Assignments

All assignments and exams use English.

Response paper:

Starting from week 4, each student will select one week to be a discussion leader. The discussion leader is required to write a response paper, which is due one night before the class. The discussion leader will send the response paper to all students. Each paper should be at least 3-pages long (Times New Roman font size of 12, double space), including SUMMARIES and CRITIQUE. The quality of the response paper is primarily based on critique, not summaries. At the end of the paper, students will propose two questions for class discussion. NO COPY&PASTE from the text (especially the sumamries). ALWAYS PARAPHRASE!

Presentation:

 The discussion leaders will take 20-30 minutes to present and discuss his/her paper at the beginning of the class. No slides for presentation.

PhD students: write TWO response papers and present on one week.

Academic resource search: each discussion leader will be responsible for the required articles of the week he/she presents. Please refer to the “class materials” part.  

Book review:

Each student will pick one book. The best source of booklist is the reading list of the last qualification exam. Students can also select a book of their own interest. Student need to write on different books. After the instructor agrees with the selection, the student will write a book review with no more than 5000 words (Times New Roman font size of 12, double space). Examples of reviews can be found in Perspective of Politics and International Studies Review. Please note that a book review is more than a summary. It is a critical response to a scholarly work. Authors usually cite other scholarly works to evaluate the book being reviewed. Book review is due on week 17. And please, NO COPY&PASTE from the book. ALWAYS PARAPHRASE!

Final exam:

Two hours open book exam.

Readings

Week 1 (9/17): Introduction to the course

Marston, Hunter. “The U.S.-China Cold War Is a Myth.” Foreign Policy. Accessed June 8, 2020. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/09/06/the-u-s-china-cold-war-is-a-myth/.

*Recommended

Kaplan, Robert D. “A New Cold War Has Begun.” Foreign Policy. Accessed July 25, 2019. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/01/07/a-new-cold-war-has-begun/.

Week 2 (9/24): the use of theory: where we are?

Kristensen, Peter Marcus. 2018. “International Relations at the End: A Sociological Autopsy.” International Studies Quarterly. Accessed May 14, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqy002.

Lake, David A. 2011. “Why ‘Isms’ Are Evil: Theory, Epistemology, and Academic Sects as Impediments to Understanding and Progress.” International Studies Quarterly 55 (2): 465–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2011.00661.x.

Whyte, Christopher. “Can We Change the Topic, Please? Assessing the Theoretical Construction of International Relations Scholarship.” International Studies Quarterly 63, no. 2 (June 1, 2019): 432–47. doi:10.1093/isq/sqy050.

*Recommended

Desch, Michael C. 2019. “How Political Science Became Irrelevant.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, February 27, 2019. https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Political-Science-Became/245777.

Tickner, J. Ann. 1997. “You Just Don’t Understand: Troubled Engagements between Feminists and IR Theorists.” International Studies Quarterly 41 (4): 611–32.

Geddes, Barbara. 2003. Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics. University of Michigan Press, especially 131-173.

Reiter, Dan. 2015. “Should We Leave Behind the Subfield of International Relations?” Annual Review of Political Science 18 (1): 481–99. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-053013-041156.

Sil, Rudra, and Peter Joachim Katzenstein. 2010. Beyond Paradigms: Analytic Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire?; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Week 3 (10/1): Autumn festival, no class  

Week 4 (10/8): Concepts in IR

Holsti, Kalevi J. “Change in International Politics: The View from High Altitude.” International Studies Review 20, no. 2 (June 1, 2018): 186–94. doi:10.1093/isr/viy030.

Baldwin, David. “Power and International Relations”. In Carlsnaes, Walter, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons, eds. 2012. Handbook of International Relations. 2 edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Powell, Robert. 1991. “Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory.” The American Political Science Review 85 (4): 1303–20.

Fazal, Tanisha M. 2004. “State Death in the International System.” International Organization 58 (2): 311–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818304582048.

*Recommended

Goemans, Hein. 2006. “Bounded Communities: Territoriality, Territorial Attachment, and Conflict.” Territoriality and Conflict in an Era of Globalization, 25–61.

Mattern, Janice Bially, “The Concept of Power and the (Un)discipline of International Relations”, in The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. OUP Oxford.

Dahl, Robert A. “The Concept of Power.” Behavioral Science 2, no. 3 (January 1, 1957): 201–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830020303.

Lee, Melissa M. 2018. “The International Politics of Incomplete Sovereignty: How Hostile Neighbors Weaken the State.” International Organization 72 (2): 283–315. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818318000085.

Grieco, “Understanding the Problem of International Cooperation,” in Baldwin, David A. 1993. Neorealism and Neoliberalism?: The Contemporary Debate. New Directions in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.

Snidal, Duncan. 1991. “International Cooperation among Relative Gains Maximizers.” International Studies Quarterly 35 (4): 387–402.

Week 5 (10/15)  Classical Realism, balance of power

Thucydides, ‘The Melian Dialogue’

Hans J. Morgenthau & Kenneth Thompson. Politics among Nations: the Struggle for Power and Peace, sixth edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1985, Ch1 “A Realist Theory of International Politics”, Ch11 “the Balance of Power”.

Leeds, B.A. 2003. “Do Alliances Deter Aggression? The Influence of Military Alliances on the Initiation of Militarized Interstate Disputes.” American Journal of Political Science 47 (3): 427–439.

Reed, William. “Information, Power, and War.” American Political Science Review 97, no. 04 (2003): 633–41. doi:10.1017/S0003055403000923.

*Recommended

Carr, Edward Hallett. 1964. The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations. 450th ed. edition. New York, N.Y.: Harper Perennial. Ch5-6

Lobell, Steven E. “A Granular Theory of Balancing.” International Studies Quarterly 62, no. 3 (September 1, 2018): 593–605. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqy011.

Schweller, Randall L. “New Realist Research on Alliances: Refining, Not Refuting, Waltz’s Balancing Proposition.” The American Political Science Review 91, no. 4 (1997): 927–30.

Week 6 (10/22): Neorealism (I), hierarchy in IR

Waltz, Kenneth Neal. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Edited by Anonymous. Addison-Wesley Series in Political Science. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. Skim chapters 1-2, and read chapters 3-8.

Lake, D.A. 2009. Hierarchy in International Relations. Cornell Univ Pr, Ch2

Walt, Stephen M. “Everyone Misunderstands the Reason for the U.S.-China Cold War.” Foreign Policy. Accessed July 7, 2020. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/30/china-united-states-new-cold-war-foreign-policy/.

*Recommended

Keohane, Robert O., and N. Waltz Kenneth. 2000. “The Neorealist and its Critic.” International Security 25 (3): 204–5.

Krauthammer, C. 1990. “The Unipolar Moment.” Foreign Affairs 70 (1): 23–33.

Wæver, Ole. 2009. “Waltz’s Theory of Theory.” International Relations 23 (2): 201–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117809104635.

Legro, Jeffrey W., and Andrew Moravcsik. 1999. “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” International Security 24 (2): 5–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228899560130.

Feaver, Peter D., Gunther Hellmann, Randall L. Schweller, Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, William C. Wohlforth, Jeffrey W. Legro, and Andrew Moravcsik. 2000. “Brother, Can You Spare a Paradigm?(Or Was Anybody Ever a Realist?).” International Security 25 (1): 165–193.

Singer, J. David. “The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations.” World Politics 14, no. 1 (October 1961): 77–92. https://doi.org/10.2307/2009557.

Art, Robert J., and Kenneth Neal Waltz. The Use of Force: Military Power and International Politics. Rowman & Littlefield, 2009.

Kang, David C. “International Order in Historical East Asia: Tribute and Hierarchy Beyond Sinocentrism and Eurocentrism.” International Organization 74, no. 1 (ed 2020): 65–93. doi:10.1017/S0020818319000274.

MacKay, Joseph. “Legitimation Strategies in International Hierarchies.” International Studies Quarterly 63, no. 3 (September 1, 2019): 717–25. doi:10.1093/isq/sqz038.

Week 7 (10/29): Neorealism (II) defensive realism

Jervis, Robert. 1978. “Cooperation Under the Security Dilemma.” World Politics 30 (2): 167–214.

Christensen, Thomas J., and Jack Snyder. 1990. “Chain Gangs and Passed Bucks: Predicting Alliance Patterns in Multipolarity.” International Organization 44 (2): 137–68.

Waltz, Kenneth N. 2000. “Structural Realism after the Cold War.” International Security 25 (1): 5–41.

*Recommended

Baldwin, David A. 1993. Neorealism and Neoliberalism?: The Contemporary Debate. New Directions in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press. Ch2

Organski, A. F. K., and Jacek Kugler. 1980. The War Ledger. Edited by Anonymous. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Vasquez, John A. “The Realist Paradigm and Degenerative versus Progressive Research Programs: An Appraisal of Neotraditional Research on Waltz’s Balancing Proposition.” The American Political Science Review 91, no. 4 (1997): 899–912.

Smith, Alastair. “Alliance Formation and War.” International Studies Quarterly 39, no. 4 (December 1, 1995): 405–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600800.

Glaser, Charles L. “Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-Help.” International Security 19, no. 3 (1994): 50–90. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539079.

Week 8 (11/5): Neoclassical realism and the problem of prestige/reputation

Narizny, Kevin. 2017. “On Systemic Paradigms and Domestic Politics: A Critique of the Newest Realism.” International Security 42 (2): 155–90.

Mercer, Jonathan. 2017. “The Illusion of International Prestige.” International Security 41 (4): 133–68. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00276.

Taliaferro, Jeffrey W., Steven E. Lobell, and Norrin M. Ripsman. “Is Peaceful Change in World Politics Always Desirable? A Neoclassical Realist Perspective.” International Studies Review 20, no. 2 (June 1, 2018): 283–91. doi:10.1093/isr/viy023.

*Recommended

Schweller, Randall L. 2006. Unanswered Threats?: Political Constraints on the Balance of Power. Princeton Studies in International History and Politics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University. Intro p1-10, Ch2

Rose, Gideon. 1998. “Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy.” World Politics 51 (1): 144–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100007814.

Kupchan, Charles. 1994. The Vulnerability of Empire. Cornell Studies in Security Affairs. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Ch 1-2.

Ripsman, Norrin M., Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, and Steven E. Lobell. 2016. Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics. 1 edition. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Brawley, Mark R. 2013. Political Economy and Grand Strategy: A Neoclassical Realist View. 1 edition. London: Routledge.

Lobell, Steven E., Norrin M. Ripsman, and Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, eds. 2009. Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy. 1 edition. Cambridge, UK?; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Copeland, Dale C. The Origins of Major War. Cornell University Press, 2001.

Week 9 (11/12): Offensive Realism and hedging

Mearsheimer, John J. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.  New York: Norton.

Koga, Kei. “The Concept of ‘Hedging’ Revisited: The Case of Japan’s Foreign Policy Strategy in East Asia’s Power Shift.” International Studies Review 20, no. 4 (December 1, 2018): 633–60. doi:10.1093/isr/vix059.

*Recommended

Kuik, Cheng-Chwee. 2016. “How Do Weaker States Hedge? Unpacking ASEAN States’ Alignment Behavior towards China.” Journal of Contemporary China 25 (100): 500–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2015.1132714.

Mearsheimer, John J. 1990. “Why We Will Soon Miss the Cold War.” Atlantic (0276-9077) 266 (2): 35.

Snyder, H. Glenn. 2002. “Mearsheimer’s World-Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security: A Review Essay.” International Security 27 (1): 149–73.

Zakaria, Fareed. 1999. From Wealth to Power?: The Unusual Origins of America’s World Role. Princeton Studies in International History and Politics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Ch2

Gartzke, Erik. 1999. “War Is in the Error Term.” International Organization 53 (3): 567–87. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081899550995.

Week 10 (11/19): bargaining, coercive diplomacy, foreign policymaking,

Sechser, Todd S. 2018. “Reputations and Signaling in Coercive Bargaining.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 62 (2): 318–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002716652687.

Levy, Jack S. “Prospect Theory, Rational Choice, and International Relations.” International Studies Quarterly 41, no. 1 (March 1, 1997): 87–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/0020-8833.00034

Yarhi-Milo, Keren. 2013. “In the Eye of the Beholder: How Leaders and Intelligence Communities Assess the Intentions of Adversaries.” International Security 38 (1): 7–51. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00128.

*Recommended

Wagner, R. Harrison. “The Theory of Games and the Balance of Power.” World Politics 38, no. 4 (July 1986): 546–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010166.

Niou, Emerson M. S., Peter C. Ordeshook, and Gregory F. Rose. 1989. The Balance of Power?: Stability in International Systems, Cambridge University Press.

Kahler, Miles. “Rationality in International Relations.” International Organization 52, no. 04 (1998): 919–41. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550680.

McDermott, Rose. 2004. “Prospect Theory in Political Science: Gains and Losses From the First Decade.” Political Psychology 25 (2): 289–312. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00372.x.

Horowitz, Michael C., and Allan C. Stam. 2014. “How Prior Military Experience Influences the Future Militarized Behavior of Leaders.” International Organization 68 (3): 527–59. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818314000046.

Week 11 (11/26): Liberalism, democratic peace

Schweller, Randall L. “Organised Anarchy: Revisiting G. John Ikenberry’s After Victory.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 21, no. 1 (February 1, 2019): 63–70. doi:10.1177/1369148118791983.

Rosato, Sebastian. 2003. “The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory.” American Political Science Review 97 (4): 585–602.

Hyde, Susan D., and Elizabeth N. Saunders. “Recapturing Regime Type in International Relations: Leaders, Institutions, and Agency Space.” International Organization 74, no. 2 (ed 2020): 363–95. doi:10.1017/S0020818319000365.

*Recommended

Christian Reus-Smit, “The Strange Death of Liberal IR Theory,” European Journal of

International Law, 12, 3 (2001): 573-93

Kucik, J., and E. Reinhardt. 2008. “Does Flexibility Promote Cooperation? An Application to the Global Trade Regime.” International Organization 62 (03): 477–505.

Mesquita, Bruce Bueno de, James D. Morrow, Randolph M. Siverson, and Alastair Smith. 1999. “An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace.” American Political Science Review 93 (4): 791–807. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586113.

Weiss, Jessica Chen. 2013. “Authoritarian Signaling, Mass Audiences, and Nationalist Protest in China.” International Organization 67 (1): 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818312000380.Doyle, Michael W. 2005. “Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace.” American Political Science Review null (03): 463–466.

Moravcsik, Andrew. 1997. “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics.” International Organization 51 (4): 513–53. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081897550447.

Dafoe, A. 2010. “Statistical Critiques of the Democratic Peace: Caveat Emptor.” American Journal of Political Science.

Oneal, John R., and Bruce Russett. Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations. 1st ed. W. W. Norton & Company, 2001.

Oneal, John R, and Bruce M Russet. 1997. “The Classical Liberals Were Right: Democracy, Interdependence, and Conflict, 1950–1985.” International Studies Quarterly 41 (2): 267–94.

Gartzke, Erik. 2007. “The Capitalist Peace.” American Journal of Political Science 51 (1): 166–91

Kindleberger, Charles P. 1986. The World in Depression, 1929-1939: Revised and Enlarged Edition. Revised. University of California Press.

Ikenberry, G. John. 2018. “The End of Liberal International Order?” International Affairs 94 (1):7–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iix241.

Jeffry A. Frieden, “Actors and Preferences in International Relations,” in David A. Lake and Robert Powell, eds., Strategic Choice and International Relations (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1999), pp. 39–76.

Week 12 (12/3): Neoliberal institutionalism, interdependence

Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Ch3&9.

Krasner, Stephen D. 1983. International Regimes. Cornell Studies in Political Economy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Ch1

Farrell, Henry, and Abraham L. Newman. 2019. “Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion.” International Security 44 (1): 42–79. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351.

*Recommended

Sommerer, Thomas, and Jonas Tallberg. “Diffusion Across International Organizations: Connectivity and Convergence.” International Organization 73, no. 2 (ed 2019): 399–433. doi:10.1017/S0020818318000450.

 Cha, Taesuh. 2019. “Is Anybody Still a Globalist? Rereading the Trajectory of US Grand Strategy and the End of the Transnational Moment.” Globalizations, May. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14747731.2019.1611011

Reus-Smit, Christian. 1997. “The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions.” International Organization 51 (4): 555–89. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081897550456.

Keohane, O. Robert. 1998. “International Institutions: Can Interdependence Work?” Foreign Policy, no. 110: 82–96+194.

Gilpin, Robert. 1981. War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge?; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Keohane, Robert O. 1989. Power and Interdependence. Edited by Anonymous. Scott, Foresman/Little, Brown Series in Political Science. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman.

Koremenos, Barbara, Charles Lipson, and Duncan Snidal. 2001. “The Rational Design of International Institutions.” International Organization 55 (04): 761–799.

Week 13 (12/10): Constructivism (I), social identity

Wendt, Alexander. 1992. “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.” International Organization 46 (02): 391–425.

Hopf, Ted. 1998. “The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory.” International Security 23 (1): 171–200.

Larson, Deborah Welch, and Alexei Shevchenko. “Lost in Misconceptions about Social Identity Theory.” International Studies Quarterly 63, no. 4 (December 1, 2019): 1189–91. doi:10.1093/isq/sqz071.

*Recommended

Hopf, Ted. 2017. “Change in International Practices.” European Journal of International Relations, August, 1354066117718041. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066117718041.

Johnston, Iain. 2007. Social States: China in International Institutions, 1980-2000. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, Ch1

Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press.

Mercer, Jonathan. “Anarchy and Identity.” International Organization 49, no. 02 (1995): 229–52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028381.

Week 14 (12/17):  Constructivism (II) , non-state actors and policy diffusion

Keck, Margaret E., and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Cornell University Press, Ch1&6.

Hall, Nina, Hans Peter Schmitz, and J. Michael Dedmon. “Transnational Advocacy and NGOs in the Digital Era: New Forms of Networked Power.” International Studies Quarterly 64, no. 1 (March 1, 2020): 159–67. doi:10.1093/isq/sqz052.

Gilardi, Fabrizio. “Transnational Diffusion: Norms, Ideas, and Policies.” In Handbook of International Relations, 2:453–477. Sage Thousand Oaks, CA, 2012.

*Recommended

Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization 52 (04): 887–917.

Moravcsik, Andrew. 2000. “The Origins of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Postwar Europe.” International Organization 54 (2): 217–52. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551163.

Hall, Rodney Bruce and Thomas J. Biersteker. “The Emergence of Private Authority in the International System.” In The Emergence of Private Authority in Global Governance, ed. Rodney Bruce Hall and Thomas J. Biersteker, 3-22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Haufler, Virginia. “Corporations in Zones of Conflict: Issues, Actors, and Institutions.” Chapter 4 in Avant, Finnemore, and Sell, Who Governs the Globe?, 2010, Cambridge University Press.

Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 2001. “Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 4 (1): 391–416.

Risse, Thomas. “Transnational Actors and World Politics”. Carlsnaes, Walter, Thomas Risse, and Beth A. Simmons, eds. 2012. Handbook of International Relations. 2 edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Klotz, Audie. “Norms Reconstituting Interests: Global Racial Equality and U.S. Sanctions against South Africa.” International Organization 49, no. 3 (ed 1995): 451–78. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300033348.

Week 15 (12/24): feminist theory, English School

Tickner, J. Ann, and Jacqui True. 2018. “A Century of International Relations Feminism: From World War I Women’s Peace Pragmatism to the Women, Peace and Security Agenda.” International Studies Quarterly. Accessed May 14, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqx091.

Buzan, Barry, and Richard Little. 2000. International Systems in World History: Remaking the Study of International Relations. Oxford University Press, USA, Ch2, 3, & part II.

*Recommended

Little, Richard. “The English School’s Contribution to the Study of International Relations.” European Journal of International Relations 6, no. 3 (September 1, 2000): 395–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066100006003004.

Bull, Hedley. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. Macmillan International Higher Education, 2012.

Buzan, Barry. “The English School: An Underexploited Resource in IR.” Review of International Studies 27, no. 3 (July 2001): 471–88. doi:10.1017/S0260210501004715.

秦?青。???系理?中??派生成的可能和必然，《世界??与政治》2006年 第3期。

Ren, Xiao. “Grown from within: Building a Chinese School of International Relations.” The Pacific Review 33, no. 3–4 (July 3, 2020): 386–412. doi:10.1080/09512748.2020.1728573.

Week 16 (12/31):  Rational choice and its critics, dependency theory

Fearon, James. 1995. “Rationalist Explanations for War.” International Organization 49 (3): 379–414.

Fearon, J., and A. Wendt. 2002. “Rationalism v. Constructivism: A Skeptical View.” In Carlsnaes, Walter, Thomas Risse-Kappen, and Beth A. Simmons, eds. 2013. Handbook of International Relations. 2nd ed. London?; Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE.

Mahoney, James and Diana Rodriguez-Franco, “Dependency Theory”, in The Oxford Handbook of political development, chapter 2

*Recommended

Kydd, Andrew H. 2015. International Relations Theory: The Game-Theoretic Approach. Cambridge?; New York: Cambridge University Press. Ch2

Green, Donald, and Ian Shapiro. 1996. Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science. Yale University Press, especially Ch3

Webster, Kaitlyn, Chong Chen, and Kyle Beardsley. 2019. “Conflict, Peace, and the Evolution of Women’s Empowerment.” International Organization 73 (2): 255–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818319000055.

Dixit, Avinash K., and Barry J. Nalebuff. The Art of Strategy: A Game Theorist’s Guide to Success in Business and Life. W. W. Norton & Company, 2010.

Week 17 (1/7): Rethinking theories: where will we go

Guzzini, Stefano. “Embrace IR Anxieties (or, Morgenthau’s Approach to Power, and the Challenge of Combining the Three Domains of IR Theorizing).” International Studies Review 22, no. 2 (June 1, 2020): 268–88. doi:10.1093/isr/viaa013.

Crawford, Neta C. “The Potential for Fundamental Change in World Politics.” International Studies Review 20, no. 2 (June 1, 2018): 232–38. doi:10.1093/isr/viy034

*Recommended

Paul, T. V. “Assessing Change in World Politics.” International Studies Review 20, no. 2 (June 1, 2018): 177–85. doi:10.1093/isr/viy037.

Katzenstein, Peter J. 2018 “The Second Coming? Reflections on a Global Theory of International Relations.” The Chinese Journal of International Politics. Accessed September 6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poy012.

Wight, Martin. “Western Values in International Relations.” In Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics, 3:89–131, 1966.

Week 18 (1/14) Final exam

PhD student at Department of Diplomacy Kuan-Tzu Chou 周冠竹

Grading Policy

Class participation: 25%

Discussion leader and presentation: 15%

Response paper: 15%

Book review: 15%

Final exam: 30%

Grade Scale:

100-90  A+   89-85   A    84-80   A-    

79-77    B+   76-73   B    72-70   B-

70 and below F

Attendance and Class Activities

Students are required to attend class regularly unless excused in advance or you have proof of emergency. I will accept notes from the student attesting to the date of the illness as an excused absence. A student may also use the university’s online system to register an excused absence. A student who experiences a prolonged absence or an illness preventing attendance is required to provide written documentation of the illness from the relevant healthcare provider, verifying the dates of the treatment and the period during which the student was unable to meet academic responsibilities.

Religious observances

Please let me know in advance if a religious observance will cause you to miss a class. Provided you give advance notice. You will have the opportunity to make up exams or other assignments.

Ethics

I have zero talerence on plagiarism. Student should not plagiarize when writing every assignement in this course. I frequently upload student papers to Turnitin service to check plagiarism. Once confirmed, the assignment will receive a failing grade. Meanwhile, I will inform the student’s mentor at Department/program.

I have given failing grades to graduate and undergraduate students due to plagiarism. I do not work with students who had a record of plagiarism.

Class materials

The online learning system Moodle contains all the required book chapters, the articles of the first three weeks, and recommended reading materials. IMPORTANT! The discussion leader should acquire the articles in the required reading list and sent them to TA two weeks before the class. TA will upload the articles. Finding the articles is part of your presentation grade. Failing to send the article will reduce 5 points of your grade. If there are more than one person serving as discussion leader for a week. They will be jointly responsible for sending the articles.

I have reserved several key readings in the library. Please be aware of copyrights regulations and do not reprint these works. Students are encouraged to gather a course pack together.