POL 240 Introduction to International Relations Spring 2012 Professor: David Carter Office: 33 Corwin Hall Office Hours: 3 5pm Tues. Email: dbcarter@princeton.edu Course Location: 28 McCosh Course Time: 10:00am 10:50pm Tues./Thurs. Preceptors: Scott Abramson: sabramso@princeton.edu Marzenna James (Course Administrator): mjames@princeton.edu OVERVIEW: This course provides a broad exploration of the field of international relations. We cover key theoretical concepts in IR and discuss how empirical evidence and key historical events relate to and inform theory. The course is organized around specific substantive questions such as: why do states choose to fight rather than negotiate?; why are levels of economic development among states so unequal?; how do international institutions affect conflict and cooperation?; what logic is behind the use of terrorism by political actors?; and, why do states experience civil war? Most weeks in the course, we will explore one big topic. Each week, we will generally first read the textbook chapter, which provides a nice overview and references to key pieces of literature. For the second lecture (and precept), we will read two or three important articles on the topic. This way, we will gain background through the textbook and subsequently build upon it with more specialized readings. GRADING: Final grades for this course are determined as follows: Midterm Exam - 20% Final Exam - 30% Precept Participation - 20% Two Short Papers - 30% Below are more detailed explanations of each of the components to the final grade. 1. Examinations: Two in-class examinations will be given during the course. The exams will consist of two sections: identification of key concepts and essay. The identification section will list 8 10 key concepts or ideas from the course readings and lectures of which students will need to choose 6 8 to explain. The concept 1
should be correctly explained and then briefly applied to an actual example from the readings or from current events. The essay portion of the exams will consist of 3 questions of which students must choose 2 to answer. All identification concepts and essay questions will come directly from the readings and lectures, so exams will reward all who have kept up with the work. The second examination will focus mostly on material covered since the first examination; however, concepts covered previous to the first examination will inevitably come up, as the topics in the course are all closely linked. 2. Short Papers: Two short papers, 3 5 pages each, will be due during the semester. One paper should take a current event and a second should take a historical event and discuss and analyze it using the concepts learned in class. For instance, you might analyze the Argentinian junta s decision to attack Britain in the Falklands using ideas from the War and Peace topic in the course. The only restriction on topics is that you do not choose one that is used in the assigned readings or analyzed in lectures. You will obviously need to consult newspapers and other sources (e.g., history books) to write the papers. The two papers have due dates listed in the Course Schedule; however you can turn your paper in at any point before the specified date. 3. Participation: Active participation in precept discussions are important to ensure that everyone benefits as much as possible from the course. A baseline for the participation grade is simply attendance. It is quite hard for your preceptor to award a good participation grade to students who are not there. Beyond that, students are expected to weigh in on discussions in a way that demonstrates they have done the readings and more importantly, given some serious thought to them. Your preceptor is fully in charge of your final precept grade, although we will all closely coordinate to make sure our grading standards are the same. COURSE POLICIES: The course will follow the Politics department late penalty of 1/3 grade drop for each 24 hour delay in submission of written assignments. Requests for extensions or re-grading must be accompanied by a comprehensive written explanation including note from Princeton health services in case of medical justification. Note that re-grading will be completed by the professor and may result in raising or lowering the original grade. Students are expected to familiarize themselves with the University Honor Code and plagiarism policy: http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pub/integrity/pages/intro/index.htm READINGS: The course has one main textbook. Any additional readings will be available online. Jeffry A Frieden, David A. Lake, & Kenneth A. Schultz. 2010. World Politics: Interests, Interactions, Institutions. New York: W.W. Norton. (FLS) 2
COURSE SCHEDULE 1. February 7: Introduction to the Study of International Relations. FLS: Introduction and Chapter 1 2. February 9: Understanding Interests, Interactions, Institutions. FLS: Chapter 2 James Fearon. 1998. Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Cooperation. International Organization 52(2): 269 305. John J. Mearsheimer. 1995. The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security 19(3): 5 49. 3. February 14: War and Peace. FLS: Chapter 3 4. February 16: War and Peace. Dan Reiter. 2003. Exploring the Bargaining Model of War Perspectives on Politics 1(1): 27 43. Tanisha Fazal. 2004. State Death in the International System. International Organization 58(2): 311 344. Stacie E. Goddard. 2006. Uncommon Ground: Indivisible Territory and the Politics of Legitimacy. International Organization 60(1): 35 68. 5. February 21: War and Peace: Domestic Politics. FLS: Chapter 4 6. February 23: War and Peace: Domestic Politics. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, James D. Morrow, Randolph Siverson, & Alastair Smith. 1999. An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace. American Political Science Review 93(4): 791 807. Michael Tomz. 2007. Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations: An Experimental Approach. International Organization 61: 821 840. 7. February 28: War and Peace: International Institutions. FLS: Chapter 5 8. March 1: War and Peace: International Institutions. 3
Virginia Page Fortna. 2004. Interstate Peacekeeping: Causal Mechanisms and Empirical Effects. World Politics 56: 481 519. Sara McLaughlin Mitchell and Paul R. Hensel. 2007. International Institutions and Compliance with Agreements. American Journal of Political Science 51(4): 721 737. 9. March 6: International Trade. FLS: Chapter 6 10. March 8: International Trade. First Short Paper Due, 5pm. Ronald Rogowski. 1987. Political Cleavages and Changing Exposure to Trade American Political Science Review 81(4): 1121 1137. Dani Rodrik. 2001. Trading in Illusions. Foreign Policy No. 123 (March April): 54 62. Peter D. Sutherland. 2008. Transforming Nations: How the WTO Boosts Economies and Opens Societies. Foreign Affairs 87(2): 125 136. 11. March 13: International Financial Relations. FLS: Chapter 7 Lawrence H. Summers. 2000. International Financial Crises: Causes, Prevention, and Cures. American Economic Review 90(2): 1 16. 12. March 15: International Monetary Relations. FLS: Chapter 8 Benjamin J. Cohen. 2008. The International Monetary System: Diffusion and Ambiguity. International Affairs 84(3): 455 470. 13. March 20 & 22: Spring Break. 14. March 27: Mid-term Examination. 15. March 29: Development: Wealth and Poverty. FLS: Chapter 9 16. April 3: No Class International Studies Association Annual Convention. 17. April 5: Development and Foreign Aid. 4
Randall W. Stone. 2004. The Political Economy of IMF Lending in Africa. American Political Science Review 98(4): 570 591. William Easterly. 2003. Can Foreign Aid Buy Growth? Journal of Economic Perspectives 17(3): 23 48. Joseph Wright and Matthew Winters. 2010. The Politics of Effective Foreign Aid. Annual Review of Political Science 13: 61 80. 18. April 10: Human Rights. FLS: Chapter 11 19. April 12: Economic Sanctions. Kimberly Ann Elliot and Gary Clyde Hufbauer. 1999. Same Song, Same Refrain? Economic Sanctions in the 1990 s. American Economic Review 89(2): 403 408. Navin A. Bapat and T. Clifton Morgan. 2009. Multilateral Versus Unilateral Sanctions Reconsidered: A Test Using New Data. International Studies Quarterly 53: 1075 1094. Meghan L. O Sullivan. 2010. Iran and the Great Sanctions Debate. The Washington Quarterly 33(4): 7 21. 20. April 17: Territorial Disputes and International Law. Anne-Marie Slaughter, Andrew S. Tulumello, and Stepan Wood. 1998. International Law and International Relations Theory: A New Generation of Interdisciplinary Scholarship, The American Journal of International Law 92(3): 367 397. Todd L. Allee and Paul K. Huth. 2006. Legitimizing Dispute Settlement: International Legal Rulings and Domestic Political Cover. American Political Science Review 100(2): 219 234. Paul K. Huth, Sarah E. Croco, and Benjamin J. Appel. 2011. Does International Law Promote the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes? Evidence from the Study of Territorial Conflicts since 1945. American Political Science Review 105(2): 415 436. 21. April 19: The Global Environment. FLS: Chapter 12 Idean Salehyan. 2008. From Climate Change to Conflict? No Consensus Yet. Journal of Peace Research 45(3): 315 326. 22. April 24: Transnational Networks in IR. 5
FLS: Chapter 10 23. April 26: Terrorism in IR. Daniel Byman. 2005. Deadly Connections: States that Sponsor Terrorism Cambridge University Press. pp. 21 78. William F. Shugart. 2006. An Analytical History of Terrorism. Public Choice 128: 7 39. Andrew Kydd and Barbara F. Walter. 2006. The Strategies of Terrorism. International Security 31(1): 49 80. 24. May 1: Civil Wars in International Relations. James D. Fearon and David Laitin. 2003. Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil War. American Political Science Review 97(1): 75 90. Barbara Walter. 1997. The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement. International Organization 51(3): 335 364. Virginia Page Fortna. 2004. Does Peacekeeping Keep Peace? International Intervention and the Duration of Peace After Civil War. International Studies Quarterly 48(2): 269 292. 25. May 3: The Future of IR. Second Short Paper Due, 5pm. FLS: Chapter 13 26. Final Exam: Date TBA. 6