POLS 7508: Graduate Seminar in International Relations Theory Fall, 2009 Class Time: Monday 3:00-6:00, CL 411 Instructor:

Dr. Robert Blanton Office: Clement 405 Office Hours: Phone: 678-3364 e-mail: rblanton@memphis.edu Course Objectives: This course provides a graduate-level introduction to international relations (IR) theory. After covering some of the epistemological issues concerning IR theory, we will survey some of the key schools of thought, including realism, liberalism, constructivism, feminism, and cultural approaches. We will cover some of the major empirical applications of these approaches. Readings will include a combination of classics of IR theory as well as some of the more current advances within the field. Throughout the course, emphasis will be placed upon the ability to critically analyze original theoretical works and place them within the broader framework of IR theory. The overarching goal of this course is to increase your ability to effectively read, comprehend, and critically assess in both verbal and written form theoretical and empirical works within IR. Required Texts: Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce. 2005. The Logic of Political Survival. MIT Press. Enloe, Cynthia. 2001. Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. University of California Press. Keohane, Robert. 1986. Neorealism and its Critics. Columbia University Press. Keohane, Robert and Joseph Nye. Various. Power and Interdependence. Longman. Lebow, Richard Ned. 2009. A Cultural Theory of International Relations. Cambridge University Press. Lobell, Steven et al, eds. 2009. Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy. Cambridge University Press. Mearsheimer, John. 2003. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. Norton. Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press. NOTE: All other readings can be accessed at: https://umdrive.memphis.edu/rblanton/public/POLS_7508_Fall_2009 Course Requirements: 1. Class Participation (25%). The learning process is very much a "two-way street" requiring the active participation of both professor and student. This is particularly the case in a graduatelevel seminar. As such, students will be assessed as to their performance in classroom discussions. Class participation grades will be based on the level of knowledge demonstrated in the class dialogue as well as their weekly written assignments.

Regarding the former, students should be prepared to provide a knowledgeable answer to the following questions: -What is the author(s) purpose? -What is the author's argument/thesis? -How does the author(s) support his/her argument? (This should include both what the article analyzes -- i.e. what specific historical cases or aspect of IR -- as well as how the author(s) accomplish this -- i.e the analysis of historical documents, surveys, or quantitative data). Each week you will be expected to turn in two discussion questions based on the readings. Each question should each be approximately 4-6 sentences long -- in addition to posing an interesting question, the questions should demonstrate a solid level of comprehension of the readings and should (ideally) attempt to synthesize the various arguments. For example, questions should point out common themes among the readings (i.e. how x, y, and z criticize the democratic peace) or draw comparisons with readings from different weeks. Email the questions to me each Monday by 2:00; also bring a hard copy with you to class. 2. Paper (45% total). A goal of this course is to help you develop the skills to critically assess and synthesize the various concepts and approaches covered here, and to begin to apply them to issues in the global system. Towards that end, each of you will develop a critical review of the scholarly literature on a chosen problem/issue in the study of international relations. Your goal is to trace the development of scholarship on this chosen problem and to assess what innovations have been made, which research strategies have been taken, and what aspects of this issue remain unresolved. The final paper should be approximately 20 pages in length (double spaced with normal fonts and margins) and should follow this basic format: I. Introduction -- what is the issue and why is it important? You should start off with a "hook" such as a real world example, and the first paragraph should contain the issue itself. The introductory section should also contain a thesis statement regarding your general conclusions and assessment of scholarship on the issue. II. Theoretical literature on the issue -- this is the main body of the paper, and will trace the development of scholarship on this issue. Though this section does not have to be exhaustive, it does have to have the major contributions to the issue in questions. Though not every issue is addressed by every perspective, you should draw from a minimum of three perspectives covered in this course. III. Empirical findings -- this section should compare and contrast the empirical scholarship that deals with this issue. You should provide some coverage of the methodological approaches used by the scholarship in this area (i.e. quantitative analysis, formal/game theory, case studies) and summarize the main findings of literature in this area. IV. Conclusion -- your conclusion should be your assessment of where scholarship stands regarding this issue, and should give some idea of what progress has been made as well as what areas remain unanswered (or need additional treatment). In other words, you should show what the

scholarship has found, how effective it has been in providing increased insights into this area, and what "gaps" remain in the study of this issue. The assignment will be completed in three phases: a. Proposal (5%) -- a one page statement of your research topic. These will be emailed to me on Friday, Sept 18. I will circulate them to the class, and we will discuss them on Monday, Sept 21. b. First draft (10%) -- due Nov 12. This will be a draft of the complete paper. Though the paper will likely require subsequent improvements, it should be clearly written and proper citation format should be used -- in other words, a first draft should not be a "rough" draft! c. Final draft (30%) -- due Dec 3. The final draft will be graded on the overall quality of the paper as well as how well you respond to my comments on the first draft. That is, if you get a "B" on the first draft, you will get a lower on the final draft if you make no effort to respond to my comments. 3. Final Exam (30%). A final exam will be administered Dec. 14 during class time.

Course Policies: Makeup/Late Policy: Papers turned in after the due date, if accepted, will be assessed a late penalty of 5 points per day. Unless there is some mitigating circumstance (illness, etc.), discussion questions will not be accepted after the class meeting. Attendance Policy: Obviously, failure to attend class meetings will have a negative impact upon the class participation grade. Students are responsible for all material covered in class, even if absent. Academic Dishonesty: As outlined in the Student Handbook (p. 10), cheating and plagiarism will result in severe disciplinary action on the part of the instructor. Either offense will be grounds for receiving an F on the assignment or examination and possibly an F for the course, depending on the severity of the offense. Students with Disabilities: The University encourages the full participation of students with disabilities. Students with disabilities are invited to meet individually with the instructor to discuss special accommodations that may be needed. Inclement Weather: In the event that inclement weather requires the cancellation of class at the University of Memphis, local radio and television media will be immediately notified. Additionally, the University of Memphis has established an Inclement Weather Hotline at 678-0888. Topics and Readings: Readings may be subject to change.

Week 1 (Aug 31) Topic: Course Introduction Puchala, Donald. 2000. "Marking a Weberian Moment: Our Discipline Looks Ahead" International Studies Perspectives 1(2): 133-144. Elman, Colin and Miriam Fendius Elman. 2003. "Introduction: Appraising Progress in International Relations Theory," chapter 1 in Progress in International Relations Theory, edited by Colin Elman and Miriam Fendius Elman. Cambridge: MIT Press. Snidal, Duncan and Alexander Wendt. 2009. "Why there is International Theory Now," International Theory 1(1): 114. Jennifer Sterling-Folker, 2006. "Making Sense of International Relations Theory," chapter 1 of Making Sense of International Relations Theory, edited by Jennifer SterlingFolker. Boulder, CO: Rienner. Morganthau, Hans. 1978. "Six Principles of Political Realism," excerpt from Power Among Nations. Suggested introductory material (if youve never taken a course in IRT you may want to peruse some of these sources: Snyder, Jack. 2004. "One World Rival Theories" and Walt, Stephen. 1998. "One World Many Theories." Both appeared in Foreign Policy. Holsti, Ole. 1989. Models of International Relations and Foreign Policy, Diplomatic History 13: 15-43. Viotti, Paul and Mark Kauppi. Various years. International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. . Week 2 (Sept 14) Topic: Offensive Realism Readings: Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, all Week 3 (Sept 21) Topic: Structural/Neorealism Readings: Keohane, Neorealism and its Critics, chapters 1-6, 8 and 11. Week 4 (Sept 25) Topic: Extensions to Realism and the Study of Conflict Readings: Bremer, Stuart. 1992. "Dangerous Dyads: Conditions Effecting the Likelihood of Interstate War, 1816-1965," Journal of Conflict Resolution 36: 309-341. Rosecrance, Richard. 1987. "Long Cycle Theory and International Relations." International Organization 41 (2): 283-301. Kugler, Jacek et al. 2004. Integrating Theory and Policy: Global Implications of the War in Iraq, International Studies Review. Gartzke, Erik. 2003."War is the Error Term," International Organization. Walt, Stephen. 1985. "Alliance Formation and the Balance of Power." International

Security 9 (4): 3-43. Schweller. 1994. "Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back In." International Security 19: 62-107. Tickner, Ann. 1997. You Just Don't Understand: Troubled Engagements Between Feminists and IR Theorists International Studies Quarterly (1997) 41, 611-632

Week 5 (Oct 5) Topic: Linking Realism to Foreign Policy: Neoclassical Realism Readings: Lobell, Ripsman, and Taliaferro, Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy, all. Week 6 (Oct 12) Topic: Liberalism/Neoliberalism Readings: Keohane and Nye, Power and Interdependence, all. Week 7 (Oct 26) Topic: Applications of Neoliberalism: The Liberal and Democratic Peaces Readings: Doyle, Michael. 1986. Liberalism and World Politics, American Political Science Review 80: 1151-70. Maoz, Zeev and Bruce Russett. 1994. Normative and Structural Causes of the Democratic Peace, American Political Science Review. Oren, Ido. 1995. The Subjectivity of the Democratic Peace, International Security 20: 147-184. Allison, Juliann Emmons. 2001. "Peace among Friends: A Feminist Interpretation of the Democratic Peace" Peace & Change 26 (2): 204-222. Rosato, Sebastian. 2003. The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory, American Political Science Review 97: 585-602. Gartzke, Erik. 2007. The Capitalist Peace American Journal of Political Science. 51: 166-91. Mousseau, Michael. 2007. "Some Systemic Roots of the Democratic Peace" International Studies Review 9 (1): 93-5. Li, Quan and Eric Gartzke. 2002. How Globalization Can Reduce International Conflict, in Schneider, Barbieri, and Gleditsch, Globalization and Armed Conflict. (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield). Week 8 (Nov 2) Topic: Neoliberal Institutionalism Readings: Axelrod, Robert and Robert Keohane. 1985. Achieving Cooperation Under Anarchy, World Politics 38: 226-54. Grieco, Joseph. 1988. Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation, International Organization 42: 485-507. Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Three Cultures of Anarchy (ch. 6 of Social Theory).

Jervis, Robert. 1999. "Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the Debate" International Security 24(1): 42-63. Simmons, Beth. 2000. International Law and State Behavior: Commitment and Compliance in International Monetary Affairs, American Political Science Review 94: 819-836. Hafner-Burton, Emilie and Kiyoteru Tsutsui. 2004. Human Rights in a Globalizing World: The Paradox of Empty Promises American Journal of Sociology 110: 13731411.

Week 9 (Nov 9) Topic: Constructivist Approaches Readings: Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics, pp. 1-190; 370-378. Week 10 (Nov 16) Topic: Feminist Approaches Readings: Enloe, Cynthia. Bananas, Beaches, and Bases, all. Week 11 (Nov 23) Topic: Culture and International Relations Readings: Lebow, Cultural Theory of International Relations, Chapters 1-3, 9, 10. Week 12 (Nov 27) Topic: Rational Choice and Two-Level Approaches Readings: BDM et al. Logic of Political Survival, chapters 1-3, 6, 7, 9, 10 Week 13 (Dec. 4) Topic: Psychological Approaches Crescenzi, Mark. 2007. "Reputation and Interstate Conflict" American Journal of Political Science 51 (2): 382-396 Lebow, Cultural Theory, ch. 7. Rosati, Jerel. 2000. "The Power of Human Cognition in the Study of World Politics," International Studies Review 2 (3): 45-75 Brul, David. 2008. "The Poliheuristic Research Program: An Assessment and Suggestions for Further Progress" International Studies Review 10(2): 266-293 Schafer, Mark and Stephen Walker. 2006. "Democratic Leaders and the Democratic Peace: The Operational Codes of Tony Blair and Bill Clinton," International Studies Quarterly 50 (3): 561-583 Brunk, Darren. 2008. "Curing the Somalia Syndrome: Analogy, Foreign Policy Decision Making, and the Rwandan Genocide" Foreign Policy Analysis 4(3): 301-320. Houghton, David. 2007. "Reinvigorating the Study of Foreign Policy Decision Making: Toward a Constructivist Approach" Foreign Policy Analysis 3 (1): 24 - 45