Course 1: International Relations and Cultural Diplomacy
Course Convenor: Prof. Pierangelo Isernia
Department of Social, Political and Cognitive Sciences (DISPOC)
☎ +39.0577.235.299/285 (d)
@ pierangelo.isernia[at]unisi.it
Lesson Hours: Thursday 14-16 (Aula Seminario)
Office Hours: Wednesday and Thursday 12-13; on appointment
Department of Social, Political and Cognitive Sciences (DISPOC)
☎ +39.0577.235.299/285 (d)
@ pierangelo.isernia[at]unisi.it
Lesson Hours: Thursday 14-16 (Aula Seminario)
Office Hours: Wednesday and Thursday 12-13; on appointment
COURSE DESCRIPTION
This class offers an introduction to International Relations aiming at (a) familiarizing the student with the main concepts and theories of IR and (b) providing the theoretical and methodological tools to better understand the complex nature of international politics nowadays. The course will cover the main theoretical approaches and how they bear upon IR issues and problems at different level of analysis, from the international system to the individual psychology of decision makers. These issues will be addressed with a specific focus on their role in understanding what role cultural and public diplomacy play in international relations.
COURSE ORGANIZATION
Through lectures and readings, discussions, individual and group exercises and out-of-class home-take activities, this course wants to develop the conceptual tools and methodological skills that will enable the student to form her/his own critical judgments about some of the most topical issues in IR, with particular reference to the role of cultural diplomacy in international relations.
Students are expected to play an active role in class and they are supposed to carefully read and study al assignments for class. Each topic will be covered in two weeks. The first week, a guided tour of the main theoretical and empirical issues will be offered, walking the students through empirical and theoretical material considered exemplar of that specific subject. In the second week, students are expected to play a much more active role in discussing and analyzing concrete empirical material related to each single topic, with particular reference to analytical tools and examples relevant for the study of public and cultural diplomacy.
Grading will be determined by the following:
CLASS MATERIAL
All readings for the sessions, homework assignments, data sets, overhead projector slides used during the lectures, and an assortment of links to other political science research sites will be made available by the instructor via UNISI 2.0 (http://20.unisi.it/). All students attending class must have a functioning email address and check it regularly.
COURSE SCHEDULE
Weeks 1-2: Introduction to Theories, Approaches and Levels of Analysis
- Realism-Liberalism-Marxism / Traditionalism-Behavioralism-Constructivism
- The Challenge of Cultural Approaches to IR
Weeks 3-4: The International System
- Unipolarism, Bipolarism, Multipolarism and the Rise of new Powers
- Cultural Diplomacy in different international systems
Weeks 5-6: Dyadic Relations among states
- Soft and Hard Power
- The “fourth arm" of international relations: the US and EU case compared
Weeks 7-8: Political Structure and Foreign Policy
- State Strength and Political Regime
- Cultural Diplomacy in non democratic contexts
Weeks 9-10; Public Opinion, Media and Foreign Policy
- The role of Public Opinion and the Media in Foreign Policy
- How the Others See Us: Anti-Americanism and anti-Europeanism in comparative perspective
Weeks 11-12: Decision-Making, Small Groups and the Role of the Individual
- What difference does the individual make in IR?
- The role of the individual in cultural diplomacy: George W. Bush and Barak Obama compared
READINGS
Reference Texts
Richard T. Arndt (2006). The First Resort of Kings. American Cultural Diplomacy in the
Twentieth century. Washington, DC. Potomac Books Inc.
Jan Melissen (ed.) (2005). The New Public Diplomacy. Soft Power in International Relations. Palgrave MacMillan.
Nancy Snow and Phillip M. Taylor (eds.) (2009). Routledge Handbookof Public Diplomacy. New York, Routledge.
Week 1-2: Introduction: Theories, Approaches and Level of Analysis: Realism, Liberalism Marxism and Constructivism
Waltz, Kenneth N. (1990). Theory of International Politics. Random House, NY. [Chapter 5-6]. [Google-docs]
Wendt, Alexander E. (1987). “The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory.” International Organization. 41 (3): 335-370. [Google-docs]
Moravcsik Andrew (1997). “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics.” International Organization. 51 (4): 513-553. [Google-docs]
Week 3-4: The International System
Ruggie, John Gerard (1982). "International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order." International Organization. 36 (2): 379-415.
Waltz Kenneth N. (2000). “Structural Realism after the Cold War.” International Security. 25: 1.
Wendt, Alexander (1992). "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics." International Organization. 46 (2): 391-425.
Week 5-6: Dyadic Relations among states: hard and soft power
George Alexander L. And William E. Simmons (eds.) (1994). The Limits of Coercive Diplomacy. Chapters 2 and 3, pp.7-22.
Nye, Joseph S. (2004). Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics. New York, Public Affair [Chs.1, 2 & 4]
Trager Robert F. e Dessislava P. Zagorcheva (2005/2006). “Deterring Terrorism. It Can be Done.” International Security. 30:3, pp.87-123.
Week 7-8: Political Structure and Foreign Policy: State Strength and Political Regime
Doyle Michael W. (1983). “Kant, Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs.” Philosophy and Public Affairs. 12:3, Part 1, 2, pp.204-235, 323-353
Ray, James Lee (1998). “Does Democracy Cause Peace?”Annual Review Of Political Science. 1: 27-46.
Katzenstein Peter J., (1976). “International Relations and Domestic Structures: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States.” International Organization. 30 (1): 1-45.
Weeks 9-10 ; Public Opinion, Media and Foreign Policy
Baum, Matthew A. and Philip B.K. Potter (2008). "The Relationships Between Mass Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis." Annual Review of Political Science. 11. 39-65.
Page Benjamin I., Jason Barabas (2000), “Foreign Policy Gaps between Citizens and Leaders”, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 3, September, pp. 339-364.
Powlick Philip J., Andrew Z. Katz (1998), “Defining the American Public Opinion/Foreign Policy Nexus”, Mershon International Studies Review, Vol. 42, No. 1, May, pp. 29-61.
Weeks 11-12: Decision-Making, Small Groups and the Role of the Individual
Allison Graham T. (1969). “Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis.” The American Political Science Review, Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 689-718.
Hudson Valerie M. (2005). “Foreign Policy Analysis: Actor-Specific Theory and the Ground of International Relations.” Foreign Policy Analysis. 1: 1-30.
Levy, Jack S. (1992), “An Introduction to Prospect Theory.” Political Psychology. 13 (2): 171-186.
George, Alexander L. (1969). “The "Operational Code": A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision-Making.” International Studies Quarterly. 13 (2): 190-222
Dyson, Stephen Benedict (2006). “Personality and Foreign Policy: Tony Blair’s Iraq Decisions.” Foreign Policy Analysis. 2: 289–306.
This class offers an introduction to International Relations aiming at (a) familiarizing the student with the main concepts and theories of IR and (b) providing the theoretical and methodological tools to better understand the complex nature of international politics nowadays. The course will cover the main theoretical approaches and how they bear upon IR issues and problems at different level of analysis, from the international system to the individual psychology of decision makers. These issues will be addressed with a specific focus on their role in understanding what role cultural and public diplomacy play in international relations.
COURSE ORGANIZATION
Through lectures and readings, discussions, individual and group exercises and out-of-class home-take activities, this course wants to develop the conceptual tools and methodological skills that will enable the student to form her/his own critical judgments about some of the most topical issues in IR, with particular reference to the role of cultural diplomacy in international relations.
Students are expected to play an active role in class and they are supposed to carefully read and study al assignments for class. Each topic will be covered in two weeks. The first week, a guided tour of the main theoretical and empirical issues will be offered, walking the students through empirical and theoretical material considered exemplar of that specific subject. In the second week, students are expected to play a much more active role in discussing and analyzing concrete empirical material related to each single topic, with particular reference to analytical tools and examples relevant for the study of public and cultural diplomacy.
Grading will be determined by the following:
- Participation in class discussion and presentations of specific research results [10% total].
- Short presentations in class of research article. This presentation will open and warm up the discussion and the student is expected to take the lead in it [40% total]. However, all students are expected to read all materials relevant for each class and be ready to discuss them.
- A review of the literature in one area. This is the major requirement for this module. You are supposed to cover a specific area of research – the most focused the best – and to offer a synthetic reconstruction of the main literature on that topics. This work will be presented in written form.
CLASS MATERIAL
All readings for the sessions, homework assignments, data sets, overhead projector slides used during the lectures, and an assortment of links to other political science research sites will be made available by the instructor via UNISI 2.0 (http://20.unisi.it/). All students attending class must have a functioning email address and check it regularly.
COURSE SCHEDULE
Weeks 1-2: Introduction to Theories, Approaches and Levels of Analysis
- Realism-Liberalism-Marxism / Traditionalism-Behavioralism-Constructivism
- The Challenge of Cultural Approaches to IR
Weeks 3-4: The International System
- Unipolarism, Bipolarism, Multipolarism and the Rise of new Powers
- Cultural Diplomacy in different international systems
Weeks 5-6: Dyadic Relations among states
- Soft and Hard Power
- The “fourth arm" of international relations: the US and EU case compared
Weeks 7-8: Political Structure and Foreign Policy
- State Strength and Political Regime
- Cultural Diplomacy in non democratic contexts
Weeks 9-10; Public Opinion, Media and Foreign Policy
- The role of Public Opinion and the Media in Foreign Policy
- How the Others See Us: Anti-Americanism and anti-Europeanism in comparative perspective
Weeks 11-12: Decision-Making, Small Groups and the Role of the Individual
- What difference does the individual make in IR?
- The role of the individual in cultural diplomacy: George W. Bush and Barak Obama compared
READINGS
Reference Texts
Richard T. Arndt (2006). The First Resort of Kings. American Cultural Diplomacy in the
Twentieth century. Washington, DC. Potomac Books Inc.
Jan Melissen (ed.) (2005). The New Public Diplomacy. Soft Power in International Relations. Palgrave MacMillan.
Nancy Snow and Phillip M. Taylor (eds.) (2009). Routledge Handbookof Public Diplomacy. New York, Routledge.
Week 1-2: Introduction: Theories, Approaches and Level of Analysis: Realism, Liberalism Marxism and Constructivism
Waltz, Kenneth N. (1990). Theory of International Politics. Random House, NY. [Chapter 5-6]. [Google-docs]
Wendt, Alexander E. (1987). “The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory.” International Organization. 41 (3): 335-370. [Google-docs]
Moravcsik Andrew (1997). “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics.” International Organization. 51 (4): 513-553. [Google-docs]
Week 3-4: The International System
Ruggie, John Gerard (1982). "International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order." International Organization. 36 (2): 379-415.
Waltz Kenneth N. (2000). “Structural Realism after the Cold War.” International Security. 25: 1.
Wendt, Alexander (1992). "Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics." International Organization. 46 (2): 391-425.
Week 5-6: Dyadic Relations among states: hard and soft power
George Alexander L. And William E. Simmons (eds.) (1994). The Limits of Coercive Diplomacy. Chapters 2 and 3, pp.7-22.
Nye, Joseph S. (2004). Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics. New York, Public Affair [Chs.1, 2 & 4]
Trager Robert F. e Dessislava P. Zagorcheva (2005/2006). “Deterring Terrorism. It Can be Done.” International Security. 30:3, pp.87-123.
Week 7-8: Political Structure and Foreign Policy: State Strength and Political Regime
Doyle Michael W. (1983). “Kant, Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs.” Philosophy and Public Affairs. 12:3, Part 1, 2, pp.204-235, 323-353
Ray, James Lee (1998). “Does Democracy Cause Peace?”Annual Review Of Political Science. 1: 27-46.
Katzenstein Peter J., (1976). “International Relations and Domestic Structures: Foreign Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States.” International Organization. 30 (1): 1-45.
Weeks 9-10 ; Public Opinion, Media and Foreign Policy
Baum, Matthew A. and Philip B.K. Potter (2008). "The Relationships Between Mass Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis." Annual Review of Political Science. 11. 39-65.
Page Benjamin I., Jason Barabas (2000), “Foreign Policy Gaps between Citizens and Leaders”, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 3, September, pp. 339-364.
Powlick Philip J., Andrew Z. Katz (1998), “Defining the American Public Opinion/Foreign Policy Nexus”, Mershon International Studies Review, Vol. 42, No. 1, May, pp. 29-61.
Weeks 11-12: Decision-Making, Small Groups and the Role of the Individual
Allison Graham T. (1969). “Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis.” The American Political Science Review, Vol. 63, No. 3, pp. 689-718.
Hudson Valerie M. (2005). “Foreign Policy Analysis: Actor-Specific Theory and the Ground of International Relations.” Foreign Policy Analysis. 1: 1-30.
Levy, Jack S. (1992), “An Introduction to Prospect Theory.” Political Psychology. 13 (2): 171-186.
George, Alexander L. (1969). “The "Operational Code": A Neglected Approach to the Study of Political Leaders and Decision-Making.” International Studies Quarterly. 13 (2): 190-222
Dyson, Stephen Benedict (2006). “Personality and Foreign Policy: Tony Blair’s Iraq Decisions.” Foreign Policy Analysis. 2: 289–306.
|
GO TO COURSE 2
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AND THE EUROPEAN SCENARIO |