Мировая политика и международные отношения

Бакалавриат 2022/2023

Статус: Курс обязательный (Политология)

Направление: 41.03.04. Политология

Кто читает: Департамент политики и управления

Где читается: Факультет социальных наук

Когда читается: 3-й курс, 3, 4 модуль

Формат изучения: без онлайн-курса

Охват аудитории: для всех кампусов НИУ ВШЭ

Преподаватели: Агеева Вера Дмитриевна, Девяткин Павел Димитриевич, Кондратьев Сергей Викторович, Фергюсон Йен Эндрю

Язык: английский

Кредиты: 5

Контактные часы: 80

Full Syllabus Ask Question

Abstract

Students of this course are bound to ask the question – what exactly is IR? What distinguishes it from history or law, economics or comparative politics? When did IR emerge as an academic subject? How has it changed over time? What does IR contribute to the sum of human knowledge? And why has it become one of the most popular twenty-first century social sciences, despite the fact that – as you will discover, fairly early on – IR students have to spend more time than most defending and defining their subject? The purpose of this course is to try and answer these questions while providing you with a foundation for some of the more specialised IR topics that you may choose to study in the future. We will look in some detail at both the real-world problems which IR addresses, and some of the essential theories it employs to understand the international system. This course does not presup-pose a specialised knowledge of international affairs. On the other hand, it does assume that you will have a genuine interest in world politics and a willingness to expand your knowledge of geog-raphy and key moments in international history. This course is therefore a roadmap and guide to complex issues. Rather than trying to be exhaustive, it seeks to introduce you to a wide range of issues and problems that have preoccupied writers, scholars and policy-makers for many decades – even centuries. Instead of arguing in favour of a specific approach or pointing to an absolute truth in IR, this course will ask you to think about international events in a systematic and critical fash-ion, coming to well-reasoned conclusions based on a combination of empirical observation and theoretical rigour. The aim, in other words, is to inform and stimulate and, in so doing, to get you to ask questions and think of answers that you may never have thought of before. The course is modelled on the University of London’s, ‘Introduction to International Rela-tions’. We will be using the study guide from this course as a key reference point throughout. The working language is English. That applies for both lectures and seminars.

Learning Objectives

Explore the evolution of the discipline of international relations (IR) over the past century by examining our changing understandings of order in the modern world
Consider the impact of major historical events on the evolution of IR, including the treaties of Westphalia, the First World War and the ongoing influence of globalisation
Introduce a range of theoretical tools that will help students analyse the behaviour of interna-tional actors and the nature of international systems
Define and discuss some main concepts within the discipline, including war, the state and power
Critically assess challenges facing the contemporary international order, including problems of global governance and the rise of East Asian actors

Expected Learning Outcomes

Analyse contemporary and historical international events from a variety of theoretical view-points
Describe the evolution of international relations as an academic discipline
Explain the relevance of key terms in international relations
Identify the strengths and weaknesses of IR’s various theoretical approaches

Course Contents

History of International Relations (IR)
Theories of International Relations (IR)
Key concepts of International Relations (IR)
The future of International Relations (IR)

Assessment Elements

Seminar participation
Seminar participation (20%). Students’ participation in seminar discussions is assessed according to the “intensity” and thoughtfulness of their participation. It is not enough to just turn up. Active participation is required to get a good participation grade. Obtaining an excellent grade, requires demonstrating an ability to understand and analyse key ideas and concepts from (all) the required readings and (at least one) of the recommended readings assigned for the seminar. A scorecard for participation will be kept by the seminar instructor and used to calculate a final participation score for each student. If a student misses a seminar, and has a valid reason for doing so, there will be an opportunity to complete a brief written task in order to obtain a participation grade for the class they have missed. Confirmation of the validity of absence must be provided to the study office. The written task is to be arranged with the seminar instructor.
Exam
Final exam (40%). At the end of Module 4 there will be a three-hour written exam. The exam paper will comprise a choice of questions based on all the topics covered in the course. Students will be expected to answer THREE questions, writing short essay-length answers of around 400-800 words each, plus references. Students will be required to answer one question on Part 1 and one question on Part 2 of the course. The third question can be from either part. Details about what is expected in terms of these answers will be conveyed during the lectures of the course. Sample questions will also be discussed.
Written assignments
There are two written essays for this course, one for each of the two parts. The deadline for these assignments will be the end of Module 3 and the end of Module 4 (more specific dates will be set at the start of the course). No late submissions will be accepted, but students can submit their essay at any point before the set deadlines. The idea of these assignments is to test each student’s understanding of each part of the course, and also to evaluate their academic writing skills. Each assignment should be around 1500-words in length, not including the title question, the student’s name and group number (which should all be included at the top of the first page). The bibliography at the end of will also not be included in the word count. Essays should not go over, or under, the word limit of 1500 words by more than 10%. Every 10% (150 words) higher or lower than the word limit will incur a 0.5 grade penalty. In other words, assignments of 1345 and 1655 words will both receive the same 0.5 penalty. Both essays should be written in 12-point Times New Roman with 1.5 spacing. Students can use larger font for the title and section headings, if they wish. The only file format that will be accepted is a Microsoft Word document (.doc) file. The essays should provide a thoughtful, well-researched response to a choice from the following questions: ONE essay from this choice on Part 1: The History & Theory of International Relations (IR) 1. ‘Is IR still an American social science?’ 2. ‘How does critical theory in IR explain problems of world politics?’ 3. ‘There is little agreement between theories of IR. Discuss.’ ONE essay from this choice on Part 2: Concepts, Trends and Challenges of Globalisation 1. ‘Has the character of war changed in today’s globalised world?’ 2. ‘Do the dynamics of globalisation make the world more insecure and unstable?’ 3. ‘Are international institutions effective in addressing global policy challenges?’ Discuss with reference to ONE challenge from the course (topics 17–20). Essays should be submitted to the seminar instructors. It is recommended (but not essential) that these assignments are structured to include something like the following four sections: 1) Introduction, which provides a brief version of the answer along with a guide to the essay 2) A literature review that: a) engages with selected historical literature from the relevant theme(s) of the course, and b) sets out the theoretical / conceptual debate that the essay engages with; 3) Explanation of the answer - an analytical section that engages with selected theoretical / conceptual literature in setting out an answer to the essay question; 4) Conclusion, which restates the answer and reflects on its implications for IR As a rough guide, the Introduction and Conclusion together should be no more than 300–400 words (approx. 25%) of each assignment. There will be no opportunity to revise and resubmit these assignments. In all cases where plagiarism is identified, a grade of 0 will be given. There will be a chance to talk through the questions and expectations in terms of academic writing in the final lectures of each part of the course.

Interim Assessment

2022/2023 4th module
0.1 * Seminar participation + 0.2 * Written assignments + 0.4 * Exam

Bibliography

Recommended Core Bibliography

ALLISON, G. (2017). The Thucydides Trap. Foreign Policy, (224), 80. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=123126463
Brown, C., & Ainley, K. (2009). Understanding International Relations (Vol. Foruth edition). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=1522816
Doyle, M. W. (2005). Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace. American Political Science Review, (03), 463. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.apsrev.v99y2005i03p463.466.05
Ikenberry, G. J. (2008). The Rise of China and the Future of the West. (cover story). Foreign Affairs, 87(1), 23. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=28018827
International relations : the key concepts, Griffiths, M., 2004
Krasner, S. D. (1999). Sovereignty : Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=74712
Rathbun, B. (2008). A Rose by Any Other Name: Neoclassical Realism as the Logical and Necessary Extension of Structural Realism. Security Studies, 17(2), 294–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410802098917
Tammen, R. (2008). The Organski Legacy: A Fifty-Year Research Program. International Interactions, 34(4), 314–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050620802561769
The globalization of world politics : an introduction to international relations, Baylis, J., 2014
Theories of international relations, Burchill, S., 2005
Understanding international relations, Brown, C., 2001
Understanding international relations, Brown, C., 2009
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International Organization, (02), 391. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.intorg.v46y1992i02p391.425.02

Recommended Additional Bibliography

Armitage, D. (2012). Foundations of Modern International Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=498289
Baldwin, D. A. (2016). Power and International Relations : A Conceptual Approach. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=1090916
Bartelson, J. (2006). The Concept of Sovereignty Revisited. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.4253F2F7
Booth, K. (2001). New Wars for Old. Civil Wars, 4(2), 163. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698240108402474
Bull, H. (2012). The Anarchical Society : A Study of Order in World Politics (Vol. 4th ed). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=1523322
Clark Arend, A. (2003). International Law and the Preemptive Use of Military Force. Washington Quarterly, 26(2), 89. https://doi.org/10.1162/01636600360569711
Copeland, D. C. (2014). Economic Interdependence and War. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=810397
Enloe, C. H. . (DE-588)172063531, (DE-576)132937670. (2014). Bananas, beaches and bases : making feminist sense of international politics / Cynthia Enloe. Berkeley, Calif. [u.a.]: Univ. of California Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edswao&AN=edswao.408128828
Erik Gartzke. (2007). The Capitalist Peace. American Journal of Political Science, (1), 166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00244.x
Ferguson, N. (2005). Sinking Globalization. Foreign Affairs, 84(2), 64. https://doi.org/10.2307/20034276
Halliday, F. (DE-588)109995899, (DE-576)161282180. (1994). Rethinking international relations / Fred Halliday. London: Macmillan. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edswao&AN=edswao.041315367
Hans Morgenthau, Realism, and the Scientific Study of International Politics. (1994). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.DA7BDEC
Ikenberry, G. J. (2014). The Illusion of Geopolitics. Foreign Affairs, 93(3), 80. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=95603432
Jonathan M. DiCicco, & Jack S. Levy. (1999). Power Shifts and Problem Shifts. Journal of Conflict Resolution, (6), 675. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.sae.jocore.v43y1999i6p675.704
Julie Newton. (2013). Gorbachev, Mitterrand, and the Emergence of the Post-Cold War Order in Europe. Europe-Asia Studies, (2), 290. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2012.759716
Kennedy, D. W. (2008). The Mystery of Global Governance. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.65985926
Krasner, S. D., & Pascual, C. (2005). Addressing State Failure. Foreign Affairs, 84(4), 153. https://doi.org/10.2307/20034427
Mazower, M. (DE-588)121850439, (DE-576)168139618. (2009). No enchanted palace : the end of empire and the ideological origins of the United Nations / Mark Mazower. Princeton, NJ [u.a.]: Princeton Univ. Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edswao&AN=edswao.311479782
Mazower, M. (DE-588)121850439, (DE-576)168139618. (2012). Governing the world : the history of an idea / Mark Mazower. London [u.a.]: Allen Lane. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edswao&AN=edswao.377319783
Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power : The Means to Success in World Politics (Vol. 1st ed). New York: PublicAffairs. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=461952
Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the Debate. (1999). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.CDFD624D
Rengger, N. J. . (DE-588)121634248, (DE-576)167219286. (2000). International relations, political theory and the problem of order : beyond international relations theory? / N. J. Rengger. London [u.a.]: Routledge. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edswao&AN=edswao.078786320
Rengger, N. J. (2000). International Relations, Political Theory and the Problem of Order : Beyond International Relations Theory? London: Routledge. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsebk&AN=460203
Rosato, S. (2003). The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory. American Political Science Review, (04), 585. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.apsrev.v97y2003i04p585.602.00
Schweller, R. L. (1994). Bandwagoning for profit. International Security, 19(1), 72. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539149
Snyder, G. H. (2002). Mearsheimer’s World—Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security. International Security, 27(1), 149–173. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228802320231253
Structural power : the limits of neorealist power analysis. (1993). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.6CAA16EA
The Coming Multi-Order World. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2016.1150053
Waltz, K. N. (2000). Structural Realism after the Cold War. International Security, 25(1), 5–41. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228800560372
Weiss, T. G., & Wilkinson, R. (2014). Rethinking Global Governance? Complexity, Authority, Power, Change. International Studies Quarterly, 58(1), 207–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/isqu.12082

Authors

GORELSKIY ILYA EVGENEVICH
SHIMANOVSKAYA VIKTORIYA TIMUROVNA
FERGYUSON IEN ENDRYU Эндрю
KORYAGIN GRIGORIY DMITRIEVICH
DEVYATKIN PAVEL DIMITRIEVICH

Course Syllabus