教學大綱 Syllabus

每周課程進度與作業要求 Course Schedule & Requirements

教學週次Course Week	彈性補充教學週次Flexible Supplemental Instruction Week	彈性補充教學類別Flexible Supplemental Instruction Type
16+2週16+2 weeks	第 17 週 Week 17	自主總整學習Capstone self-learning
	第 18 週 Week 18	完成指定課後作業或作品Completion of designated after-course assignment or work

Assignments

• All assignments and exams use English.
• Write your own paper. Do not ask someone else to write it for you.

 

Response paper:

• Starting from the week on classical realism, each student will select ONE week to serve as a discussion leader. The discussion leader is required to write one response paper, which is due one night before the class (10PM). The discussion leader will upload his/her response paper to a shared folder.
• Each paper should be at least 3-pages long (Times New Roman font size of 12, double space), including SUMMARIES and CRITIQUE. Summary should not take more than half of the response paper. The quality of the response paper is primarily based on critique, not summaries. A response paper with too many summaries and too little critique will receive B- or below.
• At the end of the paper, students will propose TWO QUESTIONS for class discussion.
• NO COPY & PASTE from the text (especially the summaries). ALWAYS PARAPHRASE!
• PhD students: write TWO response papers and present them in two separate weeks.
• Please read this to help you write a response paper: Thomas J. Donahue Writing Response Papers, https://sites.google.com/site/tjdonahu/home/writing-response-papers

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: present twice during the semester.

Feedback:

• You need to write a one-page response to any talks or roundtable we have this semester.

Quiz:

• There will be random quizzes during the semester if you do not finish the reading.

Final exam:

• Three hours open book exam. The format will be finalized before the exam

The IR forum:

• Thanks to the funding from the Ministry of Education, I will organize several talks, dialogues, and one roundtable discussing theories of international relations. Please attend these events and participate in discussion.

Readings

Week 1 (9/14): Introduction to the course, set up presentation dates

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

Week 2 (9/21): the use of theory: where we are?

Quan Li, “The Second Great Debate Revisited: Exploring the Impact of the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide in International Relations,” International Studies Review 21, no. 3 (September 1, 2019): 447–76, https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viy009.

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.

Risse, Thomas, Wiebke Wemheuer-Vogelaar, and Frank Havemann. “IR Theory and the Core–Periphery Structure of Global IR: Lessons from Citation Analysis.” International Studies Review 24, no. 3 (September 1, 2022): viac029. doi:10.1093/isr/viac029. READ Fig 1 & 2  only

*Recommended

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.

Kahler, Miles. “Inventing International Relations,” in Michael Doyle and John Ikenberry, eds., New Thinking in International Relations (Boulder: Westview Press, 1997): 20-53

Walt, Stephen M. “The Relationship Between Theory And Policy In International Relations,” Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 8 (2005): 23–48

Lake, David A.” Theory is Dead, Long Live Theory: The End of the Great Debates and the Rise of Eclecticism in International Relations”, European Journal of International Relations 19, 3 (2013), pp.567-587

Kaldor, Mary. 2018. “Cycles in World Politics.” International Studies Review 20 (2): 214–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viy038.

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.

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.

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

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 (9/28): Classical Realism, balance of power, alliance politics

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”.

Brett Ashley Leeds and Burcu Savun, “Terminating Alliances: Why Do States Abrogate Agreements?,” Journal of Politics 69, no. 4 (2007): 1118–32, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00612.x.

*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

Edry, Jessica, Jesse C. Johnson, and Brett Ashley Leeds. “Threats at Home and Abroad: Interstate War, Civil War, and Alliance Formation.” International Organization, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818321000151.

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.

Walt, Stephen M. 1987. The Origins of Alliances. Cornell Studies in Security Affairs. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Snyder, Glenn. 1997. Alliance Politics. Cornell Studies in Security Affairs. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

Weitsman, Patricia A. 2004. Dangerous Alliances : Proponents of Peace, Weapons of War. Edited by Anonymous. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press.

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.

Morrow, James D. 1991. “Alliances and Asymmetry: An Alternative to the Capability Aggregation Model of Alliances.” American Journal of Political Science 35 (4): 904–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111499.

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.

Olson, Mancur, and Richard Zeckhauser. “An Economic Theory of Alliances.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 48, no. 3 (August 1, 1966): 266–79. https://doi.org/10.2307/1927082.

Haas, Melinda, and Keren Yarhi-Milo. “To Disclose or Deceive? Sharing Secret Information between Aligned States.” International Security 45, no. 3 (January 1, 2021): 122–61. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00402.

Week 4 (10/5): Neorealism (I), hierarchy in IR 【talk on realism】

*Recommended

Dillon Savage, Jesse. “Common-Pool Hierarchy: Explaining the Emergence of Cooperative Hierarchies.” International Studies Quarterly 65, no. 3 (7 2021): 712–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqab020.

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.

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.

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

Keohane, Robert O. Neorealism and Its Critics. Political Economy of International Change. New York: Columbia University Press, 1986.

Week 5 (10/12): Neorealism (II) defensive realism, power transition theory

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.

Lemke, Douglas. 2002. Regions of War and Peace. Cambridge Studies in International Relations ; 80. Cambridge University Press. CH2

*Recommended 

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

Adams, Karen Ruth. “Attack and Conquer? International Anarchy and the Offense-Defense-Deterrence Balance.” International Security 28, no. 3 (2003): 45–83.

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

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

Stein, Arthur. 1993. “Coordination and Collaboration: Regimes in an Anarchic World” in 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.

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

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 6 (10/19): IR roundtable 

Week 7 (10/26): 【dialogue with constructivist】

Week 8 (11/2): 【normative value in IR theory】

Week 9 (11/9): Neoclassical realism

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

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. Ch1

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, Ch2

*Recommended

Paul, T. V. “Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy.” International Security 30, no. 1 (2005): 46–71.

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

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.

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.

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

Snyder, Jack L. (1991). Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Chs. 1, 2, and 8.

Week 10 (11/16): Offensive Realism, hedging

Mearsheimer, John J. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.  New York: Norton. (Yes, the whole book)

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 11 (11/23): Liberalism, democratic peace.  【AMUN, Webex】

Schultz, Kenneth A. “Do Democratic Institutions Constrain or Inform? Contrasting Two Institutional Perspectives on Democracy and War.” International Organization 53, no. 2 (ed 1999): 233–66. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081899550878.

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

Lake, David A., Lisa L. Martin, and Thomas Risse. 2021. “Challenges to the Liberal Order: Reflections on International Organization.” International Organization 75 (2): 225–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818320000636.

 

*Recommended

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

Simmons, Beth A., and Hein E. Goemans. “Built on Borders: Tensions with the Institution Liberalism (Thought It) Left Behind.” International Organization 75, no. 2 (ed 2021): 387–410. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818320000600.

Christian Reus-Smit, “The Strange Death of Liberal IR Theory,” European Journal of
International Law, 12, 3 (2001): 573-93

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.

Doyle, Michael W. 2005. “Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace.” American Political Science Review null (03): 463–466.

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.

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

Oneal, John R., and Bruce Russett. “The Kantian Peace: The Pacific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885-1992.” World Politics, 1999, 1–37.

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 Russett. 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

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.

Mearsheimer, John J. “Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order.” International Security 43, no. 4 (April 1, 2019): 7–50. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00342

Week 12 (11/30): Neoliberal institutionalism, interdependence

Milner, Helen V. “Is Global Capitalism Compatible with Democracy? Inequality, Insecurity, and Interdependence.” International Studies Quarterly 65, no. 4 (December 17, 2021): 1097–1110. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqab056.

Mansfield, Edward D., and Nita Rudra. 2021. “Embedded Liberalism in the Digital Era.” International Organization 75 (2): 558–85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818320000569.

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

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

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

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.

Ruggie, John Gerard. “International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order.” International Organization 36, no. 2 (1982): 379–415.

Legro, Jeffrey W., and Andrew Moravcsik. “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” International Security 24, no. 2 (1999): 5–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228899560130.

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 (12/7): Constructivism (I)

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

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.

Chia, Colin. “Social Positioning and International Order Contestation in Early Modern Southeast Asia.” International Organization 76, no. 2 (ed 2022): 305–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818321000321.

 

*Recommended

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

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.

Hurd, Ian. “Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics.” International Organization 53, no. 2 (ed 1999): 379–408. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081899550913.

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

Chubb, Andrew. “The Securitization of ‘Chinese Influence’ in Australia.” Journal of Contemporary China 0, no. 0 (March 21, 2022): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2022.2052437.

Week 14 (12/14):  Constructivism (II) , non-state actors

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

Hyde, Susan D. “Catch Us If You Can: Election Monitoring and International Norm Diffusion.” American Journal of Political Science 55, no. 2 (2011): 356–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00508.x.

*Recommended

Finnemore, Martha,. National Interests in International Society. Cornell University Press, 1996.

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.

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

Goldstein, Judith and Robert Keohane, “Ideas and Foreign Policy: An Analytical Framework,”in Judith Goldstein and Robert Keohane, eds., Ideas and Foreign Policy (Cornell: Cornell University Press, 1993): 3-30

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 (12/21): The problem of status, reputation. English school

Røren, Pål. “The Belligerent Bear: Russia, Status Orders, and War.” International Security 47, no. 4 (January 4, 2023): 7–49. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00458.

Mercer, Jonathan. “The Illusion of International Prestige.” International Security 41, no. 4 (April 1, 2017): 133–68. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00276.

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.

 

*Recommended

Jervis, Robert, Keren Yarhi-Milo, and Don Casler. “Redefining the Debate Over Reputation and Credibility in International Security: Promises and Limits of New Scholarship.” World Politics 73, no. 1 (January 2021): 167–203. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887120000246.

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

Weisiger, Alex, and Keren Yarhi-Milo. “Revisiting Reputation: How Past Actions Matter in International Politics.” International Organization 69, no. 2 (ed 2015): 473–95. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818314000393.

Sundaram, Sasikumar S. 2020. “The Practices of Evaluating Entitlements: Rethinking ‘Reputation’ in International Politics.” International Studies Quarterly 64 (3): 657–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaa041.

秦亚青。国际关系理论中国学派生成的可能和必然，《世界经济与政治》2006年 第3期。

Week 16 (12/28): foreign policy, decision making, and diversionary thesis

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.

Fravel, M.  Taylor. “The Limits of Diversion: Rethinking Internal and External Conflict.” Security Studies 19, no. 2 (May 21, 2010): 307–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636411003795731.

 

*Recommended

Katagiri, Azusa, and Eric Min. “The Credibility of Public and Private Signals: A Document-Based Approach.” American Political Science Review 113, no. 1 (February 2019): 156–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000643.

Holsti, Ole R., and James N. Rosenau. “The Structure of Foreign Policy Attitudes among American Leaders.” The Journal of Politics 52, no. 1 (February 1990): 94–125. https://doi.org/10.2307/2131421.

Goldsmith, Benjamin E., Yusaku Horiuchi, and Kelly Matush. “Does Public Diplomacy Sway Foreign Public Opinion? Identifying the Effect of High-Level Visits.” American Political Science Review 115, no. 4 (November 2021): 1342–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055421000393.

Saunders, Elizabeth N. “Transformative Choices: Leaders and the Origins of Intervention Strategy.” International Security 34, no. 2 (October 1, 2009): 119–61. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2009.34.2.119.

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 17 prepare for final exam

Week 18 (1/12) Final exam. format to be announced.