POL 240

Introduction to International Relations

Spring 2012

Professor: David Carter Course Location: 28 McCosh

Office: 33 Corwin Hall Course Time: 10:00am–10:50pm Tues./Thurs.
Office Hours: 3–5pm Tues.
Email: [email protected]

Preceptors:
Scott Abramson: [email protected]
Marzenna James (Course Administrator): [email protected]

OVERVIEW: This course provides a broad exploration of the field of international

relations. We cover key theoretical concepts in IR and discuss how empirical evidence
and key historical events relate to and inform theory. The course is organized around spe-
cific substantive questions such as: why do states choose to fight rather than negotiate?;
why are levels of economic development among states so unequal?; how do international
institutions affect conflict and cooperation?; what logic is behind the use of terrorism by
political actors?; and, why do states experience civil war? Most weeks in the course, we
will explore one big topic. Each week, we will generally first read the textbook chapter,
which provides a nice overview and references to key pieces of literature. For the second
lecture (and precept), we will read two or three important articles on the topic. This
way, we will gain background through the textbook and subsequently build upon it with
more specialized readings.

GRADING: Final grades for this course are determined as follows:

• Midterm Exam - 20%

• Final Exam - 30%

• Precept Participation - 20%

• Two Short Papers - 30%

Below are more detailed explanations of each of the components to the final grade.

1. Examinations: Two in-class examinations will be given during the course. The
exams will consist of two sections: identification of key concepts and essay. The
identification section will list 8–10 key concepts or ideas from the course readings
and lectures of which students will need to choose 6–8 to explain. The concept

1
 should be correctly explained and then briefly applied to an actual example from
the readings or from current events. The essay portion of the exams will consist of
3 questions of which students must choose 2 to answer. All identification concepts
and essay questions will come directly from the readings and lectures, so exams
will reward all who have kept up with the work. The second examination will focus
mostly on material covered since the first examination; however, concepts covered
previous to the first examination will inevitably come up, as the topics in the course
are all closely linked.

2. Short Papers: Two short papers, 3–5 pages each, will be due during the
semester. One paper should take a current event and a second should take a
historical event and discuss and analyze it using the concepts learned in class. For
instance, you might analyze the Argentinian junta’s decision to attack Britain in
the Falklands using ideas from the “War and Peace” topic in the course. The only
restriction on topics is that you do not choose one that is used in the assigned
readings or analyzed in lectures. You will obviously need to consult newspapers
and other sources (e.g., history books) to write the papers. The two papers have
due dates listed in the Course Schedule; however you can turn your paper in at any
point before the specified date.

3. Participation: Active participation in precept discussions are important to en-

sure that everyone benefits as much as possible from the course. A baseline for
the participation grade is simply attendance. It is quite hard for your preceptor
to award a good participation grade to students who are not there. Beyond that,
students are expected to weigh in on discussions in a way that demonstrates they
have done the readings and more importantly, given some serious thought to them.
Your preceptor is fully in charge of your final precept grade, although we will all
closely coordinate to make sure our grading standards are the same.

COURSE POLICIES: The course will follow the Politics department late penalty
of 1/3 grade drop for each 24 hour delay in submission of written assignments. Requests
for extensions or re-grading must be accompanied by a comprehensive written explana-
tion including note from Princeton health services in case of medical justification. Note
that re-grading will be completed by the professor and may result in raising or lowering
the original grade. Students are expected to familiarize themselves with the University
Honor Code and plagiarism policy:
http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pub/integrity/pages/intro/index.htm

READINGS: The course has one main textbook. Any additional readings will be
available online.

Jeffry A Frieden, David A. Lake, & Kenneth A. Schultz. 2010. World Politics: Inter-
ests, Interactions, Institutions. New York: W.W. Norton. (FLS)

2
COURSE SCHEDULE
1. February 7: Introduction to the Study of International Relations.

• FLS: Introduction and Chapter 1

2. February 9: Understanding Interests, Interactions, Institutions.

• FLS: Chapter 2
• James Fearon. 1998. “Bargaining, Enforcement, and International Coopera-
tion.” International Organization 52(2): 269–305.
• John J. Mearsheimer. 1995. “The False Promise of International Institutions.”
International Security 19(3): 5–49.

3. February 14: War and Peace.

• FLS: Chapter 3

4. February 16: War and Peace.

• Dan Reiter. 2003. “Exploring the Bargaining Model of War” Perspectives on

Politics 1(1): 27–43.
• Tanisha Fazal. 2004. “State Death in the International System.” Interna-
tional Organization 58(2): 311–344.
• Stacie E. Goddard. 2006. “Uncommon Ground: Indivisible Territory and the
Politics of Legitimacy.” International Organization 60(1): 35–68.

5. February 21: War and Peace: Domestic Politics.

• FLS: Chapter 4

6. February 23: War and Peace: Domestic Politics.

• Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, James D. Morrow, Randolph Siverson, & Alas-

tair Smith. 1999. “An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace.”
American Political Science Review 93(4): 791–807.
• Michael Tomz. 2007. “Domestic Audience Costs in International Relations:
An Experimental Approach.” International Organization 61: 821–840.

7. February 28: War and Peace: International Institutions.

• FLS: Chapter 5

8. March 1: War and Peace: International Institutions.

3
 • Virginia Page Fortna. 2004. “Interstate Peacekeeping: Causal Mechanisms
and Empirical Effects.” World Politics 56: 481–519.
• Sara McLaughlin Mitchell and Paul R. Hensel. 2007. “International Insti-
tutions and Compliance with Agreements.” American Journal of Political
Science 51(4): 721–737.

9. March 6: International Trade.

• FLS: Chapter 6

10. March 8: International Trade.

First Short Paper Due, 5pm.

• Ronald Rogowski. 1987. “Political Cleavages and Changing Exposure to

Trade” American Political Science Review 81(4): 1121–1137.
• Dani Rodrik. 2001. “Trading in Illusions.” Foreign Policy No. 123 (March–
April): 54–62.
• Peter D. Sutherland. 2008. “Transforming Nations: How the WTO Boosts
Economies and Opens Societies.” Foreign Affairs 87(2): 125–136.

11. March 13: International Financial Relations.

• FLS: Chapter 7
• Lawrence H. Summers. 2000. “International Financial Crises: Causes, Pre-
vention, and Cures.” American Economic Review 90(2): 1–16.

12. March 15: International Monetary Relations.

• FLS: Chapter 8
• Benjamin J. Cohen. 2008. “The International Monetary System: Diffusion
and Ambiguity.” International Affairs 84(3): 455–470.

13. March 20 & 22: Spring Break.

14. March 27: Mid-term Examination.

15. March 29: Development: Wealth and Poverty.

• FLS: Chapter 9

16. April 3: No Class – International Studies Association Annual Conven-

tion.

17. April 5: Development and Foreign Aid.

4
 • Randall W. Stone. 2004. “The Political Economy of IMF Lending in Africa.”
American Political Science Review 98(4): 570–591.
• William Easterly. 2003. “Can Foreign Aid Buy Growth?” Journal of Eco-
nomic Perspectives 17(3): 23–48.
• Joseph Wright and Matthew Winters. 2010. “The Politics of Effective Foreign
Aid.” Annual Review of Political Science 13: 61–80.

18. April 10: Human Rights.

• FLS: Chapter 11

19. April 12: Economic Sanctions.

• Kimberly Ann Elliot and Gary Clyde Hufbauer. 1999. “Same Song, Same
Refrain? Economic Sanctions in the 1990’s.” American Economic Review
89(2): 403–408.
• Navin A. Bapat and T. Clifton Morgan. 2009. “ Multilateral Versus Unilat-
eral Sanctions Reconsidered: A Test Using New Data.” International Studies
Quarterly 53: 1075–1094.
• Meghan L. O’Sullivan. 2010. “Iran and the Great Sanctions Debate.” The
Washington Quarterly 33(4): 7–21.

20. April 17: Territorial Disputes and International Law.

• Anne-Marie Slaughter, Andrew S. Tulumello, and Stepan Wood. 1998. “In-

ternational Law and International Relations Theory: A New Generation of
Interdisciplinary Scholarship,” The American Journal of International Law
92(3): 367–397.
• Todd L. Allee and Paul K. Huth. 2006. “Legitimizing Dispute Settlement:
International Legal Rulings and Domestic Political Cover.” American Political
Science Review 100(2): 219–234.
• Paul K. Huth, Sarah E. Croco, and Benjamin J. Appel. 2011. “Does In-
ternational Law Promote the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes?
Evidence from the Study of Territorial Conflicts since 1945.” American Polit-
ical Science Review 105(2): 415–436.

21. April 19: The Global Environment.

• FLS: Chapter 12
• Idean Salehyan. 2008. “From Climate Change to Conflict? No Consensus
Yet.” Journal of Peace Research 45(3): 315–326.

22. April 24: Transnational Networks in IR.

5
 • FLS: Chapter 10

23. April 26: Terrorism in IR.

• Daniel Byman. 2005. Deadly Connections: States that Sponsor Terrorism

Cambridge University Press. pp. 21–78.
• William F. Shugart. 2006. “An Analytical History of Terrorism.” Public
Choice 128: 7–39.
• Andrew Kydd and Barbara F. Walter. 2006. “The Strategies of Terrorism.”
International Security 31(1): 49–80.

24. May 1: Civil Wars in International Relations.

• James D. Fearon and David Laitin. 2003. “Ethnicity, Insurgency, and Civil
War.” American Political Science Review 97(1): 75–90.
• Barbara Walter. 1997. “The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement.” In-
ternational Organization 51(3): 335–364.
• Virginia Page Fortna. 2004. “Does Peacekeeping Keep Peace? International
Intervention and the Duration of Peace After Civil War.” International Stud-
ies Quarterly 48(2): 269–292.

25. May 3: The Future of IR.

Second Short Paper Due, 5pm.

• FLS: Chapter 13

26. Final Exam: Date TBA.