Banerjee - IR308 International Relations Theory

Syllabus For Guidance – IR308 International Relations Theory (Spring 2013)

Prof. Sanjoy Banerjee

NOTA BENE! SYLLABUS IS FOR GUIDANCE ONLY! THE INSTRUCTOR WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE MOST RECENT SYLLABUS ON COURSE START DATE!

The purpose of IR 308, Fundamentals of IR: Theory and Issues, is to develop an understanding of the debates about theory and issues in the discipline. Knowledge in this field is structured as a debate among complex arguments. These arguments include theories, evidence, and rebuttals to other arguments. Expertise in the field consists of knowing the rival arguments and assessing their relative success at establishing themselves and undermining their rivals. Within the ongoing debate about IR theory, some formulations rise and others fall. Within the issues debates, some strategies and solutions gain credibility and others lose it.

Another key tenet of the course is that theories are about facts. They need to be tested against facts and compared with facts. Although facts themselves are described with words and categories derived from theories, they are more concrete than theories.

Prerequisites:

Students may take IR 308 only if they have completed IR 104 or IR 204, or an equivalent class. These prerequisite courses may not be taken concurrently with IR 308.

Grading:

30% midterm exam, 40% term paper, 20% presentation, and 10% attendance and class participation.

Plagiarism, as defined by SFSU Plagiarism - Office of Student Conduct is strictly prohibited. Copying from other students during an exam is prohibited and constitutes plagiarism. Plagiarism on presentations and term papers is also prohibited and carries similar penalties. All text in presentations and term papers quoted from other authors should be cited. Any plagiarism will result in an F on the exam or assignment. A student caught plagiarizing should expect to be referred to the SFSU Administration.

It is vital that you back up your writing on to storage media separate from your computer. Loss of work for any reason will not be accepted as an excuse for delay in the submission of assignments.

If you have a disability that requires accommodation on tests under SFSU rules, please contact me. The Disability Programs and Resource Center (dprc@sfsu.edu) is available on campus and provides facilities.

Text:

Robert Jackson and Georg Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations: Theories and approaches (J&S) Fourth edition, Oxford University Press.

Presentation:

Students will be assigned an article from the assigned readings and from the list of additional articles below. The student will be expected to present to the class using presentation graphics software (such as Power Point) a discussion of the assigned article meeting the following criteria:

  1. Summarize the article in three slides. Clarify focus author's reasoning and main conclusions. This summary should focus on the questions below.
  2. Present one theory and one body of evidence, from separate sources, that support the focus author's reasoning and main conclusions. The supporting theory should drawn from academic sources and should not have any authors in common with the focus theory. Formulate two theoretical questions that the focus theory answers yes and the supporting theory answers yes. Formulate another theoretical question with empirical reference that the supporting theory answers yes and the data answers yes. These questions should be somewhat general, and not about concrete facts. For the focus and supporting theory, give the quotes that answer your questions. Please give the quotes in the tables. The data should be from cited sources, not encyclopedias, and there should be multiple cases or detailed treatment of a single case. No article from this syllabus may be cited. Summarize in tables:
Table summary of Quotes
  Focus Theory Supporting Theory
Q1 Yes. Quote. Yes. Quote.
Q2 Yes. Quote. Yes. Quote.
Table Summary of Quotes (2)
  Focus Theory Supporting Data
Q3 Yes. Quote. Yes. Cite Sources.

3. Present another unassigned theory from an academic source and separately sourced body of evidence that contradict the focus author's reasoning and main conclusions. Identify two theoretical questions that the focus theory answers yes and the opposing theory answers no. Identify another theoretical question with empirical reference the focus theory answers yes and the data answers no. For the focus and opposing theory, give the quotes that answer your questions. The data should be from cited sources and there should be multiple cases or detailed treatment of a single case. The data for Q3 and Q6 should be different from each other. Elaborate upon the answers. No article listed in this syllabus may be cited. Summarize in tables:

      Table summary of Quotes (3)
        Focus Theory Opposing Theory
      Q4 Yes. Quote. No. Quote.
      Q5 Yes. Quote. No. Quote.
      Table Summary of Quotes (4)
        Focus Theory Opposing Data
      Q6 Yes. Quote. No. Cite Sources.

      The presentation slides should be e-mailed to me prior to the start of the class in which you have been scheduled to present. Presentations scheduled later will be graded more stringently than presentations scheduled earlier.

      Term paper:

      A term paper of 3000 words is due on 24 May 2013 regardless of the date of your presentation. The paper should be based on your presentation and should include revised tables of the six questions in the presentation. In the term paper examine how your focus theory fits into a debate in the IR literature. Examine what data is consistent with it and what data is not. The paper should be in academic style. Follow the citation format of any of the assigned journal articles.

      Electronic sources of readings:

      Students are expected to retrieve most of the assigned readings from the SFSU Library web site. See The Electronic Journals List. You can find most of the journals listed below through that, and then go to the volume and number indicated below.Some readings are available only on JSTOR. Most readings can be accessed through the library web site. Some readings will be sent out as e-mail attachments. If it takes you more than 15 minutes to find a reading, please request it from me by e-mail.

      Additional Readings:

      R. McKewon “Norm regress,” International relations 23, 1

      M. Findley and S. Edwards, “Accounting for the unaccounted” International studies quarterly 51

      D. Nexon and T. Wright “What’s at stake in the American empire debate” American political science review 101, 2

      E. Moe “Mancur Olson and structural economic change,” Review of international political economy 16, 2

      D. Rowe, “World economic expansion …” International organization 53, 2

      T. V. Paul, “Soft balancing in the age of US primacy,” International security 30, 1

      W. Wohlforth “The stability of a unipolar world,” International security 24, 1

      E. Goh “Great powers and hierarchical orders in Southeast Asia,” International security 32, 3

      D. Lake, “Escape from the state of nature,” International security 32, 1

      J. Levy and W. Thompson “Balancing on land and at sea” International security 35, 1

      A. Agathangelou and L. Ling, “Power, borders, security, wealth” International studies quarterly 48, 3

      W. Dunaway “The double register of history” Journal of world systems research 7, 1 (jwsr.ucr.edu)

      J. Vickers, “Bringing nations in” International feminist journal of politics 8, 1

      K. Fierke “The dialogues of maneuver and entanglement” Millennium 28, 1

      E. Adler, “The spread of security communities,” European journal of international relations 14, 2

      J. Mitzen “Ontological security in world politics” European journal of international relations 12, 3

      A. Friedberg “Ripe for rivalry” International security 18, 3 (available via JSTOR)

      D. Kang “Getting Asia wrong,” International security 27, 4

      A. Acharya “Will Asia’s past be its future?” International security 28, 3

      K. Cheng-Chwee “The essence of hedging” Contemporary Southeast Asia 30, 2

      M. Green and D. Twining “Democracy and American grand strategy in Asia” Contemporary Southeast Asia 30, 1

      E. Aysha “September 11 and the Middle East failures of US “soft power” International relations 19, 2

      A. Tsygankov, “Vladimir Putin’s vision of Russia as a normal great power,” Post-Soviet affairs 21, 2

      M. Levinger and P. Lytle “Myth and mobilization,” Nations and nationalism 7, 2

      B. Buzan “A world order without superpowers” International relations 25, 1

      D. Drezner “Will currency follow the flag?” International relations of the Asia-Pacific 10, 3

      P. Carmody “An Asian-driven economic recovery in Africa?” World development 37, 7

      D. Victor, “Toward effective international cooperation on climate change” Global environmental politics 6, 3

      NOTA BENE! SYLLABUS IS FOR GUIDANCE ONLY! THE INSTRUCTOR WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE MOST RECENT SYLLABUS ON COURSE START DATE!