P a g e | 1

The Foundations of International Society

2014-2015

Part I: Politics 2

(International Relations I)

Paper organiser:

Dr. Aaron Rapport (POLIS)

Room 131, Alison Richard Building

Office hours: Wednesdays, 10-11 am

Email: ar727@cam.ac.uk

Lecturers: Professor Brendan Simms will deliver four lectures on international history; these

lectures are denoted with his initials (BS). All other lectures will be given by Dr. Rapport.

Aims and Objectives

The course aims to introduce students to the subject of International Relations (IR), whose main

focus is the nature of politics at the international level. This includes issues as varied as international

trade, military crises, human rights, and international law, to name a few—matters in which states,

international institutions, and transnational nongovernmental organizations play a major role.

Students will acquire the empirical and conceptual foundations needed to understand an

international political system which cannot be accurately described as either pure anarchy or a

coherent form of ‘global governance’. International politics can be analyzed from numerous

analytical frameworks which compete and complement each other to a certain extent. Some of

these frameworks assume IR is best understood as an ‘international society’ with a shared set of

institutions and common procedures that allow states to co-exist. Others presume IR is best

characterized by an endless competition for power and prestige; still others contend that

international politics is best studied with an eye on transcending the most violent, hierarchical, and

oppressive practices of the past. Students will not be expected to learn IR theory as an end in itself,

but rather as an analytic guide by which they will be able to have informed, critical discussions about:

the historical origins of the present international system; what is distinctive about international

politics as opposed to politics inside the state; and the main challenges which confront humanity in

the twenty-first century.

Brief Description of the Paper

The subject of International Relations (usually given capital letters, as opposed to international

relations as events) has a huge range. To make the task of learning IR manageable, this course is

structured around four inter-related themes, each of which takes a different ‘cut’ at the subject and

selects certain key areas of knowledge, or debates, from which (in conjunction with your supervisor)

you may choose your topics for supervisions. The themes are as follows:

P a g e | 2

(1) History: The way the international system has evolved from a world in which the interaction

between continents was limited, through the rising predominance of the European states system and

balance of power, to the current post-imperial and multi-level structure, which incorporates 193

states as members of the United Nations (together with a small number of unrecognised states),

thousands of intergovernmental organisations, and even more nongovernmental actors in civil

society, often operating transnationally.

2) Order in world politics: What are the key concepts of international relations? How much order exists

in the system, and how is it sustained? Is it proper to speak of an ‘international society’? What are

the respective roles played by states, regions, organisations, law and economic exchange in the

international political system? Are states still the main players, and what can they do via their foreign

policies? How significant are the effects of interdependence and globalisation?

3) War: As a major part of the human experience – what it represents, why it happens, and its effects

at home and in the international system. Is war in decline, or simply changing its nature? Is war

essentially a continuation of politics, or its opposite?

(4) Ethics: What is reasonable to expect of states in terms of ethical behaviour in international

relations? How may competing ethical systems, or cultural traditions, be reconciled in a world which

is both globalising and competitive? What are the major moral dilemmas thrown up at the global

level?

Modes of teaching

The paper is taught by a combination of 28 lectures, six hours of supervision for each student, for

which essays are written, and two classes in the Easter term. The lectures will usually be

accompanied by an illustrative outline on PowerPoint, which will subsequently be made available on

CamTools. The outline is not a full version of the lecture, and thus not a substitute for attendance.

In their turn the lectures are intended to provide a structure for your work, and must be built upon

by your reading and by your supervisory discussions. The lectures may be accessed as follows:

CamTools> Human, Social, and Political Sciences Tripos Part I> Resources (left bar)> Pol2:

International Relations> Lectures

Lectures begin promptly at 10:00 am on Tuesdays and Fridays in Mill Lane Lecture Rooms, room 9.

There will be two lectures a week in the Michaelmas term and two per week in the Lent term, with

the last two weeks of the latter left free for catching up with essays and reading. The classes in the

Easter term are provided as a way of pulling together the main ideas and themes examined in the

course, and of assisting you in your revision.

Mode of Assessment

There will be a three hour unseen examination paper in the Easter term, in which you will be

required to answer three questions from a choice of twelve. These questions will focus on the four

main themes outlined above. While each individual question will primarily focus on a single theme,

knowledge of more than one area of the guide may be relevant and will almost certainly improve the

P a g e | 3

quality of your answer. In the reading list which follows lists of essay questions for supervisions are

given at the end of each of the four sections. The examination papers from the last four years, along

with marking criteria, are provided at the end of this guide.

READING

Textbooks and general background books

For this course you need to recognise that you will need varying kinds of knowledge: some

historical, some understanding of key concepts, theories and debates, and some awareness of the

contemporary world. The following are recommended both for preparatory reading before the

course, and for background during it. While there is variation in terms of what different books

choose to emphasise, these general texts also overlap quite a bit and thus can be used to substitute

for one another. In other words, don’t imagine that you are expected to read all of any single text—

let alone read all of them! Instead, read selectively, according to interest. If you wish to purchase one

or two for regular reference then those by Burchill and Linklater (for theory) and Hanhimaki et. al

(for history) would be the best investments. Secondhand copies of most will be available from

online retailers.

Baylis, John, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens (eds.), The Globalization of World Politics: An

Introduction to International Relations, 5th edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). [This best-

selling text covers a wide range of theoretical and empirical material, with the help of boxes and

other study aids. Its overviews are reliable starting points for many of the issues which you will

encounter].

Brown, Chris and Kirsten Ainsley, Understanding International Relations, 4th edition (Houndmills:

Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). [This is the most coherent and concise introduction available. It has a

theoretical leaning but always stays close to real world concerns. It is written in a lively and engaging

style].

Burchill, Scott and Andrew Linklater (eds.), Theories of International Relations, 5th edition (Basingstoke:

Palgrave, 2013). [Exceptionally clear and comprehensive collection of essays on all the main

theories].

Hanhimaki, Jussi, Joseph A. Maiolo, Kirsten Schulze, and Anthony Best, An International

History of the Twentieth Century and Beyond, 2nd edition (London: Routledge, 2008). [This collaborative

work provides comprehensive coverage of world history since 1900, broken down by periods and by

regions – but a good alternative is the next book…]

Keylor, William, A World of Nations: the International Order since 1945, 2nd edition (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2008).[Sober, factual, account of the main themes of international politics in the

Cold war and beyond].

Jackson, Robert, Global Politics in the 21st Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013). [A

lively, accessible and up to date survey of most issues covered in the course. Note that there are two

Robert Jacksons whose books appear in this guide].

P a g e | 4

Kegley, Charles W. and Shannon L. Blanton, World Politics: Trend and Transformation, 2014-2015

edition (Boston: Wadsworth). [Well-established general introduction that emphasises the elements of

change in the international system].

Mayall, James, World Politics: Progress and its Limits (Cambridge: Polity, 2000). [Professor Mayall, a

member of POLIS and a Fellow of Sidney Sussex, produced in this book a marvel of compression.

Its 155 pages contain incisive discussion of the main ideas, institutions and debates in international

society, from a broadly English School (or liberal) perspective].

Mingst, Karen A., and Ivan M. Arreguín-Toft, Essentials of International Relations 6th edition, (New

York: W.W. Norton, 2013). [A tried, tested and concise overview].

Watson, Adam, The Evolution of International Society (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009). (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|56982). [This is a lucid account of how human

societies since the earliest times have dealt with each other, forming what we now call ‘states-

systems’. It is divided into three sections: the ancient world; European international society; and

global international society].

LECTURES

A summary list of the 28 lectures is given here, followed by a more detailed description,

accompanied by relevant readings. Possible essay questions are listed at the end of each section of

the reading list.

Michaelmas term

1. Introduction

2. The subject of International Relations

Theories of International Relations

3. The realist tradition

4. Varieties of liberalism

5. The constructivist turn (NOTE CHANGE OF LECTURE DAY BELOW)

6. Critical approaches

Theme I: History – the evolution of the international system

7. Why the state? (BS)

8. The European balance of power (BS)

9. The Concert of Europe, industrialisation and empire (BS)

10. The hopes and failures of the League of Nations (BS)

11. Bipolarity, globalisation and the ‘triumph of the West’

P a g e | 5

Theme 2: Order in World Politics

12. Concepts of international system and society

13. Statehood

14. Foreign policy and diplomacy

15. International order: law, rules and norms

16. International organisation (i): The UN Security Council

Lent Term

Order in World Politics, continued

17. International organisation (ii): managing the international economy

18. International organisation (iii): The EU and other forms of regionalism

19. Non-state actors and the concept of global civil society

Theme 3: War in international society

20. Systemic causes of war

21. Domestic causes of war

22. Systemic consequences of war

23. Domestic consequences of war

Theme 4: Normative dilemmas

24. Order v. Justice

25. Saving strangers: an obligation to intervene?

26. The environment and the problem of global commons

27. Nuclear proliferation (DATE TBC)

28. Unity and diversity in international society

Easter Term

Revision sessions TBC (see p. 34)

P a g e | 6

DETAILED READINGS

Readings are distinguished as follows:

** Highly recommended

* Recommended, but often broad overviews of a topic offering further theory and

background information. These are best thought of as supplementary to the highly

recommended readings. Again, you should read selectively according to interest

(translation: you can and should try to read some of the one star selections that correspond

with each lecture, but if you try to read all of them you will find yourself overwhelmed!)

NB: Citations without any asterisk are still relevant and worthwhile. They provide useful alternatives

where there is pressure on the availability of books.

Many of the book chapters and articles listed below will be scanned and accessible through the

Library CamTools portal. Please note that this is NOT the same as the separate Part I portal on

CamTools. Instead it is accessed: CamTools > SPS Library > Files (on the left bar) > Part I > Pol 2

1. Introduction (10 Oct.)

How is the modern world organised, to the extent that it is? The creation of a single global system;

what kind of politics takes place across and beyond national frontiers? The differences between

‘international relations’ and ‘world politics’. System and society. The concept of globalization.

**Baylis, John and Smith, Steve (eds.), (see TEXTS), Chapters 1 and 2.

**Waltz, Kenneth, ‘The continuity of international politics’, in Ken Booth and Tim Dunne (eds.),

Worlds in Collision: terror and the future of global order (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002). [Brief but

usefully blunt statement of the argument that states still dominate world politics].

*Jackson, Robert (see TEXTS), Chapter 1.

*Kegley and Wittkopf (see TEXTS), Chapter 1.

2. The subject of International Relations (14 Oct.)

International Relations (IR) as an academic subject – history, purposes, scope; relations with other

social sciences and with the humanities; special subjects within IR; different national and cultural

traditions in its study.

**Hollis, Martin, and Steve Smith, Explaining and Understanding International Relations (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1990), ch. 1. [Two general ways of orienting oneself to the study of IR]

**Schmidt, Brian C. ‘On the history and historiography of International Relations’, in Walter

Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse and Beth Simmonds (eds.), Handbook of International Relations (London: Sage,

2002).[Interesting challenge to the conventional view that International Relations started in 1919].

P a g e | 7

*Brown, Chris and Kirsten Ainsley (see TEXTS), Chapters 1, 2, 3.

*Haslam, Jonathan, No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli

(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), pp 183-254. [Advanced and lucid discussion of

international thought in its historical context. The pages recommended focus on the key aspects of

20th century realism].

*Jackson, Robert and Georg Sorensen, Introduction to International Relations: theories and approaches, 4th

edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), Chapters 1-2.

Smith, Steve, ‘The discipline of International Relations: still an American social science?’ British

Journal of Politics and International Relations 2, no. 3 (2000), pp. 374-402.

Waever, Ole, ‘The rise and fall of the inter-paradigm debate’, in Steve Smith, Ken Booth and

Marysia Zalewski (eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1996), pp. 149-185. [For those particularly interested in theory].

THEORIES OF INTERNATIONAL POLITICS

The following four lectures are intended to provide a direct encounter with the main theories of IR.

The theories are not a substitute for understanding world politics empirically. Rather, you should use

them to make sense of both the evolution of international politics and the main debates which it

engenders. They will help you to form a view both on the whole – what kind of system do we

inhabit – and the specifics, whether war, intervention or international organisation. There will not be

questions in the final examination on the theories as such, but you will be expected to draw on them

as necessary throughout the paper.

3. The Realist Tradition (17 Oct.)

Realism has its roots in the political philosophy of Thucydides, Machiavelli and Hobbes. More

modern realist thinkers include E.H. Carr, Hans Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, and John

Mearsheimer. Realism emphasises pragmatic (if not amoral) diplomacy; state competition and the

balance of power; military technology and its connection to perceptions of threat; and a skeptical

view of international institutions and law.

** Donnelly, Jack, ‘Realism’ in Scott Burchill and Andrew Linklater (eds) (see TEXTS)

**Carr, E.H. The Twenty Years Crisis (any edition, but the original of 1939 is most revealing). See

particularly chapters 1, 4-8.

** Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, chapter 13 (‘Of the Natural Condition of Mankind’), any edition.

[Hobbes has been a great source of inspiration for realist IR scholars].

* Machiavelli, Niccolò, The Prince (any edition)

P a g e | 8

* Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Rex Warner translation (Harmondsworth: Penguin

Books, 1972). [Read ‘The Melian Dialogue’ at the end of Book V, often referred to as one of the

earliest realist treatises on politics.]

*Haslam, Jonathan, No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli

(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002) [relevant throughout, for its focus on the evolution of

thought, and for the relationship between ideas and practice].

*Keohane, Robert O. (ed.), Neorealism and its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986).

[Extracts from the key writings around Waltz’s theory of neo-realism (see below); see particularly

chapter 1 by Keohane and chapters 4-5 by Waltz.]

*Morgenthau, Hans, Politics among Nations: the Struggle for Power and Peace (New York: Alfred Knopf,

1948, and later eds). [Influential but also highly contested attempt to make power the scientific basis

for studying IR].

Waltz, Kenneth, Theory of International Politics (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979). [Seminal work,

perhaps best approached through Keohane’s collection at this stage].

Wolfers, Arnold, Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1962). [Sophisticated and pragmatic realism in a series of essays, any of which will

reward reading].

4. Varieties of liberalism (21 Oct.)

Liberalism covers a multitude of diverse approaches in relation to politics both within the state and

between states. In IR, liberalism therefore stresses the interrelationship between inside and outside,

unlike realism which sees the international realm as distinctive. Liberalism also looks for the

possibilities for cooperation between states, especially (after 1918) through international law and

institutions. It is closely associated with what is known as the Grotian view, and to some extent with

modern rationalism. It is also naturally the point of reference for those concerned to stress the rights

of individuals rather than states, and ethical obligations to strangers. Economic liberalism tends to

highlight trade, interdependence and human progress.

**Axelrod, Robert and Robert O. Keohane ‘Achieving cooperation under anarchy: strategies and

institutions’, World Politics 38, no. 1, October 1985.

**Burchill, Scott, ‘Liberalism’, in Burchill and Linklater (see TEXTS).

** Doyle, Michael W. ‘Liberalism and World Politics’, American Political Science Review 80, no. 4 (1986),

pp. 1151-1169. [authoritative treatment of the political philosophy behind liberal practices in

international relations. For a more developed version, see Doyle, Ways of War and Peace: Realism,

Liberalism and Socialism (New York: W.W. Norton, 1997) Part II.]

*Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Free Press, 1992). [For the

condensed precursor essay, see Fukuyama, “The End of History?” The National Interest (Summer

1989).]

P a g e | 9

*Howard, Michael, War and the Liberal Conscience (London: Temple Smith, 1978). [Insights from a

major historian sensitive to the necessary dialogue between realism and liberalism].

*Held, David, Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Democracy

(Cambridge: Polity, 1995). [from a leading exponent of optimistic modern liberalism]

*Hill, Christopher, ‘1939: the Origins of Liberal Realism’, Review of International Studies 15, 1989. [an

attempt to show why World War II led to liberalism evolving, rather than disappearing].

*Vincent, R.J., Human Rights and International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press 1986). [One

of the first IR attempts to bring human rights to the centre of the subject].

5. The constructivist turn (23 Oct.) NOTE: This is a THURSDAY. Lecture will still be at

10 am in Mill Lane room 9.

Strictly speaking constructivism is not a theory of the substance of international politics; it is an

epistemological approach common across the social sciences emphasising the need to understand

human behaviour not in terms of objective reality, let alone laws, but rather in terms of ‘inter-

subjective understandings’ – that is, how we use ideas, frames, perceptions to construct our world,

which is thus far less predictable than realists, liberals or Marxists would have us believe.

Constructivism has become the dominant approach among European IR scholars, and has also

established a firm foothold in the US where, however, rationalism still dominates. NB the distinction

between ‘thin’ constructivism, seen as close to liberal rationalism, and the ‘thick’ variety, being

strongly post-positivist, even post-modernist.

**Hopf, Ted, ‘The promise of constructivism in International Relations Theory’, International Security

23, no. 1 (1998).

**Reus-Schmidt, Christian, ‘Constructivism’ in Burchill and Linklater (see TEXTS)

**Wendt, Alexander, ‘Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics’,

International Organization 46, no. 2 (1992). [Classic article from the leading IR constructivist].

*Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink, ‘International norm dynamics and political

change’, International Organization 52, no. 4 (1998): 887-917 [How can seemingly weak political actors

compel powerful states and organisations to alter their behavior?]

*Guzzini, Stefano, Power, Realism and Constructivism (London: Routledge, 2013), Part III. [Excellent

critical synthesis, looking back on 20 years of constructivism in IR].

*Ruggie, John, Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International Instittutionalization (London:

Routledge, 1998). [Key essays from a leading theorist who has also held major posts at the UN].

*Wendt, Alexander, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1999). [Wendt’s major book, replying to Waltz’s of 1979. Densely theoretical, but rewarding].

P a g e | 10

6. Critical approaches (28 Oct.)

IR has often been accused of being too close to power, despite the influence of ‘idealism’ between

the two World Wars. With the development of the subject at universities world-wide has come a

wide range of approaches, empirical and theoretical, with critical approaches both to intellectual

orthodoxies and their assumptions about what is possible – and more importantly not possible – in

international politics. One critical strand looks back to Marxism. Another, currently more vigorous,

derives from the work of Michel Foucault and others in challenging the foundational assumptions of

established social science. This strand is generally termed ‘post-structural’. There has also been much

work generated by feminist and green writers, which is generally counter-orthodoxy, but not easy to

place into the standard academic categories.

**Burchill and Linklater (see TEXTS), chapters 5 on Marx and 7 on critical theory. [Chapters 6, 8,

10 and 11, (on historical sociology, post-structuralism, feminism, and green politics, respectively) are

also worth further reading for those particularly interested in this general approach to IR].

**Cox, Robert W., ‘Social forces, states and world orders: beyond International Relations theory’,

Millennium 10, no. 2 (1981) [highly influential attempt to draw attention to the structures which

underlie international relations.]

** Linklater, Andrew, ‘Citizenship and sovereignty in the post-Westphalian state’, European Journal of

International Relations 2, no. 1 (1996). [A major statement from Britain’s leading IR theorist, creatively

combining influences from both Marxism and the English School. For a fuller treatment see

Linklater’s book The Transformation of International Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian

Era (Cambridge: Polity, 1998).]

*Enloe, Cynthia, ‘Margins, silences and bottom rungs: how to overcome the underestimation of

power in the study of International Relations’, in Steve Smith,, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski

(eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

[Attack on the IR’s neglect of the actual impact of power on ordinary lives, from a leading feminist

empiricist].

* Strange, Susan, Casino Capitalism (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1986) [prescient, sceptical and readable

account from the founder of modern international political economy, stressing US hegemony].

*Tickner, J. A. Gendering World Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001) [one of the key

writers among feminist approaches to IR].

Campbell, David, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, revised ed.

(Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998). [Sometimes difficult but innovative study on how

foreign policy relies on creating the ‘Other’, and how that very process shapes our own identities].

Gill, Stephen (ed.), Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1993). [The Italian theorist and anti-fascist Antonio Gramsci has been increasingly

influential in the study of IR for the way he combines ideas and material factors].

P a g e | 11

Essay Questions for Theories:

1. From realism, liberalism, constructivism, and critical theory, pick two theoretical perspectives and

discuss whether or not they would predict that future economic and military decline by the United

States relative to other countries would be a peaceful process.

Suggested readings:

a. Ikenberry, G. John, Michael Mastanduno, and William C. Wohlforth, ‘Unipolarity,

state behavior, and systemic consequences’, World Politics 61, no. 1 (2009).

b. Friedberg, Aaron L., ‘The Future of US-China Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable?’

International security 30, no. 2(2005).

2. In which region of the world would you argue the ‘security dilemma’ is currently most

pronounced? Does IR theory suggest any effective methods by which the dilemma you cite could be

alleviated?

3. Did the global recession which began in 2008 strongly impugn liberal IR theory, and/or vindicate

Marxist-critical approaches to international politics?

Suggested readings:

a. Drezner, Daniel W., ‘The System Worked: Global Economic Governance

during the Great Recession’, World Politics 66, no. 1 (2014).

b. Foster, John Bellamy, and Robert W. McChesney, ‘The Endless Crisis’, Monthly

Review 64, no. 1 (2012). Available for download at

http://monthlyreview.org/2012/05/01/the-endless-crisis/

THEME I: History - the evolution of the international system

**For the whole of theme I, see Watson, Adam, The Evolution of International Society (see TEXTS), 1-

276. [The best single source on this subject; clear and informative; see especially pp152-198 on the

emergence of the European states-system].

7. Why the state? (31 Oct.; BS)

The international system used to be constituted by a mélange of city-states, principalities, empires,

feudal and tribal entities, and other forms of political organization. It is now overwhelming

characterized by polities defined as states. What were the historical dynamics that produced the

modern state system?

**Bean, Richard ‘War and the birth of the nation state’, Journal of Economic History 33, no. 1 (1973).

[Sensitive to military, political, and economic dynamics, Bean anticipates Charles Tilly’s argument

that ‘war made the state, and the state made war’.]

P a g e | 12

**Hui, Victoria Tin-bor, ‘Toward a dynamic theory of international politics: insights from comparing

ancient China and early modern Europe’, International Organization 58, no. 1 (2004). [Why did ancient

China become a single state, rather than a set of competing states as was the case in Europe?]

*Spruyt, Hendrik, ‘Institutional selection in international relations: State anarchy as order’,

International Organization 48, no. 4 (1994). [A ‘contracting’ perspective on state formation that

complicates the link between war-making and the state].

*Buzan, Barry and Richard Little, International Systems in World History: Remaking the study of International

Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), especially pp. 163-240 [Occasionally over-abstract,

this study nonetheless takes on the big picture with clarity and confidence. The pages recommended

deal with the ancient and classical systems the authors have identified, that is from 3000 BC to 1500

AD].

*Herbst, Jeffrey, ‘War and the State in Africa’, International Security 14, no. 4 (1990).

*Holsti, Kal, International Politics: A Framework for Analysis 7th edition (London: Prentice Hall, 1995).

Chapter 2 [gives a concise summary of the systems of the ancient world].

*Osiander, Andreas, The States System of Europe, 1640-1990: Peacemaking and the conditions of international

stability (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). [Study of the four great peace congresses from

Westphalia through Utrecht and Vienna to Versailles. Students interested in reading Osiander’s

longer critique of popular conceptions of the Peace of Westphalia of 1648 should see his

article ‘Sovereignty, international relations, and the Westphalian myth’, International Organization 55,

no. 2 (2001)].

*Tilly, Charles, ‘War making and state making as organized crime’, in Bringing the State Back In ed. by

Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer and Theda Skocpol (Cambridge University Press, 1985).

[Influential study of how war has shaped the modern state as we know it].

Berridge, Geoffrey et. al. (eds.), Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger (Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan, 2001). [Essays on the major theorists of diplomacy; see especially those on Machiavelli,

Grotius, and Nicolson].

Bull, Hedley and Adam Watson, (eds.), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1984), Chapter 1. [brief summary by Watson of the approach eventually taken in

his later book, above].

Mattingly, Garrett, Renaissance Diplomacy (London: Penguin, 1955), Chapters 27-28. [close- textured

but fascinating history of the emergence of modern diplomacy in the Italian city- states; a classic].

8. The European balance of power (4 Nov.; BS)

The sovereignty principle, and its relation to power; the classical 18th century balance of power

system; the upheaval of the French revolution; the beginnings of institutionalised discussion about

international order – the Congress of Vienna and the Concert of Europe.

P a g e | 13

**Jervis, Robert, ‘Security regimes’, International Organization 36, no. 2 (1982). [Understanding the

classic balance of power in Europe within an institutional framework; written by one of the leading

US IR scholars of the past four decades].

**Schroeder, Paul, ‘Not even for the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries: power and order in the

early modern era’, in Ernest May, Richard Rosecrance and Zara Steiner, eds., History and Neorealism

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp78-102 [informed critique of some conventional

wisdoms. For a more historically narrow essay by Schroeder see ‘Did the Vienna settlement rest on

a balance of power?’ The American Historical Review 97, no. 3 (1992)].

*Hinsley, F.H., Power and the Pursuit of Peace (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963), Chapters

8-11. [A classic book, which looks both at the key ideas about war and peace in modern Europe, and

at the actual evolution of the system].

*Lauren, Paul, Gordon Craig and Alexander Craig, Force and Statecraft: Diplomatic challenges of our time,

4th edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2007), Chapters 1 and 2. [One of the best US overviews,

again combining theory with history].

*Osiander, Andreas, The States System of Europe, 1640-1990: Peacemaking and the conditions of international

stability (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). [Study of the four great peace congresses from

Westphalia through Utrecht and Vienna to Versailles]

*Simms, Brendan, “A false principle in the Law of Nations”: Burke, state sovereignty, [German]

liberty and intervention in the age of Westphalia’, in Simms, Brendan and D.J. B. Trimm, eds.,

Humanitarian Intervention: A History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). [A detailed

contestation of the idea that Westphalia put an end to interventions on moral grounds in domestic

affairs].

*Simms, Brendan, Europe: the Struggle for Supremacy, 1453 to the Present: A History of the Continent from

1500 (London: Allen Lane, 2013). [A major reinterpretation of modern Europe history, focusing on

geopolitics. Long!]

Henry Kissinger, Diplomacy (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994), Chapters 4-7 [sophisticated

realism from the leading scholar-practitioner of our time]

Sked, Alan, The Decline and Fall of the Hapsburg Empire, 1815-1918, 2nd edition (Harlow: Longman,

2001).

Wright, Peter Moorehead (ed.), Theory and Practice of the Balance of Power, 1486-1914 (London: Dent,

1975).

9. The Concert of Europe, Industrialism, and Empire (7 Nov.; BS)

The Concert of Europe and the beginnings of international organisation; the impact of economics –

industrialisation and free trade; the British lead and the consequences for imperial expansion –

nationalism, the ‘Scramble for Africa’, and the naval arms race; the emerging crisis of the European

states system.

P a g e | 14

**Bayly, C.A., The Birth of the Modern World, 1780-1914 (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), chapter 6 on

‘Nation, empire, and ethnicity, c. 1860-1900.’

**Kennedy, Paul, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: economic change and military conflict from 1500-2000

(London: Unwin Hyman, 1988), Chapters 4-5. [A book which touched a chord in the USA, worried

about decline. Powerful historical analysis of the impact of imperial overstretch].

**Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation: The political and economic origins of our time (Boston: Beacon

Press, 1957), Chapters 1-2. [Influential classic, not always easy to read but with highly original

analysis of the relationship between states, power and markets].

*Joll, James, Europe since 1870: an International History, 3rd edition (London: Penguin, 1990), Chapters 1,

4-7. [Superior text].

*Schroeder, Paul, Systems, Stability and Statecraft: Essays on the International History of Modern Europe (New

York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), Chapters 1, 2, 9,10. [Schroeder is one of the leading historians of

19 century diplomacy, and one who enjoys debating with political scientists. The chapters suggested

are among the most wide-ranging of his essays].

*Stearns, Peter N., The Industrial Revolution in World History (any edition). [Placing the industrial

revolution in global and historical context].

Bartlett, C.J., The Global Conflict, 1860-1990 (London: Longman, 1984).

Haslam, Jonathan, No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli

(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), pp 128-161. [Important for its analysis of the neglected

economic dimension of the balance of power].

Joll, James, The Origins of the First World War (London: Longman, 1992) [Sharp, concise, compelling].

Roberts, J.M., Europe, 1880-1945, 3rd edition (London : Longman, 2000), Chapters 2-4.[High- level

text].

10. The hopes and failures of the League of Nations (11 Nov.; BS)

The political impact of the Great War; the attempt to build peace through law; the strengths and

weaknesses of the League of Nations; reasons for failure; the impact of economic depression and

nationalist reactions; the realist critique.

**Carr, E.H., The Twenty Years Crisis (London: Macmillan, 1946). [Major classic which deserves

reading right through. Chapters 2-3-4 provide Carr’s critique of ‘utopianism’ and of the League of

Nations’].

**Best, Anthony, et. al, International History of the Twentieth Century and Beyond (see TEXTS), chapters 2

and 7.

*Dunbabin, John, ‘The League of Nations’ place in the international system’, History, 78, 254 (1993)

pp. 421-442.

P a g e | 15

*Keylor, William, The Twentieth Century and Beyond: An International History since 1900, 5th edition

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), Chapters. 2-4 [detailed and informative].

*Lauren, Paul, Gordon Craig and Alexander George, Force and Statecraft: Diplomatic challenges of our time,

4th edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2007), Chapter 3.

*Steiner, Zara, The Lights that Failed : European international history, 1919-1933 (Oxford: Oxford

University Press 2005), Chapter 7.

*Steiner, Zara, The Triumph of the Dark: European international history, 1933-1939 (Oxford: Oxford

University Press 2011). [The second volume of the most recent and authoritative diplomatic history

of the period. Probably best used for reference at this stage].

Armstrong, David, Lorna Lloyd and John Redmond, International Organisation in World Politics, 3rd

edition (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), Chapter 2.

Henig, Ruth (ed.), The League of Nations (London: Haus Publishing, 2010) [good commentary on the

Articles of the League’s Covenant].

Keynes, J.M. The Economic Consequences of the Peace (London: Macmillan, 1919). [Devastating

contemporary critique of Versailles, which either foretold the troubles to come, or helped to create

them, according to one’s view] (eBook: http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|455805)

Northedge, F.S. The League of Nations: its life and times (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1986).

[Lucid history written by an IR professional with an historical approach].

11. Bipolarity, globalisation and the ‘triumph of the West’. (14 Nov.)

Why was international organisation deemed so important in 1945 given the collapse of the League of

Nations? The emergence of a bipolar balance of power; the impact of nuclear weapons; the attempt

to ensure economic stability; the impact of economic growth, and of decolonization; the end of the

Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet bloc; unipolarity or multipolarity? The impact of

globalisation.

**Gaddis, John Lewis, ‘The Long Peace: Elements of Stability in the Postwar International System’,

International Security 10, no. 4 (1986). [A statement by one of the leading historians of the Cold War]

**Ikenberry, G. John, ‘A world economy restored: Expert consensus and the Anglo-American

postwar settlement’, International Organization 46, no. 1 (1992). [A historical and theoretical argument

for why the US remain engaged with the European system after World War II, unlike World War I]

**A debate about the end of the Cold War: Stephen G. Brooks and William C. Wohlforth, ‘Power,

Globalization, and the End of the Cold War: Reevaluating a Landmark Case for Ideas’, International

Security 25, no. 3 (2000/01); and, in reply, Robert D. English, ‘Power, ideas, and new evidence on the

Cold War's end: A reply to Brooks and Wohlforth’, International Security 26, no. 4 (2002).

P a g e | 16

*Calvocoressi, Peter, World Politics since 1945, 9th edition (Harlow: Pearson Longman, 2009), Chapter

1. [Long, detailed and useful reference book on all the major episodes of post-1945 world history;

good maps].

*Clark, Ian, Globalisation and Fragmentation; International Relations in the Twentieth Century (Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1997), Chapters 6-8. [Important overview from a leading figure in both the

history and theory of IR].

*Halliday, Fred, The Making of the Second Cold War (London: Verso, 1983), Chapters 1-2. [Critical

perspective on both superpowers as détente failed at the end of the 1970s].

*Lauren, Paul Gordon Craig and Alexander George, Force and Statecraft: Diplomatic challenges of our time,

4th edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2007), Chapters 4-6.

*Reynolds, David, One World Divisible: A Global History since 1945 (London: Penguin Press, 2001),

especially Chapters 1, 4, 6, 10. [The main chapters on superpower relations up to 1979 from this

major synthesis of developments at all levels of post-war history].

Buzan, Barry, The United States and the Great Powers (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2004), Chapters 1 and 3.

Clark, Ian, The Post-Cold War Order: the spoils of peace (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2001).

Fukuyama, Francis, The End of History and the Last Man (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1993). [In this

book Fukuyama articulated albeit intelligently - the triumphalism which engulfed some of the West

after the fall of the USSR, and which culminated in the rise of neo- conservatism in US foreign

policy. He recanted in an article in the New York Times Magazine of 19 February 2006 – to be

found on the Wikipedia entry in his name].

Essay questions for Theme 1

1. In what sense, if any, did ‘international relations’ exist before the Peace of Westphalia of 1648?

2. Is there any way a system of sovereign states could have arisen without war as a driving factor?

3. To what extent is modern international relations the product of the industrial revolution?

4. How did the nineteenth century balance of power work, and why did it break down?

5. Was the League of Nations inevitably doomed to fail?

6. Discuss the extent to which any ONE of the following had a structural impact on the nature of

the international system: the First World War; the Second World War; the end of the Cold War.

7. When did a truly global international system come into being?

P a g e | 17

THEME II: The elements of international order

12. Concepts of international system and society (18 Nov.)

The differences between the concepts of ‘system’, society’, and ‘community’ as applied to

international relations; Martin Wight’s three perspectives: realism, rationalism and revolutionism;

‘world society.’

**Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society (London: Macmillan, 1977), Chapters 1-3. [The major work of

‘the English School’, also useful as a high-level text].

**Buzan, Barry, ‘From international system to international society: Structural realism and regime

theory meet the English school’, International Organization 47, no. 3 (1993) [A useful synthesis of a set

of perspectives on international politics that are often treated as competitors]

**Jackson, Robert, The Global Covenant: Human conduct in a world of states (Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 2000), Chapter 5. [Strong argument for the continued importance of states, and of agreements

between them]. (eBook: http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|455400)

*Mayall, James, World Politics; progress and its limits (Cambridge: Polity, 2000), Part I.

*Young, Oran R. ‘Political leadership and regime formation: On the development of institutions in

international society’, International Organization 45, no. 3 (1991) [Can we talk about international

society without talking about individual leaders and leadership styles?]

Dunne, Tim, ‘The English School’ in Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steve Smith (eds.), International

Relations Theories; Discipline and Diversity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007) [this text is

exceptionally clear on concepts, theories, schools of thought and paradigms].

Kaplan, Morton, System and Process in International Politics (Essex: European Consortium for Political

Research Press, 2005).[Reprint of a classic of systems theory applied to IR]

Mayall, James, Nationalism and International Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990),

Chapters 1 and 2. [Still the best thing available on states, nations, nationalism and IR].

Mitchell, C. R. , ‘World Society as Cobweb: States, actors and systemic processes’, in Michael Banks

(ed.), Conflict in World Society: A new perspective on International Relations (Brighton: Wheatsheaf,

1984).[Well-written account of an alternative view of global politics, stressing the transnational

dimension].

Northedge, F.S., The International Political System (London: Faber, 1976), Chapters 1-3. [Lucid

traditionalist view of a system run on realist principles, but edging towards a society of states].

Wight, Martin, Systems of States (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1977). [Erudite historical and

philosophical reflections on how international relations evolved].

P a g e | 18

13. Statehood (21 Nov.)

The definition of a state; states, nations and governments; relations between the internal and

external faces of statehood; legal personality and membership of the international states system; the

variety of states; the state in decline?

** Jackson, Robert, ‘Sovereignty in world politics: a glance at the conceptual and historical

landscape’, Political Studies 47, no. 3 (1999) (Cambridge: Polity, 2007). [An effective and up to date

treatment of the theme].

**Krasner, Stephen D., ‘Rethinking the sovereign state model’, Review of International Studies 27, no. 5 (2001) [A powerful realist critique of the Grundnorm of international society being nothing more than ‘organised hypocrisy’. Those interested in a fuller treatment should see Krasner’s book Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton University Press, 1999)]. **Sorensen, Georg, The Transformation of the State: beyond the myth of retreat (Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan, 2004), Chapter 6. [Clearest recent discussion of how the state has had to adapt to

modern conditions]. A similar chapter can be found in Colin Hay, Michael Lister and David Marsh,

eds., The State: Theories and Issues (Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan 2006).

*Halliday, Fred, Rethinking International Relations (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1994), Chapter 4. [Cogent

discussion from a critic of IR’s failure to develop a proper theory of the state].

*Hobson, J.M., The State and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).

[Assesses all the major schools of thought about the state in IR].

*James, Alan, ‘The practice of sovereign statehood in contemporary international society’, Political

Studies 47, no. 3 (1999).

* Navari, Cornelia, ‘States and state systems: democratic, Westphalian or both?’ Review of International

Studies, 33 (2007), pp. 577-595.

Hinsley, F.H., Sovereignty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1986). [Still valuable for its history

of sovereignty].

Navari, Cornelia (ed.), ‘Introduction: the state as an essentially contested concept’ in Cornelia Navari

(ed.), The Condition of States (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1991).

14. Foreign policy and diplomacy (25 Nov.)

The functions of foreign policy; the changing character of diplomacy; the key aspects of decision-

making; the changing roles of foreign ministries, and of diplomats; the principal instruments of

foreign policy – military, political, economic and cultural – and their limitations; the subject of

Foreign Policy Analysis.

**Hill, Christopher, ‘What is to be Done? Foreign Policy as a Site for Political Action’, International

Affairs 79, no. 2 (March 2003) [Argues against the neglect of foreign policy, and of agency in general,

by IR structuralists].

P a g e | 19

**Hudson, Valerie M., ‘Foreign Policy Analysis: Actor‐Specific Theory and the Ground of

International Relations’, Foreign Policy Analysis 1, no. 1 (2005). [An argument for FPA as the

fundamental ‘building block’ of studies of international politics, with an overview of what makes the

approach distinctive.

**Rathbun, Brian C., ‘The Value and Values of Diplomacy: Rationalism, Psychology and European

Security in the 1920s.’ [From Rathbun’s forthcoming book Diplomacy's Value: Creating Security in 1920s

Europe and the Contemporary Middle East (Ithaca: Cornell University Press); available at

www.princeton.edu/politics/about/file-repository/public/value-and-values-princeton.pdf]

*Alden, Chris and Aran, Amnon, Foreign Policy Analysis: New Approaches: Understanding the Diplomacy or

War, Profit and Justice (London: Routledge, 2012). [Concise and up to date].

*Berridge, G.R., Diplomacy: theory and practice, 4th edition (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).

*Hill, Christopher, The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003),

Chapters 1, 2 , 6 and 11. [Detailed study designed for third year undergraduates and postgraduates,

but these chapters are relevant here].

*Hudson, Valerie, Foreign Policy Analysis: Classic and Contemporary Theory (Lanham, MD: Rowman and

Littlefield, 2006) [Excellent overview of the main theories of foreign policy and its making].

*Lauren, Paul, Gordon Craig and Alexander Craig, Force and Statecraft: Diplomatic challenges of our time

(4th edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2007).

*Smith, Steve, Amelia Hadfield Tim Dunne (eds.), Foreign Policy: theories, actors, cases (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2012). [Good introduction to foreign policy in theory and practice].

Berridge, Geoffrey et. al. (eds.), Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger (Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan, 2001). [See essay on Harold Nicolson].

Hamilton, Keith, and Richard Langhorne, The Practice of Diplomacy: its evolution, theory and administration

(London: Routledge, 1995), Chapters 4-7.

Hill, Christopher, ‘Foreign Policy’ in Joel Krieger (Ed.), Oxford Companion to Politics of the World,

second revised edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) [brief discussion of definitions;

overlaps with Chapter 1 of Hill, Changing Politics of Foreign Policy, below].

Kissinger, Henry, Diplomacy (Simon & Schuster, 1994), Chapters 9 and 28 [on Woodrow Wilson and

Richard Nixon, respectively)].

Mintz, Alex and Karl DeRouen Jr., Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2010), Chapters, 1-3. [Most up to date discussion of decision- making

theory, for those with a special interest in the subject]

Nicolson, Harold, Diplomacy, 3rd edition, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963). [Published

between the wars, and influenced by Nicolson’s participation in the Paris Peace Conference.

Introduces the ideas of the ‘new diplomacy’].

P a g e | 20

Webber, Mark and Michael Smith, (eds.), Foreign Policy in a Transformed World, (Harlow: Prentice Hall,

2002), Chapters 1-4, 11. [Good on individual national foreign policies].

Wittes, Tamara Cofman, ed., How Israelis and Palestinians Negotiate (Washington DC: United States

Institute of Peace, 2005). [In-depth examination of a prominent area of interest].

15. International order: law, rules and norms (28 Nov.)

The problem of order at the international level; tensions between order, sovereignty and justice; the

distinctive character of international law; its relationship to informal rules, norms and regimes; the

proliferation of international organisations.

**Jackson, Robert, The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States (Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 2000), Chapter 1. (eBook: http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|455400)

**Barnett, Michael N., and Martha Finnemore, ‘The politics, power, and pathologies of international

organizations’, International Organization 53, no. 4 (1999). [An analysis of IOs from within a

sociological-bureaucratic framework. A more extensive treatment of the question can be found in

Barnett and Finnemore’s book Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics (Ithaca:

Cornell University Press, 2004)].

**Snyder, Jack, and Leslie Vinjamuri, ‘Trials and errors: Principle and pragmatism in strategies of

international justice’, International Security 28, no. 3 (2003/2004). [On possible unintended

consequences of international law].

*Armstrong, David, Theo Farrell and Hélène Lambert, International Law and International Relations

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), especially Chapters 1-3. [Legally literate but also

written from an IR viewpoint]

*Armstrong, David, Lorna Lloyd and John Redmond, International Organisation in World Politics 3rd

edition, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2004), Chapters 1 and 13. [Short guide in these chapters

to the rise of international organisations, political and economic].

*Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society (London: Macmillan, 1977), Chapter 6.

*Byers, Michael (ed.), The role of law in international politics: essays in international relations and international

law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), especially Chapters 1, 3, 10 and Conclusion. [Byers is

one of the increasing number of international lawyers working at the interface with IR].

*Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., and James Ron, ‘Seeing double: Human rights impact through

qualitative and quantitative eyes’, World Politics 61, no. 2 (2009) [A review of some of the best work

on human rights and international law; conclusions about the effects of international law on state

behaviour depend on where you look and the methods you use to interpret the evidence!]

Byers, Michael, Custom, Power and the Power of Rules: international relations and customary international law,

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), Chapters 1-3, and 9.

P a g e | 21

Hurrell, Andrew, ‘Norms and Ethics in International Relations’, in Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse

and Beth Simmonds (eds.), Handbook of International Relations (London: Sage, 2002).

Kratochwil, Friedrich, Rules, Norms and Decisions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989),

Chapters 1-3. [One of the key theorists in the emergence of constructivism in IR, that is, how ideas

shape behaviour].

Slaughter, Ann-Marie, A New World Order (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004). [Influential

argument by a leading US scholar-practitioner, that the world is held together by horizontal

networks between disaggregated states].

16. International organisation: (i) The UN Security Council (2 Dec.)

The aims behind the UNSC; its powers, functioning and record; demands for reform – and possible

new models; the limitations of its role as the agent of international society; changing definitions of

security, and new challenges.

**Mingst, Karen A., and Margaret P. Karns, The United Nations in the 21st Century, 4th ed. (Boulder:

Westview Press, 2012), Ch. 4 ‘Peace and Security: International Organizations as Venues for

Security’.

**Thompson, Alexander, ‘Coercion through IOs: The Security Council and the logic of information

transmission’, International Organization 60, no. 1 (2006). [Why powerful countries might find it in

their self-interest to act through the UNSC rather than unilaterally. Thompson offers a fuller

treatment in his book Channels of Power: The UN Security Council and US statecraft in Iraq (Ithaca: Cornell

University Press, 2010)].

**Buchanan, Allen and Robert O. Keohane, ‘Precommitment regimes for intervention:

supplementing the Security Council’, Ethics and International Affairs 25, 1 (2011). [imaginative attempt

to circumvent the UNSC’s monopoly on security issues].

*Armstrong, David, Lorna Lloyd and John Redmond, International Organisation in World Politics 3rd

edition, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2004), Chapter 7.

*Berdal, Mats, ‘The United Nations Security Council: ineffective but indispensable’, Survival, 45, no.

2 (June 2003). [Sharp analysis of an impasse which continues, a decade later]

*Lowe, Vaughan, Adam Roberts, Jennifer Welsh and Dominik Zaum (eds.), The United Nations

Security Council and War: The Evolution of Thought and Practice since 1945 (Oxford: OUP, 2008).

[Comprehensive set of essays on every aspect of the UNSC’s work. Best used for reference].

*Mazower, Mark, No Enchanted Palace: the end of empire and the ideological origins of the United Nations

(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009), pp 1-27 and 190-203. [the UN put into historical

perspective]

*Roberts, Adam, and Dominik Zaum, Selective Security: War and the United Nations Security Council since

1945 (Abingdon: Routledge for the International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2008). [Informative

and judicious on what the UNSC can do and what not].

P a g e | 22

Hannay, David, New World Disorder: The UN after the Cold War – an insider’s view (London: I.B. Tauris,

2008), pp. 1-27. [Tough-minded but constructive ex-practitioner, expert on the UN and the Cyprus

dispute].

Kennedy, Paul, The Parliament of Man: the past present and future of the United Nations (New

York: Random House, 2006), Chapters 1-3.

Malone, David, (ed.), The United Nations Security Council: from the Cold War to the Twenty-first

Century (London: Lynne Rienner, 2004). [Comprehensive coverage].

Melvern, Linda, ‘The Security Council: behind the scenes’, International Affairs, 77,1 (January 2001),

pp. 101-112. [Critique of UNSC decision-making over Rwandan genocide].

Roberts, Adam, and Benedict Kingsbury (eds.), United Nations, Divided World: the UN’s roles in

international relations (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993). [Now dated but excellent set of essays covering

most angles].

LENT TERM

17. International organisation: (ii) managing the international economy (16 Jan.)

The rise and fall of the Bretton Woods system; the key role of the United States, and the emergence

of challenges to its hegemony; the key issues for state coordination – trade, currencies, energy,

growth, development, and the environment; states, markets and privatisation – who takes

responsibility, and for what?

**Pitruzzello, Salvatore, ‘Trade Globalization, Economic Performance, and Social Protection:

Nineteenth-Century British Laissez-Faire and Post-World War II U.S.-Embedded Liberalism’, in

John G. Ruggie, ed., Embedding Global Markets: An Enduring Challenge (Ashgate, 2008) [An historical

comparison of the international political economies ‘managed’ by the US and UK, drawing on the

theoretical work of Ruggie].

**Milner, Helen V., ‘Globalization, development, and international institutions: Normative and

positive perspectives’, Perspectives on Politics 3, no. 4 (2005) [A review of important debates drawn

from several books on what role institutions can and should play in economic globalisation.]

**Gourevitch, Peter, ‘Choice and Constraint in the Great Recession of 2008’, in Martha Finnemore and Judith Goldstein, eds., Back to Basics: State Power in a Contemporary World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). [A look at how domestic and international politics impacted state responses to the most recent global economic crisis.]

*Economides, Spyros and Peter Wilson, The Economic Factor in International Relations: a brief introduction

(London: I.B. Tauris, 2001). [Clear but sophisticated account of the essentials of international

political economy (IPE)]. (eBook: http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|5011712)

P a g e | 23

*Webb, Michael C., and Stephen D. Krasner, ‘Hegemonic stability theory: an empirical

assessment’, Review of International Studies 15, no. 2 (1989) [Places emphasis on economically powerful

states]

*Strange, Susan, ‘Wake up Krasner, the world has changed!’ Review of International Political Economy, 1,

no. 2 (Summer 1994), pp. 209-219. [Typically combative, but also shrewd, intervention from one of

the most original thinkers on IPE].

*Lake, David, and Mile Kahler, eds., Politics in the New Hard Times (Ithaca: Cornell University Press,

2013) [A collection of essays by leading scholars on the 2008 recession].

*Drezner, Daniel W., The System Worked: How the World Stopped another Great Depression (Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 2013) [As Drezner has said, he has ‘cornered the market on optimism’ with

this book. Have the faults of international political-economic institutions been overstated?]

Gill, Stephen, ‘Two concepts of international political economy’, Review of International Studies, 16, 4

(1990), pp. 369-381. [Gramscian approach].

Gilpin, Robert, Global Political Economy: understanding the international economic order (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 2001), especially Chapters 7-10. [One of the few classical realists to bother with

economic issues].

Narlikar, Amrita, The World Trade Organisation: a very short introduction (Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 2005). [Excellent brief account of the attempt to create an international trade regime].

Walter, Andrew, and Gautam Sen, Analyzing the Global Political Economy (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 2009). [Good recent text, with more of an economics focus than the historical

approach of Economides and Wilson].

Woods, Ngaire, ‘Making the IMF and the World Bank more accountable’, International Affairs 77, no.

1 (January 2001), pp. 83-100.

18. International organisation: (iii) The EU and other forms of regionalism (20 Jan.)

The regional v. the universal; the origins of European integration; federalism and functionalism; the

uniqueness of the European experiment; its record after 53 years; the diverse experiences of the

OAS, NAFTA, OAU/AU, ASEAN et. al.

**Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, Mette, Debates on European Integration: a Reader (Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan, 2006), pp. 17-36; 89-104; 264-303 [Very useful source-book, with expert commentary, on

the key theories and issues surrounding the integration process]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|4718153)

**Katzenstein, Peter, A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium (Ithaca: Cornell

University Press, 2005), ch. 4 [A comparative analysis of the regional organization of economic and

security activity on two continents; diverse responses to US power].

P a g e | 24

*Armstrong, David, Lorna Lloyd and John Redmond, International Organisation in World Politics 3rd

edition, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2004), Chapters 8-12.

*Bickerton, Christopher, European Integration: From Nation-State to Member State (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2012), Ch1. [Sharp analysis of the extent to which the EU is a function of the

changing nature of statehood in Europe].

*Ginsberg, Roy, H., Demystifying the European Union: the enduring logic of regional integration (Lenham:

Rowman & Littlefield, 2007). [Clear and comprehensive coverage of all aspects of the EU’s

experience].

*Hoffmann, Stanley, The European Sisyphus: Essays on Europe, 1964-1994 (London: Westview Press,

1995), especially Chapters 3, 7, 12, 13. [Incisive reflections from a major thinker about both Europe,

and international relations more generally].

*Hill, Christopher and Michael Smith, International Relations and the European Union (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2005 – second edition January 2011), Chapters 1-3. [An attempt to look at the EU

through the lens of IR].

*Hurrell, Andrew, ‘One world, many worlds: the place of regions in international society’,

International Affairs 83, no. 1 (2007). [IR theorist, and Latin American regionalist assesses the

significance of the growth of regional organisations].

Acharya, Amitav, Constructing a Security Community in South East Asia: ASEAN and the problem

of regional order, 2nd edition, (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009).

Archer, Clive, International Organisations, 3rd edition, (London: Routledge, 2001). [Straightforward

text].

Marquand, David, The End of the West: the Once and Future Europe (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 2011) [lively and informed overview of Europe’s troubles from an

academic/politician].

19. Non-state actors and the concept of global civil society (23 Jan.)

The illusion that non-state actors (NSAs) are a modern phenomenon; their variety – churches,

business, pressure-groups, media, political parties, trades unions, revolutionary cells, sports

organisations; social movements and the idea of a global civil society; a challenge to the state?

**Bartelson, Jens, ‘Making sense of global civil society’, European Journal of International Relations 12,

no. 3 (2006) [useful discussion of how far the scope of ‘civil society’ might be expanding].

**Brown, Chris, ‘Cosmopolitanism, world citizenship and global civil society’, in Jones, Peter, and

Simon Caney (eds.), Human Rights and Global Diversity (London: Frank Cass, 2001). [Sceptical but fair-

minded discussion of what it might mean to be a ‘world citizen’].

P a g e | 25

**Reimann, Kim D., ‘A view from the top: International politics, norms and the worldwide growth

of NGOs’, International Studies Quarterly 50, no. 1 (2006) [Are NGOs representative of ‘world citizens’

or elites?]

*Archibugi, Daniele, The Global Commonwealth of Citizens: Towards cosmopolitan democracy (Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 2008), Chapters 1-5. [Lively idealist account of how to move beyond the

states-system]

*Armstrong, David, Lorna Lloyd and John Redmond, International Organisation in World Politics 3rd

edition, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan 2004), Chapter 14.

Ferguson, Yale and Richard Mansbach, A World of Polities: Essays on global politics (Abingdon:

Routledge, 2007), Chapter 9.

Josselin, Daphne, and William Wallace (eds.), Non-State Actors in World Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave,

2001). [useful essays on different kinds of transnational actors]

Kaldor, Mary, Global Civil Society: An answer to war (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2003). [Committed

analysis from an academic who has advised senior European decision-makers].

Keane, John, Global Civil Society? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). [Political theory

employed in defence of the idea of global civil society]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|4761533)

Keohane, Robert, and Joseph Nye (eds.), Transnational Relations and World Politics (Cambridge,

Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1973) – a reprint from International Organization 25, no. 3

(Summer 1971). [The first work to focus attention on the various forms of transnational actors].

Rosenberg, Justin, The Follies of Globalisation Theory (London: Verso, 2000), pp1-15. [Sophisticated

assault on the clichés of globalisation thinking].

Scholte, Jan Art, Globalization: a critical introduction, 2nd edition, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,

2005). [Informed, sympathetic overview of the phenomenon]

Essay questions for Theme 2

1. Is the idea of a ‘society of states’ a contradiction in terms?

2. Do the norms and principles surrounding sovereignty do much to constrain the way powerful

states interact with their less powerful counterparts?

3. How well can we explain foreign policy and diplomacy by examining the psychology of state

leaders?

4. How should international law be used to deal with states who abuse their own populations?

5. Compare and contrast the United Nations Security Council and the European Union as forces for

peace.

P a g e | 26

6. Can the international economy be maintained without the active management of a hegemonic

state?

7. Are non-state actors paving the way for a ‘global civil society’, or are they too dependent on the

existing system of sovereign states?

THEME III: War in international society

20. War: (i) systems and dyads (27 Jan.)

Levels of analysis: human nature, the state and international anarchy; bargaining failure and war;

technological change and arms races; territorial expansion and the role of imperialism; religion and

the ‘clash of civilisations’; inequality; international terrorism.

** Singer. J. David, ‘The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations’, World Politics 14, no.

1 (1961), pp. 77-92. [Introduces the level-of-analysis framework, which is central to understanding

modern theories on the causes of war].

** Levy, Jack S. and William R. Thompson, Causes of War (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010), Chapter

2. [Excellent and fairly comprehensive review of the theoretical literature].

**Reiter, Dan. ‘Exploring the bargaining model of war’, Perspective on Politics1, no. 1 (2003) [A very

accessible introduction to the sometimes intimidating formal literature on strategic bargaining and

war]

*Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan, Chapter 13 (‘Of the Natural Condition of Mankind’), any edition.

[Hobbes has been a great source of inspiration for realist IR scholars].

*Jervis, Robert, ‘Cooperation Under the Security Dilemma’, World Politics 30, no.2 (1978) [Explains

how efforts to increase one’s own security can actually decrease it, and discusses possible ways out

of the dilemma].

*Howard, Michael, The Causes of Wars (London: Temple Smith, 1983) [Sparkling and varied essays

from Britain’s leading military historian].

*Huntington, Samuel P, ‘The clash of civilisations?’ Foreign Affairs (Summer 1993), pp. 22-49.

[Predicts that future wars will largely occur along cultural and civilizational fault-lines. Highly

influential and controversial analysis].

*Mearsheimer, John, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001), Chapters 1-

2. [Confident statement of ‘offensive realism’]

Blainey, Geoffrey, The Causes of War (New York: Free Press, 1988). [Thoughtful historical

examination of patterns of war over the last three centuries]

Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society (London: Macmillan, 1977), Chapter 8.

Freedman, Lawrence (ed.), War (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), Section B. [A very useful

reader with a wide range of relevant extracts]

P a g e | 27

Suganami, Hidemi, On the Causes of War (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996) [Erudite, logical

and careful dissection of the common errors made when talking about causes].

Van Evera, Stephen, “Offense, Defense, and the Causes of War,” International Security, Vol. 22,

No. 4 (Spring, 1998), pp. 5-43 [War is more likely when conquest is easy, or thought to be easy].

Walt, Stephen M, Revolution and War (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1997). [Explains how

revolution within states can heighten the security dilemma between them].

Waltz, Kenneth N., Man, the State and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959), Classic

study using the levels-of-analysis framework].

Waltz, Kenneth N., ‘The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory,’ Journal of Interdisciplinary History,

Vol. 18, No. 4 (1998), pp. 615-628. [Anarchy causes war – a good summary of Waltz’s seminal

contribution].

21. War: (ii) domestic causes (30 Jan.)

The state itself; the possibility that certain types of state/regime are more or less war-prone than

others; nationalism and revolutions; interventions, and the tendency towards crusading; competing

explanations of the two world wars.

See many of the references in the previous section, including in particular Blainey, Howard and

Suganami, but also:

**Frieden, Jeffrey A., David A. Lake and Kenneth A. Schultz, World Politics: Interests, Interactions,

Institutions (New York: W.W. Norton, 2010), Ch4, ‘Domestic Politics and War’ [Exceptionally clear

overview of relevant theories].

** Lenin, V.I., “Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism,” in Richard K Betts, Conflict after the

Cold War, 4th edition (Pearson, 2012), or any other edition of Lenin’s seminal text. [Capitalist

societies are expansionist. The full version is available online at

www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/].

**Doyle, Michael W., ‘Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs’, Part I, Philosophy & Public Affairs

12, no. 3 (Summer 1983. [Why established liberal democracies do not fight each other. An essential

classic].

*Mansfield, Eward D., and Jack Snyder, ‘Democratization and War’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 74, No. 3

(1995), pp. 79-97. [Established democracies may not fight each other, but democratizing states are

exceptionally warlike!].

*Snyder, Jack, Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition (Ithaca, NY: Cornell

University Press, 1993), Chapters 1-2 [Explains how domestic logrolling can result in bellicose and

even imperialist policies].

Van Evera, Stephen, ‘Hypotheses on Nationalism and War,’ International Security 18, no. 4 (Spring

1994), [Explains which ‘types’ of nationalism can lead to war, and under what circumstances].

P a g e | 28

Levy, Jack S. ‘Domestic Politics and War’, The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18, no. 4 (Spring, 1998)

[Historians generally explain war as the outcome of domestic politics. Levy attempts to systematize

their arguments].

Levy, Jack S., and William R. Thompson, Causes of War (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010), Chapter 4.

[Good overview of the theoretical literature].

Freedman, Lawrence, ‘The age of liberal wars’, Review of International Studies 31, no. 1 (2005) [Uses the

2003 Iraq War as a starting-point to discuss the role of legitimacy and liberal values in producing

military interventions].

Mueller, John, ‘The Obsolescence of Major War’, Security Dialogue 21 (July 1990), pp. 321-328. [As

culture changes, inter-state war might simply disappear].

22. War: (iii) systemic consequences (3 Feb.)

War as major agent of change: peace settlements, the redistribution of power and new international

orders; economic reconstruction; empires – collapses and creations; state-formation; ethnic cleansing

and migration; technological and economic change; ‘new wars’?

**Ikenberry, G. John, After Victory: Institutions, strategic restraint and the building of order after major wars

(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), Chaps. 1, 6. [Shows how major peace settlements

have shaped the next stage of international order].

**Gilpin, Robert, War and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983),

Chaps. 1, 5. (eBook: ttp://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|464500) [Classic realist

statement on how war can change the international hierarchy and the rules that underpin it].

*Ramos, Jennifer, Changing Norms Through Action: The Evolution of Sovereignty (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2013). [Studies under what conditions wars that violate international rules can

actually change those rules].

*Mark W. Zacher, ‘The Territorial Integrity Norm: International Boundaries and the Use of Force’,

International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 2 (2001), pp. 215-250. [Explains why contemporary wars no

longer result in territorial change].

Kaldor, Mary, New and Old wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era, 3rd ed., (Palo Alto, CA.: Stanford

University Press, 2012), esp. chaps. 2, 4 [Does it still make sense to focus primarily on traditional,

inter-state wars? Kaldor shifts our attention to “new” wars within states and their broader

consequences for the whole states-system].

Hurrell, Andrew, On Global Order (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), Chapter 7. [Good

overview of the international ramifications of war and attempts that have been made to manage the

phenomenon]. (eBook: http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|4718158)

Barkin, Samuel and Bruce Cronin, ‘The state and the nation: changing norms and the rules of

sovereignty in international relations,’ International Organization 48 (1994), pp. 107-130. [Studies how

the international sovereignty regime has changed, partially as a result of major war].

P a g e | 29

Freedman, Lawrence (ed.), War (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), Section G.

23. War: (iv) domestic consequences (6 Feb.)

Regime change; revolution, nationalism, militarisation; destruction, death, and genocide – the

demographic impact; economic change – ruin and/or stimulus; social change, as in the franchise, the

role of women, artistic expression.

**Krebs, Ronald R., ‘In the Shadow of War: The Effects of Conflict on Liberal Democracy’,

International Organization 63, no. 1 (Winter, 2009) [Those interested in a more extensive treatment of

the question should see the collection of essays in Elizabeth Kier and Ronald R. Krebs, eds., In

War’s Wake: International Conflict and the Fate of Liberal Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 2010)].

**Barnett, Michael, Confronting the Costs of War: Military Power, State, and Society in Egypt and Israel

(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), ch. 6. [How did constant preparation for war from

the 1940s through 1970s affect the state and societies of two of the most powerful Middle Eastern

countries?]

**Sorenson, George, ‘War and State-Making: Why Doesn’t it Work in the Third World?’ Security

Dialogue 32, no. 3 (September 2001) [Applies Tilly’s analysis to the developing world].

*Desch, Michael C. ‘War and strong states, peace and weak states?’ International Organization 50, no. 2

(1996): 237-268.

*Marwick, Arthur, Clive Emsley and Wendy Simpson (eds.), Total War and Historical Change: Europe

1914-1955 (Buckingham: Open University Press, 2001). [Marwick was a path-breaker in writing the

history of social change in Britain as the consequence of war. Here the analysis is extended across

Europe].

*Zarakol, Ayse, After Defeat: How the East Learned to Live with the West (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 2011). [Studies international stigmatization and the integration of defeated eastern

powers—Turkey after WWI, Japan after WWII and Russia after the Cold War—into the

international system].

Bell, Duncan, ed., Memory, Trauma and World Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006),

Chapters 1, 3, 11. [Memory has become a hugely important theme in the humanities and social

sciences. The essays in this advanced book probe into what this means for world politics]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|4718148)

Centeno, Miguel, Blood and Debt: War and the Nation-State in Latin America (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2002). Gourevitch, Peter, ‘The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics,’

International Organization, Vol. 32, No. 4 (1978), pp. 881-912, read esp..pp.896-900 [First

systematic analysis of how the international system can affect domestic politics].

P a g e | 30

Higonnet, Margaret R., et al., eds., Behind the Lines: Gender and the Two World Wars (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987). Maier, Charles, Recasting Bourgeois Europe: stabilization in France, Germany and Italy in the decade after World

War I (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975), Parts I & II.

McNeill, W. H., The Pursuit of Power (Oxford: Blackwell, 1983), Chapters 7-9. [The classic discussion

of the interaction between military technology, society and international politics]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|5029747)

Essay questions for Theme III

1. Is it sensible to talk about the causes of war, as opposed to the causes of wars?

2. ‘While there are sovereign states, there will be wars’. Discuss.

3. Can war break out even if all the parties to a dispute are ‘rational’ actors?

4. Do great wars lead to great changes in the international system? Consider in relation to ONE of:

the Napoleonic wars; the First World War; the Second World War.

5. Does war only produce domestic change in states already in a condition of upheaval?

6. Can liberal democracies fight wars without sacrificing their political values?

7. How can a ‘power transition’ between the US and China be handled peacefully?

THEME IV: Normative dilemmas

24. Order v. Justice (10 Feb.)

The different connotations of ‘justice’ in the international context; its relationship to the principle of

equality – of states, peoples and individuals; what costs might be acceptable in the pursuit of justice?

Justifications for war – the ius ad bellum; historical injustices – how far back should they be traced?

Where do obligations mainly fall – on governments, on international organisations, or on citizens?

**Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society (London: Macmillan, 1977), Chapters 4 and 12. [Bull’s major

statement, tending to privilege order].

**Dunne, Tim and Nicholas Wheeler, ‘Hedley Bull’s pluralism of the intellect and solidarism of the

will’, International Affairs, 72, 1 (1996), pp. 91-107. [Very useful commentary, not limited to Bull].

**Foot, Rosemary, John Lewis Gaddis and Andrew Hurrell (eds.), Order and Justice in International

Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), especially pp. 1-48. [A set of Oxford IR essays on

the subject: the English School meets international history]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|455401)

P a g e | 31

*Bull, Hedley, ‘Justice in International Relations’, in Kai Alderson and Andrew Hurrell (eds.), Hedley

Bull on International Society (Basingstoke: Macmillan 2000). [Later Bull, moving toward the justice

end of the spectrum].

Brown, Chris, Sovereignty, Rights and Justice (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2002) [Advanced international

political theory text]

25. Saving strangers: an obligation to intervene? (13 Feb.)

European imperialism and ‘la mission civilisatrice’; the growth of a consciousness about human

rights and wrongs; reactions against imperialism, and the Holocaust; political v. economic rights;

should vicinity make a difference? The ‘responsibility to protect’ campaign; the costs of intervention.

**Doyle, Michael, ‘International intervention’, Chapter 11 in Ways of War and Peace: realism, liberalism

and socialism (New York: W.W. Norton, 1997).

**Downes, Alexander B, ‘Regime Change Doesn’t Work’, The Boston Review, September/October

2011. Available online at: http://www.bostonreview.net/downes-regime-change

**Welsh, Jennifer M., ed., Humanitarian Intervention and International Relations (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2004), Chs. 3 and 4 [Concise discussions of the issues, plus additional case-studies].

(eBook: http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|455402)

*Economides, Spyros and Mats Berdal (eds.), United Nations Interventionism, 1991-2004 (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2007). [Empirical materials on the crucial period in which the idea of

the ‘responsibility to protect’ emerged]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|464603)

*Finnemore, Martha, The Purpose of Intervention: Changing Beliefs about the Use of Force (Ithaca, NY:

Cornell University Press, 2004), Ch. 3 [Explores how norms of humanitarian intervention have

changed since the nineteenth century].

*Posen, Barry R., ‘Military responses to refugee disasters’, International Security21, no. 1 (1996) [An

expert on military strategy and operations discusses the practical challenges of using force to aid

others]

*Simms, Brendan and D.J. B. Trimm, eds., Humanitarian Intervention: A History (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2011). [An invaluable corrective to the view that these are recent

dilemmas].

*Vincent, R. J., Nonintervention and International Order (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974),

pp. 327-389. [Elegant tracing of the principle of non-intervention as it became established].

*Wheeler, Nicholas, Saving Strangers: humanitarian intervention in international society (Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2000). [Major statement of the case for humanitarian intervention with careful

discussion of cases]. (eBook: http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|448809)

Brown, Chris, Sovereignty, Rights and Justice (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2002), Chapter 5.

P a g e | 32

Foot, Rosemary, Rights beyond Borders: the global community and the struggle over human rights in China

(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), Part II. [Interesting analysis of China’s not wholly rigid

response to being in the glare of international attention over human rights]

Hoffmann, Stanley et. al., The Ethics and Politics of Humanitarian Intervention (Notre Dame: University

of Notre Dame Press, 1996), especially Chapter 2.

Miller, David, National Responsibility and Global Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). [A

work of political philosophy swimming against the cosmopolitan tide]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|depfacozdb|455403)

Pattison, James, ‘Legitimacy and humanitarian intervention: who should intervene?’ International

Journal of Human Rights, 12 (2008), pp. 395-413. [i.e. ‘who has the right to intervene?’ is as important a

question as ‘is there a duty to intervene?’]

Welsh, Jennifer, ‘A normative case for pluralism: reassessing Vincent’s views on humanitarian

intervention’, International Affairs 87, no. 5 (2011) [a sympathetic critique of Vincent’s caution about

interventionism].

26. The environment and the problem of global commons (17 Feb.)

The emergence of the concepts of ‘planet earth’ and the ‘common heritage of mankind’: rhetoric or

necessity? Natural resources and the ‘limits to growth’; the UN Stockholm conference of 1972, and

the emergence of green politics; the debate over possible ecological catastrophe; the politics of

international environmental negotiations; can ‘the world’ act?

**Victor, David G., Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Planet (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), ch. 2 [a forthright effort to puncture what the author calls ‘myths’ about policy solutions to climate change] **International Affairs 85, no. 6 (November 2009): special issue on ‘Tackling Resource challenges in

the 21st century: avoiding worst case scenarios’, especially articles by Lee, Matthew & Hammill,

Froggatt & Levi, and Deere-Birkbeck.

*Frieden, Jeffrey A., David A. Lake and Kenneth A. Schultz, World Politics: Interests, Interactions,

Institutions (New York: W.W. Norton, 2010), Ch12, ‘The Global Environment’ [Very clear text].

*Giddens, Anthony, Politics of Climate Change (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2009). [Up to date and

lively analysis from the guru of the ‘third way’; notable in its move back towards states, compared to

his previous thinking].

*O’Neill, Kate, The Environment and International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

2009) [the best and most recent attempt to relate these issues to IR].

*Ostrom, Elinor, Governing the Commons; the evolution of institutions for collective action (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1990), Chapter 1. [Good discussion of the theoretical issues involved in

international action on the environment, by the first female Nobel Laureate in economics].

P a g e | 33

Elliott, Lorraine, The Global Politics of the Environment, 2nd edition (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,

2004). [Clear text].

Sprout, Harold and Margaret, The Ecological perspective on Human Affairs; with special reference to

international politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965). [One of the first to focus on the

environments in which politics takes place, in the most inclusive sense].

Vogler, John, The Global Commons: Environmental and Technological Governance, 2nd edition (Chichester,

Wiley-Blackwell, 2000). [Good textbook, but now rather dated].

Young, Oran, George J. Demko and Kilaparti Ramakrishna (eds.), Global Environmental Change and

International Governance (Hanover: University Press of New England, 1996). [Essays on various

environmental regimes, from climate and marine life to desertification and bio-diversity].

27. Nuclear proliferation (TBC)

The step-change represented by Hiroshima and Nagasaki; the theory of nuclear deterrence –

continued relevance? The Non-Proliferation Treaty; the slow spread of nuclear weapons – reasons

for acquisition or reluctance; the loss of states’ monopoly over WMD; current dilemmas.

**Lavoy, Peter R. ‘The Strategic Consequences of Nuclear Proliferation: A Review Essay’, Security

Studies 4, no. 4 (1995) [There are both nuclear ‘optimists’ and ‘pessimists’ on proliferation. The

formative debate in this vein took place between Kenneth Waltz and Scott D. Sagan; see Sagan and

Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate, 3rd edition (New York: W.W. Norton,

2012).]

**Litwak, Robert, ‘The new calculus of pre-emption’, Survival 44, no. 4 (February 2002). [One of the

best US analysts, always relating strategy to foreign policy].

**Ruzicka, Jan and Nicholas Wheeler, ‘The puzzle of trusting relationships in the nuclear non-

proliferation treaty’, International Affairs 86, no. 1 (January 2010), pp. 69-85. [Creatively relates nuclear

weapons to the issue of international society]

*Solingen, Etel, Nuclear Logics: Contrasting Paths in East Asia and the Middle East (Princeton University

Press, 2007) [Excellent case-studies on proliferation and its restraints].

Krause, Joachim, ‘Enlightenment and nuclear order’, International Affairs 83, no. 3 (May 2007).

[Dissects some myths of liberal arms control attitudes]

Nye, Joseph, Nuclear Ethics (New York: Free Press, 1986), Chapter 6. [The impact of having nuclear

weapons on everyone else].

28. Unity and diversity in international society (24 Feb.)

Pluralism v solidarism: what is the balance, and how well does it work? Do we live in the

‘Westfailure system’?

P a g e | 34

**Jervis, Robert, ‘Force in our time’, International Relations 25, no. 4 (2011). [subtle overview from one

of the key IR thinkers of our time].

**Keene, Edward, ‘Order in contemporary world politics, global but divided’ in Edward Keene,

Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, colonialism and order in world politics (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 2002). [The inherent tension between the ideas of civilization and global order].

**Strange, Susan, ‘The Westfailure system’, Review of International Studies, 25, 3 (1999), pp. 345-354.

[Another sharp critique of orthodox thinking about IR]

* Narlikar, Amrita, ‘Negotiating the rise of new powers’, International Affairs 89, no.3 (2013)

Kahler, Miles and David Lake, ‘Economic Integration and Global Governance: Why so little

supranationalism?, in Walter Mattli and Ngaire Woods (eds.), The Politics of Global Regulation

(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009). [Should interdependence lead us to expect more

global governance? Is supranationalism possible outside the EU?]

Ruggie, John, Constructing the World Polity (Routledge,1998), pp. 1-40 ‘What makes the world hang

together?’ (also in International Organization 52, no. 4, October 1998, in amended form). [Stimulating

overview from a leading scholar-practitioner]. (eBook:

http://search.lib.cam.ac.uk/?itemid=|eresources|4761514)

Essay questions for Theme IV

1. Is order a precondition of achieving justice in international relations?

2. Is the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of states (Article 2.7 of the UN Charter)

now out-dated?

3. Is it realistic to expect states to act in order to prevent hypothetical environmental problems for

future generations?

4. Have we achieved anything significant so far in terms of protecting the environment?

5. Why have relatively few states sought to acquire nuclear weapons?

6. Is a world without nuclear weapons possible—or even desirable?

7. Which, if any, aspects of world politics display more elements of solidarism than pluralism?

EASTER TERM

Revision Sessions (TBC; note new room and time!)

Group 1: 28 April and 12 May, 12-1

Group 2: 8 May and 15 May, 12-1

Alison Richard Building, Room SG1

P a g e | 35

WEBSITES

There is a huge range of websites of potential use to you, including: The foreign ministries and

prime ministerial/presidential offices of most states; the UN, EU, NATO and most other

intergovernmental organizations (IGOs); the International Crisis Group, and other major non-

governmental organizations (NGOs); the media, especially the Financial Times, Le Monde, New

York Times, The Guardian, BBC, Al-Jazeera etc (some require payment). There are also specialised

academic sites via key portals – see the UL’s electronic resources.

Most URLs are not given here because Google and Google Scholar make finding them, and other

links, so easy. But see in particular:

www.crisisgroup.org/en/publication-type/reports.aspx The International Crisis Group’s

reports for issues relating to international and global conflict.

www.globalpolicy.org Global Policy forum.

www.isn.ethz.ch for the International Relations and Security Network.

www.cfr.org the Council on Foreign Relations offers excellent coverage and background

information organised by geographic regions and topical issues, if from a somewhat US-centric

perspective.

www.unfccc.de UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat.

EXAMINATION PAPER JUNE 2014

Candidates must answer THREE questions.

1. Is it right to see the Peace of Westphalia as the start of international relations?

2. Consider the impact of economic issues on international politics, with reference either to the

period 1789-1914, or 1918-2014.

3. “Anarchy is the rule; order, justice, and morality the exceptions” (Robert Gilpin). Do you agree

with this assessment of international politics?

4. Do only great powers enjoy much scope for an effective foreign policy?

5. Which international organisations have been the most successful, and why?

6. Is talk about international norms and regimes much more than wishful thinking?

7. Can war break out even when nobody intends it? Give examples to support your argument.

8. If liberal democracies do not fight each other, as Michael Doyle has shown, does it follow that

the United States and its allies should actively pursue regime change?

9. What is the importance of individuals and other non-state actors in international relations?

10. Have governments “given up on the planet?” (George Monbiot)

P a g e | 36

11. What, in your view, are the main sources of states’ insecurity in the current international system?

12. Does ‘international society’ serve some interests more than others?

EXAMINATION PAPER JUNE 2013

Candidates must answer THREE questions.

1. Assess the value of theory in the study of international relations.

2. In what respects does the modern international system bear the stamp of European history?

3. To what extent was the creation of either the League of Nations or the United Nations a critical

moment in the evolution of international society?

4. Is the concept of the balance of power still useful in the nuclear era?

5. Does it make sense to talk of an international “society” when the constituent elements are nation-

states?

6. Are international organisations anything more than the instruments of the major powers?

7. In what ways might foreign policy reflect domestic issues and concerns?

8. Identify three major theories of the causes of war and apply them to understanding the causes of

either World War I or World War II.

9. “War among states, although utterly destructive, usually has desirable consequences” (TILLY).

Discuss.

10. In what circumstances might it be legitimate to intervene coercively in the affairs of another

state?

11. Is justice an impossible dream at the international level?

12. What do either climate change negotiations or the debate about rogue states and nuclear

weapons tell us about the extent of shared norms in international society?

EXAMINATION PAPER JUNE 2012

Candidates must answer THREE questions.

1. What are the distinctive concerns of the academic subject of International Relations?

2. Assess the working of the balance of power in any ONE historical period of your choice before

1900.

3. What effects did the industrial revolution have on international politics, and how significant were

they?

P a g e | 37

4. Why has the international community not succeeded in creating a working system of collective

security?

5. Does it make sense to say that war is rooted in human nature?

6. Is war always a disaster?

7. Is international order compatible with attachment to the principle of sovereignty?

8. Has diplomacy changed fundamentally, in terms of its purpose and practices, over the course of

the last hundred years?

9. Why has international cooperation been more successful in Europe than in other regions of the

world?

10. Does a ‘global civil society’ exist?

11. How realistic is it to pursue moral causes in international politics? Illustrate your answer with

reference EITHER to the problem of the environment OR to that of humanitarian intervention.

12. What problems of international justice arise from attempts to prevent nuclear proliferation?

EXAMINATION PAPER JUNE 2011

Candidates must answer THREE questions

1. How significant are the differences between an “international system” and an “international

society”?

2. Does it make sense to talk about “international relations” in the pre-modern era?

3. Assess the significance of one of the following dates in the evolution of international society:

1648; 1815; 1919; 1945; 1991.

4. “In the international environment actions will not tightly conform with any given set of norms

regardless of which set is chosen” (KRASNER). How far do you agree with this assessment of the

importance of norms, including law, in international relations?

5. What, in your view, are the principal causes of war?

6. Does war accelerate social and political change within societies?

7. To what extent did the United Nations represent a realist reaction to the failure of the League of

Nations?

8. How far has the modern state had to surrender powers to international organisations? Answer

with reference either to the European Union or to international economic organisations.

9. Does the quality of its decision-making make much difference in terms of the effectiveness of a

state’s foreign policy?

P a g e | 38

10. What are the merits of continuing to uphold the norm of non-intervention in international

society?

11. Is order a precondition of justice in international relations?

12. Is the agenda of international politics largely determined by the Western powers? Answer with

reference either to environmental negotiations or to the issue of nuclear non-proliferation.

P a g e | 39

MARKING CRITERIA FOR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS

Mark Quality of Answer

80+ An answer showing outstanding understanding that displays a very high degree of accuracy,

insight, and style, and originality in responding to the question, and is well-structured. To fall

into this range, an answer has to display all of these qualities.

70-79 An answer showing very clear understanding and a high degree of accuracy, which provides a

cogent and well-structured argument focused on the question with a significant level of insight

and a degree of originality.

60-69 An answer showing clear understanding and a good level of accuracy that provides a coherent,

sustained, and well-structured argument focused on the question. To fall into this range, an

answer has to display all of these qualities, and should not decisively show any of the negative

qualities listed under the criteria for a 50-59. Answers where there is some evidence of the

negative qualities listed under the criteria for a 50-59 will receive a mark between 60 and 64.

50-59

An answer that concentrates on the subject matter of the question, that displays relevant

knowledge and is generally accurate, but which either shows limited understanding, or presents

a discussion that is not focused on the question, or is partially unstructured, or where the

discussion is not sustained through the course of the essay. To fall into this range, an answer

has to display these positive qualities, and should not show any of the negative qualities listed

under the criteria for a 40-49.

40-49 An answer generally relevant to the subject matter of the question, but one that contains a large

number of inaccuracies, or shows significantly inadequate knowledge, or presents an

unstructured and disjointed discussion. To fall into this range, an answer should not show any

of the negative qualities listed under the criteria for a 21-39.

21-39 An answer that either displays a lack of crucial knowledge, or has no structure, or is radically

incomplete, or is almost entirely irrelevant to the question, or contains an extremely high

number of inaccuracies.

1-20 A single paragraph of conventional paragraph length, or an answer that is entirely irrelevant,

should receive a mark not higher than 20.

0 No answer provided for a question