Understanding International Politics

by J-T.M. · Published April 20, 2019 · Updated July 3, 2020

<< This syllabus was prepared for the undergraduate students of Sciences Po Paris (Reims campus) for the academic years 2016-17 and 2017-18. The course outline is archived on Academia.edu.

The basic objective of this course is to provide students with the fundamental knowledge and the analytical skills that are necessary to grasp the complexity of the 21st century international scene. New issues are deeply transforming world politics, such as the limits – real and perceived – of globalism, the tension between rising nationalism and multiplying challenges to the power and capacity of nation-states, the contested legitimacy of Western influence. Understanding (complex) international politics implies first to look closely at the main features that define the nature of the international scene: the creation and function of borders, the principle and use of national sovereignty, the essence of cooperation between nation-states. Secondly, these notions need to be contextualized in time and space. When did they become universal and how? What impact this universalization process had on the layout of the international scene? This course aims at bringing back in historical and geographical dimensions, but also the fundamental pluralism of human experience that shapes international politics. Contextualizing the elements that organize international life entails to understand as well the narratives that convey them. Hence storytelling, along with time and space, constitute crucial components of our comprehension of international politics. The “reading list” for this course will include primary sources (such as official international texts), chapters of textbooks providing clear definitions of basic concepts, as well as visual material.

Evaluation

The conference counts as 2/3 of the overall grade (a final exam at the end of the semester represents the remaining 1/3). The conference grade consists of the following types of evaluation: a mid-term exam (30%), an oral presentation (40%), and a reading summary (20%). A grade evaluating class participation, reviews and annotations of the main reading (cf. Hyphothesis section at the end of the syllabus) counts for the remaining 10%.

The mid-term exam will prepare students to write the final exam: students are required to answer one question (choice of two) in which the theoretical knowledge approached in the class (#1 to #6) will be used critically to answer a topical question. More information shall be available at a later stage during the
The oral presentation is an graded exercise based on a theme two students choose during the first tutorial. Students are responsible for the compulsory readings, which are to be used to analyse the theme of the presentation. The presentation should not exceed 20-25 minutes for joint presentations. Students must present and critically assess the most important arguments related to the topic of the presentation. Acquiring public speaking skills is a fundamental part of the assignment; presentations must not be read. Power point (if any) presentations are to be submitted via email (no later than the day of the class session).
Oral presentations must be accompanied by a detailed plan to be submitted by email to the class (and the lecturer via Urkund) by 9 a.m. the latest on the Monday morning before the class session. Essays are to be submitted as .doc AND .pdf files. Please provide hard copies of the outline to the class. The lecturer will make the essay available to the rest of the class via the conference’s Moodle page. Please consider that late submissions will be penalised. The presentation shall consist of a critical reflection on the basis of scientific texts. Students will show that they are able to grasp the most important arguments related to a topic and present them in a clearly structured
Reading commentary. You will be asked to provide a critical analysis of one of the additional for this class. You can either pick a ‘primary source’ reading, and ‘academic reading’ or a ‘further reading’. If the reading comprises multiple chapters you are free to choose one only. The lecturer will make these readings available to the rest of the class via the conference’s Moodle page. Further details about this presentation will be given on the first day of
Class participation/annotation consists in formal and informal exercises. Informally, students are always expected to prepare a reading and actively participate in the debate of each class, by asking questions prepared ahead of time and by trying to answer, and comment on, the points raised during the presentations. Students can expect to be called upon in case of insufficient spontaneous participation. Formally, each student will come to class after having annotated the main reading of the session. If multiple readings are indicated in the syllabus, the student can choose the one he wishes to annotate. Instruction regarding the use of the hypothesis plugin will be given during the first

Sessions

#1. INTRODUCTION:

Preliminary considerations on the main challenges of today’s international politics

and the way to address them

Outline of the course (contents, method, use of primary sources, texts and documents)
Assessment method and criteria, general points on assignments

Primary Source Reading:

Charter of the United Nations Charter (Excerpts)

#2 to #4: THE NATURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE #2. Borders:

Border as key element of human experience and defining feature of international

Primary Source Reading:

Ronald Reagan’s Berlin Wall speech, June 1987
The United States Secure Fence Act, 2006
Donald Trump’s Executive Order on Border Security, January 2017

Academic Reading:

John AGNEW “Borders on the Mind: Re-framing Border Thinking”, Ethics & Global Politics, vol 1, n°4,

Further:

Alexander DIENER, Joshua HAGEN, A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2012.
John RUGGIE “Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Modernity in International Relations”, International Organization, 47 (1), winter
Salter, Mark B. “The global visa regime and the political technologies of the international self: Borders, bodies, biopolitics.” Alternatives 2 (2006): 167-189.
Salter, Mark B. “Governmentalities of an airport: heterotopia and ”

International Political Sociology 1.1 (2007): 49-66.

Bigo, Didier. “The (in) securitization practices of the three universes of EU border control: Military/Navy–border guards/police–database analysts.” Security Dialogue 3 (2014): 209-225.
Anderson, Malcolm. “Les frontières: un débat contemporain.” Cultures et conflits

26/27 (1997): 15-34.

Ritaine, Evelyne. “La barrière et le checkpoint: mise en politique de l’asymétrie.”

Cultures & conflits 1 (2009): 15-33. Presentation:

The Indian-Pakistani border and the conflict in Kashmir

#3. Sovereignty:

Sovereign states as main actors of international regulation and conflicts: challengers, challenges and

Primary Source Reading:

Montevideo convention on rights and duties of states, December 1933
UN World Summit outcome and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), 2005
“Doctors Without Borders” (MSF) on R2P, 2010

Academic Reading:

Alan JAMES, “The Practice of Sovereign Statehood in Contemporary International Society”, Political Studies, vol. 47, 3, pp. 457–473, Special Issue

Further:

Itty ABRAHAM, How India Became Territorial: Foreign Policy, Diaspora, Geopolitics, Stanford University Press,
Benjamin DE CARVALHO, Halvard LEIRA, and John M. HOBSON, “The Big Bangs of IR: The Myths That Your Teachers Still Tell You about 1648 and 1919”, Millennium – Journal of International Studies, May 2011; vol. 39, 3: pp. 735-758.
Taylor OWEN, Disruptive Power. The Crisis of the State in the Digital Age, Oxford University Press,
Tilly Charles, “War-making and State-making as Organized Crime”, in Bringing the State Back in, Cambridge University Press, 1985, 169-187
Anderson, Benedict (2006), Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London; New York: Verso. [see IPS]
Lord Acton, « Nationality », in Gopal Balakrishnan (ed.), Mapping the nation, London, Verso/New Left Review, 1996 [1862].
Stein Rokkan, (1999) State formation, nation-building, and mass politics in Europe: the theory of Stein Rokkan: based on his collected works, Oxford University
Smith, A., “Invention and Imagination”, Ch. 6 of Nationalism and Modernism, Routledge, NY,
Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society, Nicholas J. Wheeler

Presentation: Humanitarian intervention in Kosovo OR Is the Kurdistan Regional Government a state? #4. States interaction:

Defining the nature of the relations between nation-states: an “international society” or an “international community”?

Primary Source Reading:

Defining international order – Hedley Bull, Martin Wight
Immanuel Kant “Perpetual Peace”, 1795
GHW Bush on “New world order” in State of the Union address, 1991
Vladimir Putin’s speech at the UN General Assembly, 2015

Academic Reading:

Barry BUZAN Ana GONZALEZ-PELAEZ, “International Community After Iraq”,

International Affairs, 81, 1 (2005). Further:

Bruce CRONIN, Community Under Anarchy. Transnational Identity and the Evolution of Cooperation, Columbia University Press,
Naeem INAYATULLAH and David L. BLANEY, International Relations and the Problem of Difference, Routledge,
Buzan, Barry. “From international system to international society: structural realism and regime theory meet the English school.” International Organization 3 (1993): 327-352.
Buzan, Barry. An introduction to the English school of international relations: The societal approach. John Wiley & Sons,
Jackson, Robert, and Georg Sørensen. Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford university press,

Presentation:

The UN system as explained by realists and liberals: power relations or international cooperation?
OR Are democracies more cooperative (i.e. about the democratic peace theory)?

#5 to #7: THE WESTERNIZATION OF INTERNATIONAL ORDER AND ITS LEGACY #5. From several to one International Order

How the European international order became a “world order” in the late 19th century, what it meant for non-Europea

Primary Source Reading:

Congress of Vienna’s final declarations, 1815
Final Act of the International Peace Conference, The Hague, 1899
Vladimir Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, (1917)
Woodrow Wilson’s “Fourteen Points” speech to Congress, January 1918

Academic Reading:

Hedley BULL Adam WATSON (eds), The Expansion of International Society, OUP, 1984 – Chapters 1 & 8

Further:

Craig MURPHY, International Organization and Industrial Global Governance since 1850, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1994.
Edward KEENE, Beyond the Anarchical Society. Grotius, Colonialism and Order in World Politics, OUP,
Devetak, Richard, Tim Dunne, and Ririn Tri Nurhayati. “Bandung 60 years on: revolt and resilience in international society.” Australian Journal of International Affairs 4 (2016): 358-373.
Akita, Shigeru, Gerold Krozewski, and Shoichi Watanabe, eds. The Transformation of the International Order of Asia: Decolonization, the Cold War, and the Colombo Plan. Routledge,
Legro, Jeffrey W. Rethinking the world: Great power strategies and international order. Cornell University Press,

Presentation:

The integration of China into the international order (1839-)?

#6. The production of a “science” of the world

The Western production of an international knowledge from Geopolitk to the discipline of

Primary Source Reading:

John L. O’Sullivan on Manifest Destiny, 1839 & 1845
Alastair Pearson and Michael Heffernan on global and pan-regional mapping, 2008
Priscilla Roberts on the history of international affairs think tanks, 2015

Academic Reading:

Michael HEFFERNAN, « Fin de Siècle, Fin du Monde ? On the Origins of European Geopolitics 1890-1920 », in Klaus DODDS and David ATKINSON (eds), Geopolitical Traditions, London, Routledge,

Further:

Simon DALBY, Geraoid O’TUATHAIL, Paul ROUTLEDGE (eds), The Geopolitics Reader, London, Routledge,
Inderjeet PARMAR, “American Hegemony, The Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of Academic International Relations in the United States” in Nicolas GUILHOT, The Invention of International Relations Theory: Realism, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory, Columbia University Press,
Said Edward, Myths and misinterpretation of the “Orient”, The Guardian, 01//08/2003
O’Loughlin, John, and Henning Heske. “From “geopolitik” to “geopolitique”: Converting a discipline for war to a discipline for peace.” The political geography of conflict and peace (1991): 37-59.
Farinelli, Franco. “Friedrich Ratzel and the nature of (political) geography.” Political geography 8 (2000): 943-955.

Presentation:

Brezinski, US foreign policy and the Cold War

#7. The making of international norms

The European invention of the “standard of civilization” and its

Primary Source Reading:

Declaration of human and civic rights, August 1789
Olympe de Gouges’ Declaration of the Rights of Woman,1791
Andrew Linklater, “The ‘Standard of Civilisation’ in World Politics », 2016
Rudyard Kipling, “The White Man’s Burden”, 1899

Academic Reading:

Gerritt GONG, The Standard of Civilization, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1984 –

Introduction

David FIDLER, ‘The Return of the Standard of Civilization’, Chicago Journal of International law, 2, no. 1 (2001)

Further:

Brett BOWDEN, The Empire of Civilization, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Finnemore Martha, Sikkink Kathryn, International Norm Dynamics and Political Change, International Organization, Autumn 1998, 887-917
Acharya, Amitav. ‘How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asia Regionalism’. International Organization, Cambridge University Press, 58, no. 2 (2004): 239–75.
introduction de Implementation and World Politics by Orchard and Betts

Presentation:

The development and (contested) diffusion of the norm of transitional justice
OR The universalization of non-proliferation as and international
OR Should democratic practices be a condition for receiving development aid?

#8 to #9: MAPPING THE WORLD #8. The invention of “Area Studies”

Reorganizing the world stage, 1940s-1950s and beyond

Primary Source Reading:

General Act of the Berlin Conference on West Africa, February 1885
Matthew Farish on the Ethnogeographic Board and WW2, 2005
US Navy issued Survival on Land and Sea, 1944

Academic Reading:

Ali MIRSEPASSI, Amrita BASU, Frederick WEAVER, Localizing Knowledge in a Globalizing World: Recasting the Area Studies Debate, Syracuse University Press, 2003 – Introduction

Further:

Amanda ANDERSON, Joseph VALENTE (eds), Disciplinarity at the Fin de Siècle, Princeton University Press,
Neil WATERS (ed), Beyond the Area Studies Wars. Towards a New International Studies, Middlebury,
Kennan George, The Long Telegram, 1947
Said, Edward. “Orientalism. 1978.” New York: Vintage 199 (1979). Chapter

Presentation:

Are area experts the new tools for power domination?

#9. The creation of international regions

From the invention of continents to the creation of “world regions”, and why Europe stands

Primary Source Reading:

United Nations Charter on Regional Agreements
Victor Hugo on the United States of Europe, 1849
Robert Schuman’s declaration,1950

Academic Reading:

Louise FAWCETT, “Exploring Regional Domains. A Comparative History of Regionalism”, International Affairs, vol. 80, n°3,

Further:

Martin LEWIS, Karen WIGEN, The Myth of Continents, Berkeley, University of California Press,
Karoline POSTEL-VINAY, “Creating International Regions. The Spatial Expression of Power” in Nadine GODEHARDT and Dick NABERS (eds) Regional Powers and Regional Orders, Routledge,

Presentation:

Europe, an exception in the creation of international regions?
OR Pan-arabism, a failed international region?
OR ASEAN and East-Asian

#10 to # 12: INTERNATIONAL STORY-TELLING #10. Narrative power

The genesis of global narratives - “World wars” and “world peace” – and their agenda-setting funct

Primary Source Reading:

Winston Churchill’s “Iron Curtain speech”, 1946
G Kennan’s “The Sources of Soviet Conduct”, or “The X Article”, 1947
AM Slaughter’s preface to National Strategic Narrative, 2011

Academic Reading:

Ben ROSAMOND, Alex WARLEIGH-LACK, « Across the EU Studies-New Regionalism Frontier: an Invitation to Dialogue » Journal of Common Market Studies, 48(4), 2010

Further:

Dipesh CHAKRABARTY, Provincializing Europe. Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference, Princeton University Press, 2007 (revised edition).
Frederik SODERBAUM, Alberta SBRAGIA, “EU Studies and the ‘New Regionalism’: What Can Be Gained from Dialogue?” Journal of European Integration, vol. 32, N°6, 2010
Krebs, Ronald (2015), “The Narrative Politics of the Battlefield”, in Narrative and the Making of US National Security, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 175

– 190.

Ringmar, Eric (2006), “Inter-Texual Relations: The Quarrel Over the Iraq War as a Conflict Between Narrative Types”, Cooperation and Conflict, 41 (4), pp. —-.
Reese, Steven D. and Lewis, Seth C. (2009), Framing the War on Terror. The internalization of policy in the US press, Journalism, 10 (6)
Baudrillard, Jean. “The spirit of terrorism.” telos 121 (2001): 134-142.
Bush Speech, War on Terror, 2001

Presentation:

War or terror
OR The concept of clash of civilizations

#11. Counter-narratives

The rise of the “subaltern” and the creation of a space for alternative narratives

Primary Source Reading:

J Nehru’s “Tryst with destiny speech”, 1947
Soekarno’s opening at Bandung Asian-African conference, 1955
Alfred Sauvy’s « Third World » article, 1952

Academic Reading:

Hidemi SUGANAMI, “Narratives of War Origins and Endings: A Note on the End of the Cold War », Millennium, vol 26, n°3, 1997

Further:

Mary KALDOR, The Imaginary War. Understanding the East-West Conflict, Blackwell, 1991.
Alister MISKIMMON, Ben O’LOUGHLIN, Laura ROSELLE, Strategic Narratives: Communication Power and the New World Order, Routledge, 2013.
Guha, Ranajit. Dominance without hegemony: History and power in colonial India.

Harvard University Press, 1997.

Chatterjee, Partha. Nationalist thought and the colonial world: A derivative discourse.

Zed Books, 1986.

Spivak Gayatri Chakravorty, “Can the Subaltern Speak?”, in Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, Macmillan Education, 1988, 271-313
Tagore, Rabindranath. “Nationalism in India.” 1996). The English writings of Rabindranath Tagore 2 (1917).
Nandy, Ashis. “The Illegitimacy of Nationalism: Rabindranath Tagore and the Politics of Self (Oxford India.” (1994).
Argounes, Fabrice. “De l’usage des Subaltern Studies en relations internationales (Can-and How-the Subaltern Speak in IR?).” Journée d’études «Quelle place dans les sciences sociales pour les Relations internationales?», Panel 3:” La transdisciplinarité

au service des études internationales en France… et au-delà”. Vol. 1. No. Quelle place dans les sciences sociales pour les Relations internationales?. 2009.

Ayoob, Mohammed. “De l’usage des Subaltern Studies en Relations Internationales1 Can (and How) the Subaltern speak to/in International Relations?.”
Leuprecht, Christian, et al. “Containing the narrative: Strategy and tactics in countering the storyline of global jihad.” Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism 1 (2010): 42-57.
Leuprecht, Christian, et al. “Winning the battle but losing the war? Narrative and counter-narratives strategy.” Perspectives on Terrorism 2 (2010).
Holtmann, Philipp. “Countering al-Qaeda’s single narrative.” Perspectives on Terrorism 2 (2013).
Chavez Speech UN, 2006 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdZbddxXohU

Presentation:

Counter-narratives to Western-centrism: Fanon, Gandhi, Du Bois, P. Chatterjee,

Strangelove… (choose an author)

History of international politics seen by Jihadi movements: a counter-narrative?

#12. Creating commonalities and the challenge of pluralism

Issues and sites of reinvention of universality, from “common goods” to global events.

Primary Source Reading:

G H Brundtland’s foreword to “Our Common Future”, 1987
International Olympic Committee’s presentation, 1933
Olympic Charter, 2015

Academic Reading:

Elinor OSTROM, Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge University Press, 1990 – Chapter 1

Further:

Boria MAJUMDAR, Projit MUKHARJI, « A Man for the Future », in Boria MAJUMDAR, Fan HONG (eds), Modern Sport – The Global Obsession, Routledge,
John WILLIAMS, Ethics, Diversity, and World Politics: Saving Pluralism From Itself?, Oxford University Press,
Pope Fransisco, Laudato Si, 2015

Presentation:

Olympic Games, a new arena for International rivalry?
OR The geopolitics of Space/Artic.
OR Who should bear the burden of combatting climate change?

Annotation instructions for: Understanding International Politics (Group Seminars 4 and 5)

We will be using a “collective annotation” software that has the potential to change the task of reading dramatically (and make it more ludic). The idea is that you will be able to make annotations within these texts which other students will be able to see. Suddenly, a solitary and difficult task becomes shared (and still challenging, mind you). I will be able to see these as well, and I will be able to pinpoint concepts, theories, and/or contexts which will help you to understand these texts and build upon them as you go through the course. You are required to use this software. Once it’s set up, it’s seamlessly simple. Whether you like to read online or on paper, you can still use this software to good effect. The basic requirement is that you take three actions per reading assignment (one core reading per week usually). Core and additional readings are marked in the syllabus and uploaded by me on Moodle. Any annotation is an action, with some caveats. An action can be many things: a question, a comment, an answer, some context you looked up and wanted to add – each of these is an annotation, and therefore an action in the basic sense. Highlighting by itself is not an action. You will highlight sections by default as you take actions. Actions are made in good faith to build up and add value to the people reading the text. It can be a question, answer, or informative comment. You can draw parallels between the text and other material, including non-academic things such as artwork, personal experiences…be imaginative! Good questions cannot be answered in a few words and might help someone else with a similar question or another student looking to make a comment. Good answers are thoughtful. Good arguments are productive, allowing for the possibility of misunderstanding on all sides, creating spaces for further understanding. At no point will a student be the target of a dismissive or otherwise negative comment. No bashing will be tolerated, please be considerate. Also, please be substantive: an action is more than a very short reply (e.g. “Ok”, “I agree” etc.). Example: XYZ sees that on a particular day, a passage from an article noted on the syllabus by John Agnew, “Borders on the mind: re-framing border thinking.” While reading the article, she sees a disjuncture from John Ruggie’s understanding of territoriality, and she writes a comment about what that might be in an annotation on Moodle. It’s about Twitter length, rather than an essay or even necessarily a fully developed thought. She also feels like sharing a personal experience of crossing Wagah border between Pakistan and India by foot which reflects territorial crystallization of statehood and nationalism. For her third action, she is trying to make sense of Prof. Postel-Vinay’s critique of borders as a defining feature of international relations. She writes a question: “Can anyone tell me whether the article is supporting such critique? I’m having trouble understanding what he means in that particular sentence [quote here].” Each of these are made public so that other people can see it. The professor finds these to be exemplary actions and gives XYZ full credit for the reading for that day. How to set up and use Hypothes.is:

Install Google Chrome on a computer you trust and have access to https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/hypothesis-web-pdf- annota/bjfhmglciegochdpefhhlphglcehbmek?hl=fr. Whatever your opinions of Chrome, it is the most used web browser in the world, and it works on Windows, OS X, and Linux machines. They plan to add other browsers, but Chrome was first because of its dominant share of users. If you’re very tech savvy, you might experiment with developer versions of other browsers. You can run in on the developer edition of Firefox and install the add-on here: https://github.com/BigBlueHat/firefox-addon (I won’t provide assistance on that matter).
Register for a Hypothes.is account with your Sciences Po Paris email address. It’s free and open source : https://hypothes.is/ . Put your full name as username so that I can recognize you
In the settings of Chrome, make sure that “Allow Access to File URLs” is checked (I will show you the procedure in class):
Join your annotation group. If your class in the one on Tuesday 10h10-12h10 (Understanding International Politics. Gr4): https://goo.gl/3V6gVN. If your class in the one on Wednesday 13h15-15h15 (Gr5): https://goo.gl/3iDLJS.
Start up the article by John Agnew in Moodle. It’s our first one, so you’ll need to take one or two actions. The article has to be opened in your browser. As you read it, note that there is a symbol that looks like this: Start up the article by James Frazer in Moodle. It’s our first one, so you’ll need to take three actions. As you read it, note that there is a symbol that looks like this: On my Windows machine, it’s in the top of the window, directly to the right of the address bar. Find it and click it.
Now Hypothes.is is active in your Chrome window. Highlight some text after the “Abstract” section, and you’ll get two options: the familiar symbol on the left is best for this assignment, because it highlights what you have selected and opens a window for you to type something in. This is an annotation. The other option merely highlights, and this is not too helpful in the context of this.
Make sure that your setting at the top says “Int. Pol. Gr.X” (4 or 5, depending on your group). When you post, make sure you have the “Post to Int. Pol. Gr.X” box selected. Don’t worry, these annotations are not public except for the few of us who are allowed into this Moodle page. This is what it should look like:
Do this once more if you feel so, and you’re done with the requirement. Feel encouraged to keep using it beyond the minimum if you find it useful. The more the better.
Do not hesitate to check out the Hypothes.is tutorials for more information: https://hypothes.is/quick-start-guide-for-students/ and https://hypothes.is/annotation-tips-for- students/