Foreign Policy Analysis Fall 2018 Library 344 MW 1:50 to 3:35 Instructor: Greg Marfleet Willis 406 ext 4116 Office Hours T 12:00 to 3:00, F 12:00-3:00 Email: [email protected] In this course we examine some of the leading theoretical approaches to the study of foreign policy across a range of countries and issue areas. The goal of the course is to prepare students to critically evaluate the theoretical literature on foreign policy, to participate in a collaborative data generation project and to conduct their own research. Foreign Policy Analysis is a sub-field of international relations which has received increased attention since the end of the Cold War. Critics observed that the (mostly structural) dominant IR theories failed to predict or explain this profound transformation. Subsequently, the debate over the Democratic Peace, 9/11, Afghanistan and US motivations for the invasion of Iraq have generated renewed interest approaches that emphasize the role that actor (leader, state and regime) characteristics may play in international politics. The rising status of FPA was evidenced by the decision of the International Studies Association to support the creation of an eponymously titled new journal dedicated to this area of research. Although the sub-field, like most sub-fields in political science and international relations, is a diverse set of research programs and theoretical approaches, FPA scholars share several common tendencies. First, they eschew ‘grand theory’ and broad systemic explanations of world politics in favor of mid-range explanations for the behavior of actors in international affairs. Second, they are generally suspicious of the simplifying assumption that states can be viewed as unified and/or rational agents. The rejection of these assumptions forces FPA researchers to ‘open the black box’ of the state as they seek explanations for events, choices and outcomes. This makes FPA is an inherently interdisciplinary sub-field as scholars must acquaint themselves with topics such as leadership, decision making, group dynamics, bureaucracies, institutional constraints on government, public opinion and the media (to name just a few). FPA draws on theories of human interaction and behavior in social psychology, organizational behavior, economic and sociology. Text: Valerie M. Hudson. 2014. Foreign Policy Analysis. 2nd Ed. Rowman and Littlefield. Assignments and Grading Participation, Attendance and Engagement 15 Reading Synopsis and discussion question (2 X 10 -- Theory & Behavior) 20 Research Proposal and Presentation (See Week 6 workshop) 20 Final Research Paper (Due by the end of the exam period) 30 Group Data Collection Contribution 15 9 September - 15 September o Monday o Topic: Introductions, Course Outline and Planning o Wednesday o Topic: FPA vs IR Reading: Hudson Ch 1 Walt, Stephen M. "International relations: one world, many theories." Foreign policy (1998): 29-46. (jstor) • 16 September - 22 September o Monday o Topic: Leaders Reading: Hudson Ch 2 McDermott, R., 1992. Prospect theory in international relations: The Iranian hostage rescue mission. Political Psychology, pp.237-263. (J-stor) Dyson, S.B. and Preston, T., 2006. Individual characteristics of political leaders and the use of analogy in foreign policy decision making. Political Psychology, 27(2), pp.265-288. (Jstor) o Wednesday o Topic: Small Groups/Advisors Reading: Hudson Ch 3 Maoz, Z. (1990) "Framing the National Interest: The Manipulations of Foreign Policy Decisions in Group Settings." World Politics, 43: 77-110. (J- stor ) Mitchell, D., 2005. Centralizing advisory systems: Presidential influence and the US foreign policy decision-making process. Foreign Policy Analysis, 1(2), pp.181-206. (Jstor) • 23 September - 29 September o Monday o Topic: Bureaucracies, Organizations and Institutions Reading: Hudson Ch 3 (again ;) ) Drezner, Daniel W. (2000). “Ideas, Bureaucratic Politics, and the Crafting of Foreign Policy.” American Journal of Political Science. 44, 4: pp. 733-749. (J-Stor) Krasner, S.D., 1972. Are bureaucracies important?(or Allison Wonderland). Foreign Policy, (7), pp.159-179. (J-Stor) o Wednesday o Topic: Culture, Identity and Roles Readings: Hudson Ch 4 Thies, C. G. (2012). "International socialization processes vs. Israeli national role conceptions: can role theory integrate IR theory and foreign policy analysis?". Foreign Policy Analysis, 8(1), 25-46.(Link to PDF) Cantir, C. and Kaarbo, J., 2012. Contested roles and domestic politics: reflections on role theory in foreign policy analysis and IR theory. Foreign Policy Analysis, 8(1), pp.5-24. (jstor) • 30 September - 6 October o Monday o Topic: Domestic Politics and Opposition Reading: Hudson Ch 5 Gowa, J., 1998. Politics at the water's edge: Parties, voters, and the use of force abroad. International Organization, 52(2), pp.307-324. (Jstor) Putnam, R.D., 1988. Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games. International organization, 42(3), pp.427-460. (J-stor) o Wednesday o Topic: System and State Attributes Reading: Hudson Ch 6 Hudson, V.M. and Boer, A.D., 2002. A surplus of men, a deficit of peace: Security and sex ratios in Asia's largest states. International Security, 26(4), pp.5-38. (MIT journals) Lake, David A. (1983) "International Economic Structures and American Foreign Economic Policy, 1887-1934," World Politics35: 517-543 (J-stor) • 7 October - 13 October o Monday o Data Day (Specifics to be negotiated) o Wednesday o Data Day (Specifics to be negotiated) • 14 October - 20 October o Monday o Mid-Term Break. No Class o Wednesday o Term Paper Workshop • 21 October - 27 October o Monday o Topic: Rivalry and Conflict Readings: Stinnett, D. M., & Diehl, P. F. (2001). "The path (s) to rivalry: Behavioral and structural explanations of rivalry development." The Journal of Politics, 63(03), 717-740.(J-stor ) Brandon C. Prins and Ursula E. Daxecker. (2008). Committed to Peace: Liberal Institutions and the Termination of Rivalry. British Journal of Political Science , Vol. 38, No. 1 pp. 17-43 (Proquest) o Wednesday o Topic: Alliances Readings: Stephen M. Walt. (2009). Alliances in a Unipolar World. World Politics , Vol. 61, No. 1, International Relations Theory and the Consequences of Unipolarity , pp. 86-120 (J-stor) Michael N. Barnett and Jack S. Levy. (1991). Domestic Sources of Alliances and Alignments: The Case of Egypt, 1962-73 International Organization , Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 369-395 (J-stor) • 28 October - 3 November o Monday o Topic: Foreign Aid Readings: Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith. 2007. Foreign Aid and Policy Concessions. The Journal of Conflict Resolution , Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 251-284 (J- stor) Alberto Alesina and David Dollar 2000. Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why? Journal of Economic Growth , Vol. 5, No. 1 (Mar., 2000), pp. 33-63 (J- stor) o Wednesday o Topic: Sanctions Readings Daniel W. Drezner. 2003. The Hidden Hand of Economic Coercion. International Organization , Vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 643-659 (J-stor) Jon Hovi, Robert Huseby and Detlef F. Sprinz. 2005. When Do (Imposed) Economic Sanctions Work? World Politics , Vol. 57, No. 4 pp. 479-499 (J-stor) • 4 November - 10 November o Monday o Topic: Creating and Responding to Norms Readings Goldstein, J. S. (1991). Reciprocity in superpower relations: An empirical analysis. International Studies Quarterly, 195-209. (J-stor) Peksen, D. (2011). Foreign military intervention and women’s rights. Journal of Peace Research, 48(4), 455-468.(J-stor) o Wednesday o Topic: Terrorism and non-state security threats Readings Savun, B., & Phillips, B. J. (2009). Democracy, foreign policy, and terrorism. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 53(6), 878-904.(J-stor ) Krueger, A. B., & Malečková, J. (2009). Attitudes and action: Public opinion and the occurrence of international terrorism. Science, 325(5947), 1534-1536. (Link ) • 11 November - 17 November o Monday Topic: Humanitarian Intervention Readings: Finnemore, M., 1996. Constructing norms of humanitarian intervention. The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics, 153 (Link) Robinson, P., 1999. The CNN effect: can the news media drive foreign policy?. Review of international studies, 25(2), pp.301-309. (jstor) o Wednesday o Wrapping up, review Hudson Ch 7,8 .