifri is a research center and a forum for debate on major international political and economic issues. Headed by Thierry de Montbrial since its founding in 1979, Ifri is a non-governmental and a non-profit organization. As an independent think tank, Ifri sets its own research agenda, publishing its findings regularly for a global audience. With offices in Paris and Brussels, Ifri stands out as one of the rare French think tanks to have positioned itself at the very heart of European debate. Using an interdisciplinary approach, Ifri brings together political and economic decision-makers, researchers and internationally renowned experts to animate its debates and research activities. The opinions expressed in this article are the authors’ alone and do not reflect the official views of their institutions. Russia/NIS Center © All rights reserved – Ifri – Paris, 2009 ISBN: 978-2-86592-564-3 IFRI IFRI-Bruxelles 27 RUE DE LA PROCESSION RUE MARIE-THERESE, 21 75740 PARIS CEDEX 15 – FRANCE 1000 BRUXELLES TEL. : 33 (0)1 40 61 60 00 TEL. : 32(2) 238 51 10 FAX : 33 (0)1 40 61 60 60 FAX : 32 (2) 238 51 15 E-MAIL : [email protected] E-MAIL : [email protected] WEBSITE : www.ifri.org E. Hagström Frisell and I. Oldberg / Sweden's EU Presidency and Russia Russie.Nei.Visions Russie.Nei.Visions is an electronic collection dedicated to Russia and the other new independent states (Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan).
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Realism After the Cold War 7
    Structural Realism after Kenneth N. Waltz the Cold War Some students of in- ternational politics believe that realism is obsolete. 1 They argue that, although realism’s concepts of anarchy, self-help, and power balancing may have been appropriate to a bygone era, they have been displaced by changed conditions and eclipsed by better ideas. New times call for new thinking. Changing conditions require revised theories or entirely different ones. True, if the conditions that a theory contemplated have changed, the theory no longer applies. But what sorts of changes would alter the international political system so profoundly that old ways of thinking would no longer be relevant? Changes of the system would do it; changes in the system would not. Within-system changes take place all the time, some important, some not. Big changes in the means of transportation, communication, and war ghting, for example, strongly affect how states and other agents interact. Such changes occur at the unit level. In modern history, or perhaps in all of history, the introduction of nuclear weaponry was the greatest of such changes. Yet in the nuclear era, international politics remains a self-help arena. Nuclear weapons decisively change how some states provide for their own and possibly for others’ security; but nuclear weapons have not altered the anarchic structure of the international political system. Changes in the structure of the system are distinct from changes at the unit level. Thus, changes in polarity also affect how states provide for their security. Signicant changes take place when the number of great powers reduces to two or one.
    [Show full text]
  • Errata Errata
    Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law Volume 12 | Issue 3 1980 Errata Errata Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Errata, Errata, 12 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 678 (1980) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol12/iss3/16 This Foreword is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. Volume 12, Number 3, Summer 1980 CUMULATIVE SUBJECT INDEX, VOLUMES I- XII* ADMIRALTY Admiralty-Jurisdiction over Aviation Port Claims. Phillip J. Kolczynski (CN) ............................................... 8:220 AFRICA see also TRANSKEI African Patent Statutes and Technology Transfer. Mark Sklan (A) ......................................................... 10:55 Assassination as a Means of Intervention: The Death of Lumumba-The Rule of Amin. ChristianM . Sternat (N) ................................................ 10:197 The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS): An Analysis and Prospects. Bruce Zagaris (A) ............................................. 10:93 Notes on Legal Literature in East Africa. Robert Martin (A) ...................................................... 10:123 Notes on the Role of the Judiciary in the Constitutional Systems of
    [Show full text]
  • North American Defence, Arctic Security, and Russian Imperial Delusions Aurel Braun
    September 2014 North American Defence, Arctic Security, and Russian Imperial Delusions Aurel Braun The following MLI commentary is based on testimony before the Standing Committee on National Defence, House of Commons, Canada, May 8, 2014, edited and updated. Aurel Braun is a visiting professor, Department of Government at Harvard University and professor of international relations and political science, University of Toronto. Introduction North American defence, Arctic security, and Russian imperial delusions. These are large interlocking topics and my purpose here is to provide context, linkages, and a broad analysis with some key specifics. In the space permitted the assessment cannot be comprehensive but I will examine some of the crucial actual and potential threats to Canada and possible ways to understand, counter, or at least mitigate these. At first blush it would seem that Canada has a very effective triple layer of protection to guarantee its interests and sovereignty. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), an alliance of democracies that has enjoyed remarkable historical longevity, is one of these layers. Second, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) adds to the transatlantic Alliance a defence agreement with Washington, one that has the dual Canadian/US goal of assuring effective aerospace warning, air sovereignty, and the overall The author of this document has worked independently and is solely responsible for the views presented here. The opinions are not necessarily those of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, its Directors or Supporters. 1 COMMENTARY: North American Defence, Arctic Security, and Russian Imperial Delusions defence of North America. Third, Canada, as a successful modern state and a member of the G7, has its own significant military capabilities as well as great economic potential.
    [Show full text]
  • International Relations (Revised 6/2019)
    INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (REVISED 6/2019) Required Core Seminars: PS 624 International Relations and PS 626 International Political Economy All students taking either a major or a minor comprehensive exam in international relations must have read and show a mastery of the literature under the Core Theme on the International Relations Reading List as well as of the literature on TWO additional themes for MAJOR exams or ONE additional theme for MINOR exams. The Reading List identifies required readings as well as strongly recommended readings. It should be noted that the Reading List is intended as a starting point to prepare students for each theme. As part of writing a contract with their committee, the student should also develop a list of readings for each theme that reflects the committee’s and student’s assessment of important new works not yet on the Reading List. The committee expects students’ exams to reflect all relevant work in the field, whether or not those works are on the Reading List. Students are reminded that good comprehensive exams demonstrate the student’s knowledge of important cases and the student’s ability to apply theory to particular empirical contexts. The International Relations field includes the following themes in addition to the Core theme: International Political Economy, International Security, and International Environmental Politics. Students may also take an exam on the theme of “Foreign Policy and Decision Making.” To develop an appropriate reading list for that theme, the student is required to contact the field committee chair no later than week 1 of the prior Spring term for a Fall term exam or week 1 of the prior Fall term for either a Winter term or Spring term exam.
    [Show full text]