U.S. Foreign Policy Political Science 376 Fall 2018
Prof. Scott Cooper 9:00 - 9:50 am Mon/Wed/Fri Email: [email protected] 121 MARB Phone: 801-422-4053 Office: 762 Kimball Tower Office Hours: 12-1 Mon/Wed/Fri or by appointment If you can’t come during my office hours, contact me to set up another time. Don’t be afraid to come see me.
Prerequisites: Poli Sci 170, 270, or 370 recommended. Poli Sci 200 recommended.
Subject Matter and Course Goals: Even though the American public has traditionally been less interested in world politics, United States foreign policy and its consequences have returned to center stage since September 11th, 2001. One central goal of this course is to enable you to make sense of current events by thoroughly grounding you in the broader history, politics, and substance of U.S. foreign policy–stuff you need to know to understand the news. Another central goal is to help you participate as citizens in crucial debates about foreign policy by building skills in critical reading, analytical writing, and oral discussion. In contrast to the sound bites, personal attacks, and spin doctoring that so frequently pass for public “debate,” this course will help you analyze both sides of crucial issues and reach your own conclusions. President Hugh B. Brown of the First Presidency taught this concept powerfully at BYU’s 1968 commencement exercises, in the context of Vietnam War protests: “Strive to develop a maturity of mind and emotion, and a depth of spirit which will enable you to differ with others on matters of politics without calling into question the integrity of those with whom you differ. Allow within the bounds of our definition of religious orthodoxy a variation in political belief. Do not have the temerity to dogmatize on issues where the Lord has seen fit to be silent.”
The first part of the course will acquaint you with larger trends and key events in U.S. diplomatic history. This historical background provides a necessary context within which to locate current policies. The second part focuses on the major decisionmaking actors and their influence on U.S. foreign policy. Understanding the roles of the key actors enables you to see more clearly why certain policies are adopted and also shows how active citizens can go about changing policies they disagree with. In the remainder of the course, we will study specific issues facing current
1 policymakers. We obviously cannot study every issue of interest, but we will address a broad range of issues that will prepare you for lifelong involvement in foreign policy debates.
A note for foreign students: Although most students in this course are United States citizens, I welcome foreign students. In my opinion, U.S. foreign policy is just as relevant to you because of the outsized role the U.S. plays in world politics. Please notice that this class is designed to analyze U.S. foreign policy, not defend it. Your participation can help U.S. students (and me) better understand how U.S. actions are perceived abroad. If you have any concerns about this class or your participation in it, please come talk to me.
Grading: 15% Exam 1 25% Exam 2 25% Final Exam 21% Policy Paper (Paper 5%, Revision 16%) 14% Participation and Reading Response Essays
All Exams are given in class. You may not use any electronic devices during exams. Exams will consist primarily of short answer and short essay questions. In preparing for exams, general understanding is useful, but does not substitute for a firm grasp of the details. Also, you should be aware that “satisfactory” or “average” work will receive a C grade. Only “good” or “excellent” work receives higher grades.
Because the course is organized so that later topics build on earlier topics, all exams will be comprehensive: each will require you to have integrated all the previous materials in the course. However, the focus of each exam, including the final, will be the most recent material. I will give you a study guide for each exam so that you will know exactly what topics will be covered. You may not use cell phones or any electronic device during quizzes or exams. Remember that according to BYU policy the final exam cannot be given early; please make your travel plans accordingly.
This course will include opportunities for class discussion of these issues and ideas. Regular preparation for and participation in class discussions is crucial to your learning. For this reason, I will evaluate Participation (on a +2 to -2 scale) to encourage everyone to join our discussions.
Attendance in class is expected. I will not take attendance every day, but may do so at any time. If you are unable to be in class for non-voluntary reasons (i.e., illness, death in the family, BYU- sponsored travel), I will not mark you absent if you send me a brief email or voicemail explaining why you were unable to be in class. Multiple unexcused absences will affect your grade.
You are required to turn in 12 Reading Response Essays. The dates and topics will be announced in class. Each should be about 1½ pages (typed and double spaced). The goal is to
2 help you in your preparation, so that you will be better able to participate in our class discussions. As a result, each assignment is due in class on the day indicated in the syllabus: late assignments will not be accepted (even if your computer crashes or your car breaks down). You will be able to choose which assignments to complete, but it is your responsibility to make sure that you turn in all of them. To encourage you to start early, at least 3 of your 12 essays must be completed by October 24.
The Policy Paper is an executive summary of a longer research paper on U.S. options for dealing with a specific, current foreign policy issue. You should do all the research you would do for a 12-15 page paper, but will only turn in a 2-page (single-spaced) memo analyzing the policy options, plus a reference appendix listing your sources. After researching both sides of your issue, you will summarize the strengths and weaknesses of each policy option. Based on this analysis, you will argue for a specific policy option and explain the basis for your conclusion. Strong papers will require extensive research on the policy issue to ensure that you are discussing the most viable options and presenting all the pros and cons of each option. The paper is due in November and a revised version is due at the end of the semester. If you choose not to turn in a revised paper, I will count your initial grade for the revision as well.
Finally, you should remember that all forms of cheating, including plagiarism, are grave violations of the standards of any university. I have occasionally had to give failing grades as a result of academic dishonesty at BYU, and I will do so again if necessary. BYU’s Academic Honesty Policy is in the catalog and on the web at http://honorcode.byu.edu. If you have any questions about what constitutes academic honesty in this class, please ask me.
Readings: The reading load for this course is extremely heavy. You should expect to read over 150 pages per week. All readings should be done before class. There are 4 required books: Robert Schulzinger, U.S. Diplomacy Since 1900, 6th ed., Oxford, 2007 • 5th & 4th editions also acceptable: see page number conversions on Learning Suite
Steven Hook, U.S. Foreign Policy: The Paradox of World Power, 5th ed., SAGE/CQ Press, 2017 • 4th, 3rd, & 2nd editions also acceptable: see page number conversions on Learning Suite
Scott Sagan and Kenneth Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate, 3rd ed., Norton, 2013 • 2nd edition also acceptable: see page number conversions on Learning Suite
Philip Mundo, National Politics in a Global Economy, Georgetown, 1999
A painfully large set of additional required readings will be available on Learning Suite.
3 University Resources: Federal law and BYU policy provide protections for students against sex discrimination and sexual harassment, including professor-to-student and student-to-student harassment, and also require reasonable accommodation of students with disabilities. I believe strongly in giving all students a fair chance to succeed in my classes, and that includes helping students facing difficulties of any kind and making accommodations for special circumstances.
If you feel you have encountered sexual harassment or discrimination, please talk to me, the Title IX Coordinator ([email protected] or 801-422-8692), and/or the Equal Opportunity Office (801-422-5895). Be aware that I may have to report anything you tell me to the Title IX office. You can view BYU’s full “Sexual Misconduct Policy” at https://policy.byu.edu/view/index.php?p=155 and find more information and resources at http://titleix.byu.edu
If you have any disability which may impair your ability to complete this course successfully, please contact the University Accessibility Center (https://uac.byu.edu or 801-422-2767) and discuss it with me. Sooner is better than later, but it’s never too late to ask.
BYU’s office of Counseling and Psychological Services offers help to students with common issues such as anxiety, depression, eating disorders, interpersonal conflicts, marital problems, low self-esteem, difficult social relationships, and stress management. Consistent with the highest standards of professional psychology, all of these services are confidential. Full-time BYU students are treated at no cost. Counseling and Psychological Services is located at 1500 WSC (or call 801-422-3035). Visit their website at https://caps.byu.edu for more information or to make an appointment. You are not the only student struggling with these issues. Please ask for help.
4 PART ONE: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Remember: Reading questions for every reading are on Learning Suite.
Sept 5 Introduction, Syllabus
Sept 7 Early History: Founding and Isolationism George Washington, “Farewell Address,” 1796
Schulzinger ch. 1
*Students who have not taken Poli Sci 170/270/370 should carefully read Charles Kegley, World Politics, 2007, ch. 2: “Theories of World Politics”
Sept 10 Early History: Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny James Monroe, “Monroe Doctrine,” 1823
John L. O’Sullivan, “Manifest Destiny,” 1839
Sept 12 Early History: Spanish-American War to World War I Schulzinger ch. 2 and pp. 60-68
Albert Beveridge, “The March of the Flag,” 1898
Theodore Roosevelt, “Roosevelt Corollary,” 1904
Sept 14 Early History: Versailles to Pearl Harbor Schulzinger pp. 68-88, 118-21, and ch. 7
Woodrow Wilson, “Fourteen Points,” 1918
Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Arsenal of Democracy,” 1940
Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Day of Infamy,” 1941
Sept 17 Cold War: Postwar Confrontation and Alliance Schulzinger ch. 8
Harry S Truman, “Truman Doctrine,” 1947
Winston Churchill, “Iron Curtain,” 1946
X (George Kennan), “Sources of Soviet Conduct,” 1947
5 Sept 19 Cold War: Nuclear Standoff Schulzinger ch. 9
NSC-68, Conclusions and Recommendations, 1950
Sept 21 Cold War: Proxy Wars Schulzinger ch. 10-11
U.S. Congress, “Tonkin Bay Resolution,” 1964
Sept 24 Cold War Schulzinger ch. 12-13
Sept 26 Cold War: End of the Cold War Jimmy Carter, “Human Rights and Foreign Policy,” 1977
Ronald Reagan, “Evil Empire,” 1982
Schulzinger ch. 14
Sept 28 EXAM 1
PART TWO: DECISIONMAKING–MORALITY AND PROCESS Remember: At least 3 of your 12 reading essays must be completed by October 24.
Oct 1 Morality: Opposing Views Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica [1265-1274], “War”
E. H. Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939, 1964 [1939], pp. 154-69
Doctrine & Covenants 98
Ray Hillam and David Andrews, “Mormons and Foreign Policy,” BYU Studies, Winter 1985
Oct 3 Morality: Just War Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, 1977 [2006], ch. 4-6
Oct 5 Morality: Responsibility to Protect? Gareth Evans and Mohamed Sahnoun, “The Responsibility to Protect,” Foreign Affairs, Nov/Dec 2002
Robert Pape, “When Duty Calls,” International Security, Summer 2012
6 Oct 8 The President and Executive Branch Agencies Hook pp. 110-34, 140-41, and ch. 6
Bob Woodward, “Military Thwarted President Seeking Choice in Afghanistan” and “Biden Warned Obama During Afghan War Review Not to Get ‘Locked Into Vietnam,’” Washington Post, 27-28 September 2010
Oct 10 National Security Advisor, White House Staff Mac Destler, “How National Security Advisers See Their Role,” in Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy, 2012
Karen DeYoung, “How the Obama White House Runs Foreign Policy,” Washington Post, 4 August 2015
Oct 12 Executive Decisionmaking Hook pp. 93-97
Irving Janis, Groupthink, 2nd ed., 1982, pp. 174-77
Peter Baker, “As Democracy Push Falters, Bush Feels Like a ‘Dissident,’” Washington Post, 20 August 2007
Oct 15 Congress vs. President Hook ch. 5 and Appendix B (War Powers Resolution)
E. J. Dionne, Jr., “Short-Circuiting the Surge,” Washington Post, 5 January 2007
Michael Abramowitz and Peter Baker, “Bush Keeps Vow to Veto War Funding,” Washington Post, 2 May 2007
David Espo, “Congress Bows to Bush, OKs Iraq Funds,” Washington Post, 25 May 2007
David Fahrenthold and Peter Finn, “Anger Ramps Up in Congress Over Obama’s Legal Defense of Libya Operation,” Washington Post, 18 June 2011
optional reading: Jim Webb, “Congressional Abdication,” National Interest, 1 March 2013
Oct 17 Interest Groups Hook ch. 9 and pp. 90-93
7 Oct 19 Courts and the Imperial Presidency Debate Hook pp. 134-40
U.S. Constitution, Articles I & II
John Yoo, “How the Presidency Regained Its Balance,” New York Times, 17 September 2006
Adam Cohen, “Just What the Founders Feared,” New York Times, 23 July 2007
Gary Schmitt, “The Myth of the (Bush) Imperial Presidency,” American Enterprise Institute National Security Outlook, January 2009
Gene Healy, “The Imperial Presidency and the War on Terror,” Cato Policy Report, March/April 2006
Oct 22 Elections, Media, and Public Opinion Hook ch. 7, 8
Oct 24 Decisionmaking and Morality: Individual Responsibility Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars, 1977 [2006], ch. 18
Michael Mukasey, “The Waterboarding Trail to bin Laden,” Wall Street Journal, 6 May 2011
John McCain, “Bin Laden’s Death and the Debate Over Torture,” Washington Post, 11 May 2011
Eric Lichtblau and Scott Shane, “Report Faults 2 Authors of Bush Terror Memos,” New York Times, 19 February 2010
PART THREE: POST-COLD WAR ISSUES Oct 26 Grand Strategy: Overview Barry Posen and Andrew Ross, “Competing Visions for U.S. Grand Strategy,” International Security, Winter 1996/97
George W. Bush, “National Security Strategy: 2002,” cover letter, table of contents, and sections I-III, V, IX
8 Oct 29 Grand Strategy: Primacy William Wohlforth, “The Stability of a Unipolar World,” International Security, Summer 1999
Joseph Nye, Jr., The Paradox of American Power, 2002, pp. 1-17 & 35-40
Oct 31 Grand Strategy: Neo-Isolationism Christopher Layne, “Impotent Power? Re-examining the Nature of America’s Hegemonic Power,” National Interest, Sept/Oct 2006
Christopher Layne, “From Preponderance to Offshore Balancing,” International Security, Summer 1997
Nov 2 Grand Strategy: Cooperative Security, Selective Engagement Skim: Gareth Evans and Mohamed Sahnoun, “The Responsibility to Protect,” Foreign Affairs, Nov/Dec 2002 [Oct 5 reading]
Robert Art, “Geopolitics Updated: The Strategy of Selective Engagement,” International Security, Winter 1998/99
Barack Obama, “National Security Strategy: February 2015,” excerpts
Fred Hiatt, “Obama’s Afghanistan Strategy Was the Start of a Foreign Policy Transformation,” Washington Post, 9 January 2014
Geoff Dyer, “U.S. Foreign Policy: Trouble Abroad,” Financial Times, 26 May 2014
Nov 5 Grand Strategy: America First Donald Trump, “Remarks by Donald Trump to the 72nd Session of the United Nations General Assembly,” September 2017
Donald Trump, “National Security Strategy: December 2017,” excerpts
Stephen Sestanovich, “The Brilliant Incoherence of Trump’s Foreign Policy,” The Atlantic, May 2017
Nov 7 EXAM 2
9 Nov 9 Nuclear Proliferation: Optimists and Pessimists Sagan and Waltz ch. 1-2 and pp. 82-89, 110-26, 132-34 and ch. 5
Nov 12 Nuclear Proliferation: Policy Options Sagan and Waltz ch. 6
Sam Jones and Alex Barker, “Five Key Points of the Iran Nuclear Deal Explained,” Financial Times, 14 July 2015
Ron Dermer, “Israeli Ambassador: The Four Major Problems With the Iran Deal,” Washington Post, 14 July 2015
Mark Landler, “Trump Abandons Nuclear Deal He Long Scorned,” New York Times, 8 May 2018
Demetri Sevastopulo, “US Show of Strength Masks Limited Options Over N. Korea,” Financial Times, 1 September 2017
Ryan Hass, “On North Korea, Don’t Get Distracted By Shiny Objects,” Brookings blog, 3 July 2018
Nov 14 Middle East: Persian Gulf and Syria Bruce Jentleson, American Foreign Policy, 2014, pp. 455-90
Liz Sly, “How the Battle Against the Islamic State is Redrawing the Map of the Middle East,” Washington Post, 30 December 2015
Hal Brands and Peter Feaver, “Trump and Terrorism: U.S. Strategy After ISIS,” Foreign Affairs, March/April 2017
Nov 16 Middle East: Terrorism Jessica Stern, “The Protean Enemy,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2003
Lisa Monaco, “Preventing the Next Attack,” Foreign Affairs, November/December 2017
10 Nov 19 POLICY PAPER DUE by 4:45 pm (745 Kimball Tower, by elevators) (If you will be out of town this week, turn the paper in by the 16th.) Middle East: Israel John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby,” London Review of Books, 23 March 2006, excerpt
Elliot Kaufman, “Israel, America, Arab Nations Share Interests, Align to Counter Iran,” National Review, 17 July 2017
Nov 20 China: Strategy and Policy (Tuesday) 3 US-PRC Communiques (1972, 1979, 1982) and Taiwan Relations Act
Gerald Segal, “East Asia and the ‘Constrainment’ of China,” International Security, Spring 1996
David Shambaugh, “Containment or Engagement of China?” International Security, Fall 1996
Nov 21, 23 No Class: Holiday
Nov 26 China and Taiwan Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China, 2017, excerpts
University of Texas, “First and Second Island Chains,” Library map collection, http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/ china_first_and_second_island_chains-2012.png
Thomas Christensen, “Posing Problems Without Catching Up,” International Security, Spring 2001
Keith Richburg, “U.S. Pivot to Asia Makes China Nervous,” Washington Post, 16 November 2011
Charles Clover, “China: Projections of Power,” Financial Times, 8 April 2015
11 Nov 28 China and Taiwan: Strategic Ambiguity Scott Kastner, “Ambiguity, Economic Interdependence, and the US Strategic Dilemma in the Taiwan Strait,” Journal of Contemporary China, November 2006
Kurt Campbell and Derek Mitchell, “Crisis in the Taiwan Strait?” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2001
Nov 30 Trade Policy: Historical Context Stephen Cohen et al., Fundamentals of U.S. Foreign Trade Policy, 2003 [1996], pp. 25-43, 162-71
John Ikenberry, “Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order,” International Security, Winter 1998/99, pp. 43- 47, 53-71
Dec 3 Trade Policy: Ideas and Instruments Mundo pp. 21-25, 70-83, 192-94, 204-19
Hook pp. 394-98
Sebastian Mallaby, “Jumbo Shrimp Follies,” Washington Post, 15 November 2004
Dec 5 Trade Policy Decisionmaking: Congress, President, Bureaucracy Mundo pp. 89-98, 109-43, 195-204, 219-25
Dec 7 Trade Policy: Post-Cold War Mundo pp. 231-44
Paul Blustein and Jonathan Weisman, “U.S. Loses Appeal on Steel Tariffs,” Washington Post, 11 November 2003
Mike Allen, “President to Drop Tariffs on Steel,” Washington Post, 1 December 2003
Shawn Donnan and Demetri Sevastopulo, “US, Japan, and 10 Countries Strike Pacific Trade Deal,” Financial Times, 5 October 2015
Shawn Donnan, “TPP: Seven Things Worth Knowing,” Financial Times, 12 October 2015
(readings continued next page)
12 Adam Behsudi, “Trump’s Trade Pullout Roils Rural America,” Politico, 7 August 2017
Keith Johnson, “Here Comes Trump’s Trade War,” Foreign Policy, 1 March 2018
Jim Tankersley, “Economists Say U.S. Tariffs Are Wrong Move on a Valid Issue,” New York Times, 11 April 2018
Douglas Irwin, “Trump’s Trade Policy Is An Exercise in Futility,” Chicago Booth Review, 7 August 2018
Dec 10 Trade Policy: Regional and Bilateral Free Trade Areas Mundo ch. 5
Heather Long, “Trump Says He Has a Deal With Mexico: Here’s What’s In It,” Washington Post, 27 August 2018
Jagdish Bhagwati and Arvind Panagariya, “Bilateral Trade Treaties Are a Sham,” Financial Times, 13 July 2003
Daniel Griswold, “Bilateral Deals Are No Threat to Global Trade,” cato.org, 7 August 2003
Robert McMahon, “The Rise in Bilateral Free Trade Agreements,” Council on Foreign Relations, June 2006
Dec 12 Wrap-up, Exam Review
Dec 13 POLICY PAPER REVISION DUE, 4:45 pm (745 Kimball Tower) (Thursday)
Dec 17 8:00 - 9:20 am: FINAL EXAM (regular classroom, note the delayed start !) (Monday)
13