Pols 8470 Military Conflict and International Security

Download 234.66 Kb.
Date conversion03.05.2016
Size234.66 Kb.
  1   2   3
Georgia State University

Department of Political Science
POLS 8470

Military Conflict and International Security

Fall 2007


Wednesday 7:15-9:45

Dr. John S. Duffield

email: duffield@gsu.edu

Office: GCB-1026, 404-413-6164

Office hours: MW 3:00-4:00 and by appointment

Web page: http://www.gsu.edu/~poljsd
The problems of military conflict and security and the ways in which political communities have responded to them have greatly shaped the course of human events. Not surprisingly, they have also long been the object of scholarly attention, dating back at least to Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. Since World War II, the scholarly literature on the subject has grown in size geometrically, reflecting both the development of new perspectives for understanding conflicts of the past and the changing face of military conflict and international security in the present.
The first objective of POLS 8470 is to introduce graduate students to the literature in political science on violent conflict and security, especially their international dimensions. Which conceptual, theoretical, and empirical questions have dominated the writings of international relations scholars (and which have been neglected or overlooked)? How have scholars sought to address these questions, both theoretically and methodologically? What answers have they offered, and how satisfactory are those answers?
Conflict and security constitute important components of the broader field of international relations within political science. As such, familiarity with the relevant literature(s) is useful, if not essential, for successful teaching and research in the field. From a more practical standpoint, it may prove helpful in completing the requirements of the graduate program in political science.
The second principal purpose of the course is to promote the development of each student as an active scholar. To this end, students will be required to engage in many of the activities associated with scholarship: critically analyzing the work of other scholars, identifying a promising research topic, researching the topic, drafting a paper based on the research conducted, and revising the paper as necessary.

There is no prerequisite for admission to the course for graduate students in the Department of Political Science, and others may be admitted with the permission of the instructor. It is advisable, however, that students have taken POLS 8400 (International Politics) or the equivalent.
POLS 8470 will meet one time per week. Class meetings will typically consist of a guided discussion of the assigned readings and related materials.
Final grades will be based on the following:
o Attendance and participation (20%): One-third of a grade point (3.3%) will be deducted for each unexcused absence. The instructor should be notified of all absences in advance, except where this is clearly impossible. A student who misses more than three classes without permission may be dropped from the course. Students are expected

(1) to read all assigned texts carefully and thoughtfully prior to the meeting at which they will be discussed,

(2) to attend all class meetings (even if you feel you don’t have much to say, you will profit from listening to the discussion), and

(3) to participate as actively as possible in class discussion.

In addition, students will be responsible for leading the discussion for the assigned readings (one student per reading). Assignments will be determined one week in advance on a rotating basis, and each responsible student should bring copies for everyone of a one-page summary of the reading that addresses the following questions:

(1) What is the main purpose of the piece? What does it attempt to do?

(2) How does the piece go about tackling the problem? What methods does the author employ?

(3) What are the principal arguments or findings of the piece?

o Four short critical analyses of supplementary readings (40%): Each analysis should be 4-6 pages in length and focus on an article or book of interest to the student that pertains to a given week’s topic. (For suggestions, see the additional readings listed below.) It should first describe the purpose of the work, the approach taken by the author(s), and the work’s findings and then provide a critical discussion of the work’s strengths and weaknesses, drawing comparisons with other readings as appropriate. The analyses should be submitted (electronically or in hard copy) to the instructor by 12 noon on the day of the relevant seminar, and at least two should be submitted prior to the semester midpoint (October 15). Questions you might wish to answer include: How important is the issue the work seeks to address? How appropriate to the objective is the methodology and how well-executed is it? How significant are the findings and how much confidence can we have in their validity?
o Research paper (40%): Each student will prepare a research paper on a topic of his/her own choosing. The course places so much emphasis on this assignment because such activity is the essence of contemporary scholarship in political science. Consequently, students contemplating careers in the field should become familiar with and begin engaging in these activities at an early stage in their graduate training.
The research paper may take several possible forms: (1) an extended critical review of the literature (especially recent books and articles) on a particular topic, (2) an in-depth examination of a central concept in the field, (3) an original piece of theoretical and/or empirical research, or (4) a full proposal and research design for a more extensive research project (e.g., MA thesis, dissertation). Options (3) and (4) will typically involve framing a research question, summarizing the relevant literature, deriving hypotheses to be tested, elaborating an appropriate research design for testing the hypotheses, and, in the case of (3), executing the research design and analyzing the findings. Each student will determine the nature and topic of the research paper in consultation with me.
Students should bear in mind the following requirements and deadlines:
1. Preparation and approval of a paper proposal: Students will take the initiative in identifying a paper topic, although I will be available for advice and consultation. A written proposal (1-2 pp.) should be submitted no later than the October 10 class meeting (and preferably earlier), with the intention of having an approved proposal prior to the semester mid-point.
2. Preparation of a first draft (10%): The first draft should represent your best effort, prior to the receipt of feedback. Consequently, you will have until November 7 to submit it (although you are welcome and encouraged to do so earlier). I will provide written comments on the first draft within one week.
3. Preparation of a final draft (30%): Final drafts are due by 5 pm on December 12, and should be approximately 20-40 pages in length.
In evaluating student performance, I will employ the grading system described in the GSU Catalog:
A = Excellent (4.0)

B = Good (3.0)

C = Average (2.0)

D = Poor (but passing) (1.0)

F = Failure (0.0)
The Department of Political Science currently uses plus-minus grading. Accordingly, I will award grades on a plus (+) and minus ( ) scale in order to distinguish among performances of differing quality within these broad categories.

All of the readings will take the form of journal articles and book chapters. The following abbreviations of journal titles are used below:

AJPS = American Journal of Political Science

APSR = American Political Science Review

ARPS = Annual Review of Political Science

BJPS = British Journal of Political Science

CMPS = Conflict Management and Peace Science

EJIR = European Journal of International Relations

II = International Interactions

IO = International Organization

IS = International Security

ISQ = International Studies Quarterly

JCR = Journal of Conflict Resolution

JOP = Journal of Politics

JPR = Journal of Peace Research

PRQ = Political Research Quarterly

PSQ = Political Science Quarterly

SS = Security Studies

WP = World Politics

WPJ = World Policy Journal

WQ = Washington Quarterly

The book chapters are available on the GSU electronic reserves system (Eres). The password is DP8470???. The journal articles are available on-line through JSTOR or the GSU Electronic Journal Locator.

This course syllabus provides only a general plan for the course; deviations may be necessary.
Email: I communicate regularly with students by email. Please email me at duffield@gsu.edu. I will use your “student.gsu.edu” email address. Please check your GSU email account on a regular basis or arrange for email to be forwarded to the account that you normally use.
Academic Honesty: The Georgia State University policy on Academic Honesty applies to all assignments in this course. Students are responsible for being familiar with the policy, which is available at Forms of academic dishonesty include cheating on exams, unauthorized collaboration, multiple submissions, and plagiarism. Plagiarism includes any paraphrasing or summarizing of the works of another person without acknowledgment, including the submission of another student’s work as one’s own.
Withdrawals: The last day to withdraw from the course with the possibility of receiving a “W” is Monday, October 15, the semester midpoint. After that date, instructors must give a “WF” to all students who are on their rolls but no longer taking the class. Students who are involuntarily withdrawn may petition the department chair for reinstatement. “W”s and “WF”s can have serious adverse consequences. Hardship withdrawals may be granted after the midpoint when nonacademic emergency situations prevent a student from completing their course work. Hardship withdrawals are subject to restrictions, which are spelled out in the GSU Catalog.
Incompletes: An Incomplete (I) may be given to a student who for nonacademic reasons beyond his or her control is unable to meet the full requirements of the course. In order to qualify for an I, a student must (a) have completed most of the major assignments of the course (generally all but one) and (b) be earning a passing grade in the course (aside from the assignments not completed) in the judgement of the instructor. Further information on Incompletes is available in the GSU Catalog.
Students with Disabilities: If you have any disability which may impair your ability to successfully complete this course, please let me know during the first week of class. Once you do, we will take steps to make arrangements (e.g., accommodations) through appropriate university offices. For more information, contact the Office of Disability Services (230 Student Center, 404 463 9044).

I. (week 1)

Course overview: subject matter, objectives, requirements, readings and resources

Why study military conflict and international security?

How should they be studies?

General readings:

C. Crocker, F. Hampson, and P. Aall, Managing Global Chaos: Sources of and Responses to International Conflict (USIP, 1996)

J. Nye, Understanding International Conflicts (Harper Collins, 1999)

J. Vasquez, The War Puzzle (Cambridge, 1993)

R. Betts, ed., Conflict after the Cold War: Arguments on Causes of War and Peace (Macmillan, 1994)

F. Harvey and B. Mor, Conflict in World Politics: Advances in the Study of Crisis, War, and Peace (St. Martin’s, 1998)

II. Preliminaries
A. (week 2)

What issues should be covered by security studies? Non-traditional threats and concerns such as environmental security and human security? What are the dangers of too narrow a definition? Too broad a definition?

Required readings:

*Stephen Walt, Renaissance of Security Studies, ISQ 35/2 (June 1991), 211-39

*Edward Kolodjiez, Renaissance in Security Studies? Caveat Lector, ISQ 36/4 (Dec. 1992): 421-38

*Roland Paris, Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air? IS 26/2 (Fall 2001), 87-102

*Marc Levy, Is the Environment a National Security Issue? IS 20/2 (Aug. 1995): 35-62
For further reading:

Richard Ullman, Redefining Security, IS 8/1 (Summer 1983), 129-53

Jessica Mathews, Redefining Security, FA 68/2 (Spring 1989), 162-77

J. Nye and S. Lynn-Jones, International Security Studies: A Report of a Conference on the State of the Field, IS 12/4 (Spring, 1988), 5 27

Stephen del Rosso, The Insecurity State: Reflections on “the State” and “Security” in a Changing World, Daedalus 124/2 (Spring 1995): 175-207

Ronnie Lipschutz, On Security (Columbia, 1995)

Emma Rothschild, What Is Security? Daedalus 124/3 (Summer 1995): 53-98

Keith Krause and Michael Williams, Broadening the Agenda of Security Studies: Politics and Methods, Mershon International Studies Review 40/2 (Oct. 1996): 229-54

Barry Buzan, et al., Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Lynne Rienner, 1998)

L. Freedman, International Security: Changing Targets, FP 110 (Spring 1998), 48 63

Environmental security:

Daniel Deudney, The Case Against Linking Environmental Degradation and National Security, Millenium 19/3 (1990): 461-76

Mark Lacy, Security and Climate Change (Routledge, 2005)

John McNeil, Diamond in the Rough: Is There a Genuine Environmental Threat to Security? IS 30/1 (Summer 2005)

CNA Corporation, National Security and the Threat of Climate Change (April 2007), available at http://securityandclimate.cna.org
Human security:

UNDP, New Dimensions in Human Security (Oxford, 1994)

Taylor Owen, Human Security: Conflict Critique, and Consensus, Security Dialogue 35/3 (Sept. 2004): 373-87

B. (week 3)


Concepts and definitions: Types of military conflict and war


Patterns and Trends: numbers, frequency, nature, magnitude, etc.

Consequences of conflict

Introduction to the causes and sources of conflict: Levels of analysis

Required readings:

*J.D.Singer and M.Small, The Wages of War, 1816-1965 (1972), chs. 1-3 (pp. 1-54)

*C. Gochman and Z. Maoz, Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1976: Procedures, Patterns, Insights, JCR 28/4 (Dec. 1984): 585-615

*N.P. Gleditsch, et al., Armed Conflict 1946-2001: A New Dataset, JPR 39/5 (2002): 615-37

*J. Levy, The Causes of War and the Conditions of Peace, Annual Review of Political Science 1/1(1998), 139-65
Further reading:

Q. Wright, A Study of War (Chicago, 1942/1964), Part One

T. Ropp, War in the Modern World (Collier, 1959)

L. Richardson, Statistics of Deadly Quarrels (Quadrangle, 1960)

J. Galtung, Violence, Peace, and Peace Research, JPR 3 (1969), 167-92

J. Singer and M. Small, The Wages of War, 1816-1965: A Statistical Handbook (Wiley, 1972)

W. Eckhard and E. Azar, Major World Conflicts and Interventions, 1945-75, II 5 (1978), 75-110

*M.Small and J.D.Singer, Conflict in the International System, 1816-1977, in J.Singer, Explaining War (1979), pp. 57-82

M. Small and J. Singer, Resort to Arms: International and Civil Wars, 1816-1980 (Sage, 1982)

R. Siverson and M. Tennefoss, Interstate Conflicts: 1815-1965, II 9 (July 1982), 147-78

J. Levy, War in the Modern Great Power System, 1495-1975 (Kentucky, 1983)

B. Most and H. Starr, Conceptualizing War, JCR 27/1 (1983), 137-59

J. Levy, Analytical Problems in the Identification of Wars, II 14/2 (1988), 181-86

C. Gochman and R. Leng, Militarized Disputes, Incidents, and Crises: Identification and Classification, II 14 (1988), 157-63

D. Bennett and A. Stam, The Duration of Interstate Wars, 1816-1985, APSR 90 (June 1996), 239-57

D. Snow, Uncivil Conflicts: International Security and the New Internal Conflicts (Rienner, 1996)

D. Jones, S. Bremer, and J. Singer, Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns, CMPS 15/2 (1996), 163-213

M. Brecher and J. Wilkenfeld, A Study of Crisis (Michigan, 1997)

J. Bercovitch and R. Jackson, International Conflict: A Chronological Encylopedia of Conflicts and Their Management, 1945-1995 (Congressional Quarterly, 1997)

P. Brogan, World Conflicts (Scarecrow, 1998)

D.Geller and J.David Singer, Nations at War (Cambridge, 1998)

L. Freedman, The Changing Forms of Military Conflict, Survival 40/4 (Winter 1998-99): 39-56

*P. Wallensteen and M. Sollenberg, Armed Conflict, 1989-98, JPR 36/5 (1999), 593-606

The World at War (Jan. 1, 2000),

A. Overview (week 4)
For further reading: Overviews of the causes of war

K. Waltz, Man, the State, and War (Columbia, 1959)

G. Blainey, The Causes of War (Free Press, 1973/1988)

R. Rummel, Understanding Conflict and War, 5 vols. (Sage, 1975–1981)

G. Snyder and P. Diesing, Conflict Among Nations (Princeton, 1977)

J. David Singer, Correlates of War (1979)

B. Bueno de Mesquita, Theories of International Conflict: An Analysis and an Appraisal, in T. Gurr, ed., Handbook of Political Conflict: Theory and Research (Free Press, 1980)

J. Levy, The Causes of War: A Review of Theories and Evidence, in P. Tetlock, et al., Behavior, Society, and Nuclear War (Oxford, 1989)

J. Vasquez, The War Puzzle (Cambridge, 1993)

S. Brown, The Causes and Prevention of War (St. Martin’s, 1994)

H. Suganami, On the Causes of War (Oxford, 1996)

S. Van Evera, Causes of War: Power and the Roots of Conflict (Cornell, 1999)

G. Cashman, What Causes War? An Introduction to Theories of International Conflict (Lexington, 1999)

B. (week 4)


Human nature/biology


Individual belief systems

Cognitive limitations/bounded rationality: Misperception

Prospect theory

Motivated bias/emotional states/factors: stress

Group think

Social psychology: ingroups and outgroups

*D. Byman and K. Pollack, Let Us Now Praise Great Men: Bringing the Statesman Back In, IS 25/4 (Spring 2001), 107-46

*J. Levy, Misperception and the Causes of War, WP 36/1 (Oct. 1983), 76-99

*M.Haas, Prospect Theory and the Cuban Missile Crisis, ISQ 45/2 (June 2001), 241-70

*O. Holsti, Crisis Decision Making, in P. Tetlock, et al., Behavior, Society, and Nuclear War, vol. 1 (Oxford, 1989), pp. 8-84 (read 8-48; skim 9-18)
Further reading:

A. Stevens, The Roots of War (Paragon)

A.George, Presidential Decisionmaking in Foreign Policy (Westview, 1980)

R. Lebow, Between War Peace and War: The Nature of International Crises (Johns Hopkins, 1981)

Y. Vertzberger, The World In Their Minds (Stanford, 1990)

J. Post, The Impact of Crisis-Induced Stress on Policy Makers, in A. George, Avoiding War: Problems of Crisis Management (Westview, 1991), 471-94

D. Druckman, Nationalism, Patriotism, and Group Loyalty: A Social Psychological Perspective, Mershon International Studies Review 38, suppl. 1 (Apr. 1994), 43-68

N.Geva and A.Mintz, eds., Decision-Making on War and Peace: The Cognitive-Rational Debate (Lynn Reinner, 1997)

Stephen Peter Rosen, War and Human Nature (Princeton, 2004)
On misperception:

R. Jervis, Hypotheses on Misperception, WP 20/3 (1968), 454-79

R. Jervis, Perception and Misperception in International Politics (Princeton, 1976)

J. Snyder, Rationality at the Bring: The Role of Cognitive Processes in Failures of Deterrence, WP (Apr. 1978), 345-65

R. Jervis, War and Misperception, in Rotberg and Rabb, eds., The Origin and Prevention of Major Wars (1989), 101-26
On groupthink:

I. Janis and L. Mann, Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice, and Commitment (Free Press, 1977)

I. Janis, Victims of Groupthink (Houghton Mifflin, 1972)

I.Janis, Groupthin: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes (Houghton Mifflin, 1982)

G.Herek, I.Janis, and P.Huth, Decision Making During International Crisis: Is Quality of Process Related to Outcome? JCR 31/2 (June 1987), 203-26

P.Hart, Groupthink in Government (1990)

P. ‘t Hart, E. Stern, and B. Sundelius, eds., Beyond Groupthink (Michigan, 1997)

*M. Schafer and S. Crichlow, The Process-Outcome Connection in Foreign Policy Decision Making: A Quantitative Study Building on Groupthink, ISQ 46/1 (March 2002), 45-68

Social identity theory:

J. Mercer, Anarchy and Identity, IO 49/2 (Spring 1995), 229-52

On prospect theory:

J.Levy, Prospect Theory, Rational Choice, and International Relations, ISQ 41/1 (1997), 87-112

B.Farnham, ed., Avoiding Losses/Taking Risks: Prospect Theory and International Conflict (Michigan, 1994)

R.McDermott, Risk-Taking in International Politics: Prospect Theory and American Foreign Policy (Michigan, 1998)

J.Davis, Threats and Promises: The Pursuit of International Influence (Johns Hopkins, 2000)

C. (week 5)


Traditional views: Liberal, Marxist/Leninist, etc.

Govermental decisionmaking structures and processes

Bureaucratic politics

Organizational behavior

Militarism and military culture

Cult of the offensive

Interest groups and political competition

Logrolling and coalition formation

Diversionary theories of war

National characteristics: culture, nationalism, ethnicity, and ideology

*G. Allison, Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis, APSR 63/3 (Sept. 1969), 689-718

*J. Legro, Military Culture and Inadvertent Escalation in World War II, IS 18/4 (Spring 1994), 108-42

*J. Levy, The Diversionary Theory of War: A Critique, in M. Midlarsky, ed., Handbook of War Studies (Michigan, 1989), pp. 259-88

*K.Dassel and E.Reinhardt, Domestic Strife and the Initiation of Violence at Home and Abroad, AJPS 43/1 (Jan. 1999), 56-85
For further reading:

V. Lenin, Imperialism (New York, 1916)

G. Allison, Essence of Decision (Little, Brown, 1971)

J. Mueller, War, Presidents, and Public Opinion (Wiley, 1972)

J. Snyder, The Ideology of the Offensive (Cornell, 1984)

J. Levy, Domestic Politics and War, in Rotberg and Rabb, eds., The Origin and Prevention of Major Wars (1989)

J. Snyder, Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and Strategic Ideology (Cornell, 1991)

J. Hagan, Domestic Political Systems and War Proneness, Mershon International Studies Review 38, suppl. 2 (1994), 83-207

S. Walt, Revolution and War (Cornell, 1996)
J. Mueller, War, Presidents, and Public Opinion (Wiley, 1973)

S. Andreski, On the Peaceful Disposition of Military Dictatorships, JSS 3/3 (Dec. 1980), 3-10

B. Bueno de Mesquita and D. Lalman, Domestic Opposition and Foreign War, APSR 84/3 (Sept. 1990), 747 765.

Z. Maoz, Joining the Club of Nations: Political Development and International Conflict, 1816-1976, ISQ 33 (1989), 3-35 [199-231?]

B. Bueno de Mesquita and D. Lalman, War and Reason (Yale, 1992)

K. Gaubatz, Election Cycles and War, JCR 35 (1991), 212-44

Diversionary theory:

C. Ostrom and B. Job, The President and the Political Use of Force, APSR 80 (1986), 554-66

P. James and J. Oneal, The Influence of Domestic and International Politics on the President’s Use of Force, JCR 35 (1991), 307-33

T. Morgan and K. Bickers, Domestic Discontent and the External Use of Force, JCR 36/1 (Mar. 1992), 25-52 [use of force related to partisan, not overall, levels of support]

D. Richards et al., Good Times, Bad Times, and the Diversionary Use of Force: A Tale of Some Not-so-free Agents, JCR 37/3 (1993), 504-35

R. Miller, Domestic Structures and the Diversionary Use of Force, AJPS 39 (1995), 760-85

A. Smith, Diversionary Foreign Policy in Democratic Systems, ISQ 40 (1996), 133-53

J. Meernik and P. Waterman, The Myth of the Diversionary Use of Force by American Presidents, PRQ 49 (1996), 573-90

C.Gelpi, Democratic Diversions: Governmental Structure and the Externalization of Domestic Conflict, JCR 41 (1997), 255-82

Matthew Baum, The Constituent Foundations of the Rally-Round-the-Flag Phenomenon, ISQ 46/2 (June 2002), 263-98

Ideology, Culture, Nationalism, and Ethnicity:

B. Posen, Nationalism, the Mass Army, and Military Power, IS 18/2 (Fall 1993), 80-124

S. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations? FA 72/3 (1993), 22-49

E. Henderson, Culture or Contiguity? Ethnic Conflict, the Similarity of States, and the Onset of War, 1820-1989, JCR 41 (Oct. 1997), 649-68

E. Henderson and R. Tucker, Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of Civilizations and International Conflict ISQ 45/2 (June 2001), 317-338

Valerie Hudson and Andrea Den Boer, A Surplus of Men, A Deficit of Peace: Security and Sex Ratios in Asia’s Largest States, IS 26/5 (Spring 2002), 5-38


F. Rourke, Bureaucracy and Foreign Policy (John Hopkins, 1972), 18-40

A. Vagts, Defense and Diplomacy (Kings Crown, 1956), 263-377, 477-90

A. Vagts, A History of Militarism (Free Press, 1959)

S. Finer, Man on Horseback (Penguin, 1975)

B. Brodie, War and Politics (Macmillan, 1973), 479-96

S. Van Evera, The Cult of the Offensive and the Origins of the First World War, IS 9/1 (Summer 1984), 58-107

K. Dassel, Civilians, Soldiers, and Strife: Domestic Sources of International Aggression, IS 23/1 (Summer 1998), 107-40

Bureaucratic politics and organizational behavior:

G.Allison and M.Halperin, Bureaucratic Politics, in R.Ullman and R.Tanter, eds., Theory and Policy in International Relations (Princeton, 1972)

M.Halperin, The Decision to Deply the ABM, WP 25/1 (Oct. 1972), 62-95

S.Krasner, Are Bureaucracies Important? (Or Allison Wonderland), Foreign Policy 7 (Summer 1972), 159-79

L.Freedman, Logic, Politics and Foreign Policy Processes, International Affairs 52/3 (July 1976), 434-49

J.Rosati, Developing a Systematic Decision-Making Framework, WP 33/2 (Jan. 1981), 234-52

J. Levy, Organizational Routines and the Causes of War, ISQ 30/2 (June 1986), 193-222

D. Welch, The Organizational Process Model, IS 17/2 (Fall 1992), 112-46

T.McKeown, Plans and Routines, Bureaucratic Bargaining, and the CMC, JOP 63/4 (Nov. 2001), 1163-90 – shows that organizational routines and plans were not constraining


  1   2   3

The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page