77976 - Evolution of The international System (B53)

Learning outcomes

The aim of the course is to provide an advanced knowledge and understanding of the evolution of the international system since the modern era and of the main theories of international relations (constructivism, liberalism, realism). At the end of the course, the student knows the main events which have shaped international politics, the most important theoretical interpretations and the debates within the discipline, as well as the analytical instruments necessary to interpret the contemporary international system.

Course contents

The course is organised into lectures and seminars, as detailed in the following program. The course will cover the main theoretical traditions in international relations: realism, liberalism and constructivism. Throughout the course, the main theories in the discipline will be illustrated: balance of power and hegemonic stability for realism, institutionalism, democratic peace and capitalist peace for liberalism as well as constructivist and English school approaches. The lectures will look at the role of power, security, interests, institutions and ideas in understanding international politics, through the lenses of the main theoretical traditions of IR. The seminars will then be conducted on various historical international systems applying to each the various theoretical interpretations. For this purpose, it can be useful to refer to theories exposed in the recommended section of each topic. In particular, the systems which will be taken into consideration are: the Westphalian system (1494-1788), the Revolutionary system (1789-1889), the First World War system (1890-1918), the Second World War system (1919-1945), the Cold War system (1946-1991), the contemporary system (1992-current).

For a full description of the course contents see the list of themes and readings in the section below.

Readings/Bibliography

Lecture 1: Introduction: International Relations between Theory and History

• *Snyder, J. (2004) «One World, Rival Theories», Foreign Policy, 145, 52-62 (required)

 

Recommended:

• *Walt, S. (1998) «One world, many theories», Foreign Policy, 110, pp. 29–46
• *Wight, M. (1987) «An Anatomy of International Thought», Review of International Studies, 13:3, 221-227
• *Fukuyama, Francis (1989) «The End of History?», The National Interest, 16, pp. 3–18
• *Huntington, S. (1993) «The Clash of Civilizations?», Foreign Affairs, 72:3, 22-49

 

Videos:

• VIDEO Smith, S. on IR Theory, 5:56 (required) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvKRAd9b0zU
• VIDEO Drezner, D., Zombies, G20 and International Relations, 1:22:32

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALDdTICSAU

• VIDEO Huntington, S. on the Clash of Civilizations, 28:17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-tgVEz5xMU

• VIDEO Fukuyama, F on The End of History, 1:12:24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w240nD5whsE
• VIDEO Krasner, S. on Sovereignty, 58:16

https://conversations.berkeley.edu/index.php/krasner_2003

 

 

Lecture 2: The Three Traditions: Realism, Liberalism, Reflectivism

• Andreatta, F. (2017) Classic Works in International Relations, Il Mulino, Introduction (required) and II
• Mearsheimer, J. and S. Walt «Leaving Theory Behind», [http://duckofminerva.com/2013/09/leaving-theory-behind-why-simplistic-hypothesis-testing-is-bad-for-ir.html] (required)
• Reiter, D. «In Defense of Simplistic Hypothesis», [http://duckofminerva.com/2013/09/in-defense-of-simplistic-hypothesis-testing.html] (required)

 

Recommended:

• Carreiro-Rolim, J. «A Review of Critical Race Theory’s Critiques of Mainstream IR», https://www.e-ir.info/2021/03/20/undoing-the-creation-myth-of-contemporary-international-relations-a-review-of-critical-race-theorys-critiques-of-mainstream-ir/
• Sjoberg, L. »The Politics of Fitting Feminist Theory in IR», https://www.duckofminerva.com/2013/10/the-politics-of-fitting-feminist-theory-in-ir.html

 

Other material:

 

Questions:

• What is the meaning of “theory” in IR?
• What are the major epistemological paradigms in the study of IR?
• What are the major methodological paradigms in the study of IR?
• What are the major schools of thought in IR?

 

 

Lecture 3: The Balance of Power

• Andreatta, Classic Works, chapp. III, VIII (required)
• *Waltz, K. (1988) «The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory», Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 18:4, 615-628 (required)

 

Recommended:

• *Levy, J. S., and W. R. Thompson (2005) «Hegemonic Threats and Great-Power Balancing in Europe, 1495-1999», Security Studies, 14:1, 1-33
• *Schroeder, P. (1994) «Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory», International Security, 19:1, 108-148
• *Walt, S. (1985) «Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power», International Security, 9:4, 3-43
• Herz, J.H. (1950) «Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma», World Politics, 2:2, pp. 157-180

 

Videos:

• VIDEO Mearsheimer, J. Structural Realism, 9:22 (required)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXllDh6rD18

• VIDEO Waltz, Theory and International Politics, excerpt 12:21

https://conversations.berkeley.edu/waltz_2003

• VIDEO Richard Betts on Realism, 55:47

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCE7EB1Nvq4andt=612s [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCE7EB1Nvq4&t=612s]

 

Other material:

• Drezner, D., Game of Thrones and IR,

https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/06/23/what-can-game-of-thrones-tell-us-about-our-worlds-politics/

 

Questions:

• What is the balance of power and what are its alternatives?
• What makes some international systems more stable than others?
• What are the benefits, and risks, of alliances?
• Do states actually balance in practice?

 

 

Lecture 4: Hegemonic Stability and Unipolarity

• Andreatta, Classic Works, chap. IX (required)
• *Gilpin, R. (1988) «The Theory of Hegemonic War», Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 18:4, 591-613 (required)

 

Recommended:

• *Monteiro, N. P. (2011) «Unrest assured: Why Unipolarity Is Not Peaceful», International security, 36:3, 9-40
• *Jervis, R. (2009) «Unipolarity: A Structural Perspective», World Politics, 61:1, pp. 188-213
• *Lake, D.A. (2007) «Escape from the State of Nature: Authority and Hierarchy in World Politics», International Security, 32:1, pp. 47-79
• Layne, C. (2006) «The Unipolar Illusion Revisited: The Coming End of the United States' Unipolar Moment», International Security, 32:2, pp. 7-41

 

Videos:

• VIDEO Allison, G.T., Is War between China and the US Inevitable?, 18:34 (required) https://www.ted.com/talks/graham_allison_is_war_between_china_and_the_us_inevitable/reading-list?referrer=playlist-the_global_power_shift
• VIDEO Monteiro, N. on Unipolarity, 16:50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfaAb76KZ4E
• VIDEO Nye, J., Global power shifts, 17:58

https://www.ted.com/talks/joseph_nye_global_power_shifts

 

Questions:

• How do hegemons arise and why do they eventually decline?
• How can hegemons foster cooperation?
• How do rising powers challenge hegemons, and how do they respond?
• Is hegemonic war avoidable?

 

 

Lecture 5: International Institutions

• Andreatta, Classic Works, chap. X (required)
• *Axelrod, R. and R. Keohane (1985) «Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions», World Politics, 38:1, 226-254 (required)
• Hasenclever, A., P. Mayer and V. Rittberger (1996) «Interests, Power, Knowledge: The Study of International Regimes», Mershon International Studies Review, 40:2, pp. 177-205 (required)

 

Recommended:

• *Fearon, J. (1995) «Rationalist Explanations for War», International Organization, 49:3, pp. 379-414
• *Grieco, J. (1988) «Anarchy and the limits of cooperation: a realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism», International Organization, 42:3, 485-507
• *Ikenberry, G. J. (2011) «The Future of the Liberal World Order: Internationalism After America», Foreign Affairs, Vol. 90, No. 3, pp. 56-62
• *Claude, I. L. (1969) «The Collectivist Theme in International Relations», International Journal, 24:4, pp. 639- 656
• *Mearsheimer, J.J. (2019) «Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order», International Security, 43:4, pp. 7-50
• Keohane, R. (2012) «Twenty Years of Institutional Liberalism», International Relations, 26:2, pp. 125-138.
• Jervis, R. (1982) «Security Regimes», International Organization, 36:2, pp. 357-378

 

Videos:

• VIDEO Spaniel, The Prisoner’s Dilemma, 6:27 (required)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gnqTwFkknEandlist=PLB5965C13F4B0B2DAandindex=7 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gnqTwFkknE&list=PLB5965C13F4B0B2DA&index=7]

• VIDEO Spaniel, The Shadow of the Future, 8:31 (required)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x50rADoxHycandlist=PLB5965C13F4B0B2DAandindex=11 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x50rADoxHyc&list=PLB5965C13F4B0B2DA&index=11]

• VIDEO Spaniel, The Relative Gains Problem, 8:40 (required)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMO8qM9d0fcandlist=PLB5965C13F4B0B2DAandindex=31 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMO8qM9d0fc&list=PLB5965C13F4B0B2DA&index=31]

• VIDEO Keohane, Theory and International Institutions, 57:01

https://conversations.berkeley.edu/keohane_2004

 

Other material:

• The Economist, The New World Disorder, June 20^th, 2020, https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/06/18/the-new-world-disorder
• Moreland, W. (2020) To compete with China and Russia, America needs a new era of multilateralism, Vox, October 27^th, https://www.vox.com/world/21536158/trump-withdrawal-who-china-russia-multilateralism-us-election-2020

 

Questions:

• Why do rational, interest-seeking actors cooperate?
• How do institutions affect states’ behavior?
• Why do realists contest the utility of institutions?
• What is collective security?

 

 

Lecture 6: Domestic Regimes

• Andreatta, Classic Works, chap. XIV (required)
• Doyle, M. (1986) «Liberalism and World Politics, American Political Science Review, 80:4, pp. 1151-1169 (required)

 

Recommended:

• *Levy, J. (1988) «Domestic Politics and War», Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 18:4, 653-673
• *Doyle, M. (1983) «Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs, Part 1 and 2», Philosophy and Public Affairs, 12:3-4, 205-235, 323-353
• *Gunitsky, S. (2014) «From Shocks to Waves: Hegemonic Transitions and Democratization in the Twentieth Century», International Organization, 68:3, 561-597 (required)
• *Reiter, D., and A. Stam (2003) «Understanding Victory: Why Political Institutions Matter», International Security, 28:1, 168-179
• *Zakaria, F. (1992) «Realism and Domestic Politics: A Review Essay», International Security, 17:1, pp. 177-198
• *Mansfield, E.D. and J. Snyder (1995) «Democratization and War», Foreign Affairs, 74:3, 79-97

 

Videos:

• VIDEO Doyle, M. on Democratic Peace, 10:06 (required)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8tgDKq5HS4

• VIDEO Moravscik, A. on Liberal Theory, 9:49 (required)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7D5FNrqT5dM

• VIDEO Thirteen Days, movie by Roger Donaldson, 2000, 4:47 (extract here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yt8SBlx9P9I )

 

Other material:

• Freedom House: Nations in Transit 2020. https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2020/dropping-democratic-facade

 

Questions:

• Why should democracies be more peaceful than autocracies?
• What is the empirical record of democracies at war?
• What causes democratic waves?
• What is the “diversionary” theory of war?

 

 

Lecture 7: Economic Interdependence

• Andreatta, Classic Works, chap. I. (required)
• *Gartzke, E. (2007) «The Capitalist Peace», American Journal of Political Science, 51:1, 166-191 (required)

 

Recommended:

• *Kaysen, V. (1990) «Is War Obsolete?: A Review Essay», International Security, 14:4, 42-64
• *Mousseau, M. (2019) «The End of War How a Robust Marketplace and Liberal Hegemony Are Leading to Perpetual World Peace», International Security, 44:1, pp.160-196
• *Chatagnier, J. T., and E. Castelli (2016) «A Modern Peace? Schumpeter, the Decline of Conflict, and the Investment–War Trade-Off», Political Research Quarterly, 69;4, 852-864
• *Viner, J. (1948) «Power Versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries», World Politics, 1:1, pp. 1-29
• *Galtung, J. (1971) «A Structural Theory of Imperialism», Journal of Peace Research, 8:2, pp. 81-117

 

Videos:

• VIDEO Pinker, S., Is the World Getting Better or Worse?, 18:23 (required) https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_is_the_world_getting_better_or_worse_a_look_at_the_numbers
• VIDEO Rosling, H., 200 Years that Changed the World, 4:38 (required) https://www.gapminder.org/videos/200-years-that-changed-the-world/
• VIDEO Rosling, H., The Magic Washing Machine, 8:59 https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_magic_washing_machine
• VIDEO Rosling, H., Religions and Babies, 12:17 https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies

 

Other material:

• Luce, E. (2015), The end of the Golden Arches doctrine, Financial Times, May 10^th *

 

Questions:

• Why should capitalism and international trade hinder international conflict?
• How does “globalization” create incentive for cooperation, and conflict?
• What are the political factors that underpin the world economy?
• What is the significance of “modernity”?

 

 

Lecture 8: Ideational Interpretations

• Andreatta, Classic Works, chapp. VII, XII, XIII (required)
• *Wendt, A. (1992) «Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics», International Organization, 46:2, 391-425 (required)

 

Recommended:

• *Finnemore, M. and K. Sikkink (1998) «International norm dynamics and political change», International organization, 52:4, 887-917
• *Bull, H. (1966) «International Theory: The Case for a Classical Approach», World Politics, 18:3, 361-377
• *Jervis, R. (1988) «War and Misperception», Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 18:4, 675-700
• *Ruggie, J.G. (1983) «Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity», World Politics, 35:2, pp. 261-285
• Andreatta, Classic Works, chapp. V, VI, XI, XV

 

Videos:

• VIDEO Gallemore, C. on Constructivism, 5:19 (required) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYU9UfkV_XI
• VIDEO Walzer, M. on Just War, 4:58 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcBovmGZSPU
• VIDEO Wendt, A. on Quantum Mind and the Social Sciences, 16:49 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpkhPgpY28M
• VIDEO Finnemore, M. on Constructivism, 1:11:26 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdjr2VwwinA

 

Other material:

• Storey, H. (2021), History haunts Japan–South Korea ties, https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/history-haunts-japan-south-korea-ties

 

Questions:

• How do ideas shape (international) political realities?
• How do norms emerge, and spread, in the international system?
• How do religious (and ethnic) identities lead to war?
• What is the “English School”?

 

 

 

*** SEMINAR SECTION ***

 

 

Seminar 1: The Westphalian System

• Kennedy, P. (1987): The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, pp. 1-114 (required)

 

Recommended:

• Krasner, S.D. (1995) «Compromising Westphalia», International Security, 20:3, pp. 115-151
• Michael Doyle, Ways of War and Peace (New York, 1997), ch. 5

 

 

Further readings:

• Anderson, M. S. (1998): The Origins of the Modern European State System, 1494-1618 [https://www.routledge.com/The-Origins-of-the-Modern-European-State-System-1494-1618/Anderson/p/book/9780582229440]
• Cipolla, C. M. (1965) Guns, Sails and Empires: Technological Innovation and the Early Phases of European Expansion 1400–1700
• Mckay, D. and H. M. Scott (1983): The Rise of the Great Powers 1648 - 1815 [https://www.routledge.com/The-Rise-of-the-Great-Powers-1648---1815/Mckay-Scott-Mckay/p/book/9780582485549]

 

Questions:

• What were the causes of the 30 Years’ War and the significance of the Peace of Westphalia?
• What is the significance of the Ütrecht Treaty at the end of the wars of Louis XIV?
• How did the balance of power operate during the Ancien Regime?
• Why did Britain beat France in their long global struggle in the long XVIII Century?

 

 

Seminar 2: The Age of Revolutions and Nationalism

• Kennedy (1987), pp. 115-193 (required)

 

Recommended:

• Goddard, S.E. (2008) «When Right Makes Might: How Prussia Overturned the European Balance of Power», International Security, 33:3, pp. 110-142
• Rathbun, B. (2018) «The Rarity of Realpolitik: What Bismarck's Rationality Reveals about International Politics», International Security, 43:1, pp. 7-55
• Posen, B. (1993) Nationalism, the Mass Army, and Military Power», International Security, 18:2, pp. 80-124

 

 

Further readings:

• Bridge F. R., and Roger Bullen (2004): The Great Powers and the European States System, 1814—1914
• Schroeder, P. W. (1994) The Transformation of European Politics, 1763 – 1848
• Anderson, M. S. (2003) The Ascendancy of Europe, 1815—1914
• Evans, P. (2016) The Pursuit of Power, Europe 1815-1914
• Kissinger, H. (1994) Diplomacy, pp. 1-167
  

Questions:

• What were the causes of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars?
• What is the significance of the Peace of Vienna?
• What was the significance the industrial revolution on international politics?
• What are the causes of the “long peace” in the XIX Century?

 

 

Seminar 3: The First World War

• Kennedy (1987), Chap. 5, pp. 194-274 (required)

 

Recommended:

• Christensen, T.J. and J. Snyder (1990) «Chain Gangs and Passed Bucks: Predicting Alliance Patterns in Multipolarity», International Organization, 44:2, pp. 137-168
• Snyder, J. (2014) «Better Now Than Later: The Paradox of 1914 as Everyone’s Favored Year for War», International Security, 39:1, 71-94
• Lieber, K.A. (2007) «The New History of World War I and What It Means for International Relations Theory», International Security, 32:2, pp. 155-191
• Van Evera, S. (1984) «The Cult of the Offensive and the Origins of the First World War», International Security, 9:1, pp. 58-107
• Lynn-Jones, S. (1986) «Détente and Deterrence: Anglo-German Relations, 1911-1914», 11:2, pp. 121-150
• Levy, J.S. (1990) «Preferences, Constraints, and Choices in July 1914», International Security, 15:3, pp. 151-186
• Trachtenberg, M. (1990) «The Meaning of Mobilization in 1914 », International Security, 15:3, pp. 120-150
• Stevenson, D. (1997) «Militarization and Diplomacy in Europe before 1914», International Security, 22:1, pp. 125-161

 

Further readings:

• Taylor, A.J.P. (1954) The Struggle for Mastery in Europe, 1848 – 1918.
• Joll, J., and G. Martel (2007) The Origins of the First World War
• Kissinger, H. (1994) Diplomacy, pp. 168-265
• Cooper, R. N. (2014) Economic interdependence and war, in Rosecrance, R. N., and Miller, S. E. (Eds.). (2014) The next great war?: the roots of World War I and the risk of US-China conflict

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/34903181/CooperEconomicInterdependenceandWar2014.pdf?sequence=3

• Van Evera, S. (1984) The Cult of the Offensive and the Origins of the First World War, International security, 9:1, 58-107
• Snyder, J. (1984) Civil-Military Relations and the Cult of the Offensive, 1914 and 1984, International Security, 9:1, 108-146

 

Questions:

• What were the main causes of WWI?
• Why did the war last so long?
• What is the significance of America’s entry into the war in 1917?
• What is the significance of the Peace of Versailles?

 

 

Seminar 4: The Second World War

• Kennedy (1987), Chap. 6, pp. 275-346 (required)

 

Recommended:

• Ripsman, N.M. and J.S. Levy (2008) «Wishful Thinking or Buying Time?: The Logic of British Appeasement in the 1930s», International Security, 33:2, pp. 148-181
• Schweller, R.L. (2004) «Unanswered Threats: A Neoclassical Realist Theory of Underbalancing», International Security, 29:2, pp. 159-201
• Legro, J. (1994) «Military Culture and Inadvertent Escalation in World War II», International Security, 18:4, pp. 108-142
• Kier, E. (1995) «Culture and Military Doctrine: France between the Wars», International Security, 19:4, pp. 65-93

 

Further readings:

• Overy, R. and A. Wheatcroft (1999) The Road to War. Revised Edition.
• Bell, P.M.H. (2007) The Origins of the Second World War in Europe. 3rd Edition.
• Steiner, Z. (2013) The Triumph of the Dark; European International History 1933-9
• Weinberg, G. (2005) A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II, 2^nd ed.,
• Kissinger, H. (1994) Diplomacy, pp. 266-422

 

Questions:

• What were the main causes of WWII?
• What is the relevance of ideology in Nazi foreign Policy?
• What is the significance of America’s entry into the war in 1941?
• What is the significance of the Peace of Potsdam?

 

 

Seminar 5: The Cold War

• Kennedy (1987), Chap. 7, pp. 347-412 (required)

 

Recommended:

• Brooks S.G. and W.C. Wohlforth (2000) «Power, Globalization and the End of the Cold War: Reevaluating a Landmark Case for Ideas, International Security, 25:3, pp. 5–53
• English, R. (2002) «Power, Ideas, and New Evidence on the Cold War's End: A Reply to Brooks and Wohlforth», International Security 26:4, pp. 70-92
• Gaddis, J. L. (1986) «The Long Peace: Elements of Stability in the Postwar International System», International Security, 10:4, pp. 99-14
• Jervis, R. (1988) «The Political Effects of Nuclear Weapons: A Comment», International Security, 13:2, p. 80-90
• Mueller, J. (1988) «The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the Postwar World», International Security, 13:2, pp. 55-79

 

Further readings:

• Powaski, R. (1998) The Cold War: The US and the Soviet Union, 1917-1991
• Gaddis, J.L. (2005) Strategies of Containment
• Westad, O.A. (2017) The Cold War: A World History
• Kissinger, H. (1994): Diplomacy, pp. 423-803

 

Questions:

• What were the main causes of the Cold War?
• What is the significance of nuclear weapons?
• Why did the Cold War extend to all regions and continents?
• Why did the Cold War end?

 

 

Seminar 6: The Contemporary International System

• Friedberg, A. (2005), «The Future of US-China Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable?» International Security, 30:2, 7-45 (required)
• Ikenberry, J. (2008) «The Rise of China and the Future of the West», Foreign Affairs, 87:1, 23-37. (required)
• Shifrinson, J. (2020) «Partnership or Predation? How Rising States Contend with Declining Great Powers», International Security, 45:1, 90–126 (required)
• Johnston, A. (2019), «China in a World of Orders. Rethinking Compliance and Challenge in Beijing’s International Relations», International Security, 44:2, 9–60 (required)

 

Recommended

• Kissinger, H. (2012) «The Future of U.S.-Chinese Relations: Conflict Is a Choice, Not a Necessity», Foreign Affairs , 91:2, 44-55
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2010) «The gathering storm: China’s challenge to US power in Asia», The Chinese journal of international politics, 3:4), 381-396
• Glaser, C. L. (2015) «A US-China grand bargain? The hard choice between military competition and accommodation»,, International Security, 39:4, 49-90
• Kang, D. C., and X. Ma (2018) «Power transitions: Thucydides didn’t live in East Asia», The Washington Quarterly, 41:1, 137-154
• Gilli, A. and M. Gilli (2018) «Why China Has Not Caught Up Yet: Military-Technological Superiority and the Limits of Imitation, Reverse Engineering, and Cyber Espionage», International Security, 43:3, pp. 141-189
• Bull H. (1975), «Models of Future World Order», India Quarterly, 31:1, pp. 62-73
• Jervis, R. (2002) «Theories of War in an Era of Leading-Power Peace», American Political Science Review, 96:1, 1-14
• Joffe, J. (1995) «”Bismarck” or "Britain"?: Toward an American Grand Strategy after Bipolarity», International Security, 19:4, pp. 94-117

 

Other material:

• Case Studies in Power Transitions: The Thucydides Trap,

https://www.belfercenter.org/thucydides-trap/case-file

• Anonymous: The Longer Telegram: Toward A New American China Strategy, The Atlantic Council, 2021

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/content-series/atlantic-council-strategy-paper- series/the-longer-telegram/

• Henry Kissinger: We live in a completely different world. https://www.ft.com/video/8ee73080-6e00-4dd3-a72c-5eda436328e1

 

Questions:

• Is the US still a hegemon?
• What are the main challenges to the liberal international order?
• Is conflict between America and China inevitable?
• Are states and great powers going to be as important in the XXI Century?

Teaching methods

The course is organised into lectures and seminars. Lectures (16 hours) aim to introduce students to the core tenets of the discipline. Seminars (12 hours) aim to provide occasions for in-depth discussions of class materials and exercises. Students attend 8 lectures (twice a week) on theoretical interpretations. They are then divided into two groups, each of which must attend 6 seminars (once a week) on the application of theories to historical international systems. The course is inspired by the “flipped classroom” concept, according to which student study the material before (and not after) the classes.

All students are invited to bring a laptop, tablet, or smartphone to class to participate to in-class tests and surveys.

Assessment methods

- Reading assignments (30% of the grade)

All the required readings for the lectures and seminars are assessed in a short 5-question multiple-choice quiz at the beginning of class #3, #5 and #7 (on the required readings of lectures 1-4, 5-6 and 7-8, respectively). The best two results are selected for grading Students are required to bring a device to class in order to take the test. These assignments will count for 20% of the overall grade (from 0 to 6 points)

Furthermore, in the seminar part (classes 9-14), each student will write a short one-page discussion paper (300-400 words) responding to one the questions listed for the various seminars after the readings in the program above while applying one of the theoretical approaches (10% of the overall grade, from 0 to 3 points). Students should select a different topic than the one they are doing their presentation on, and should send it to the instructor’s email by the day of the relevant seminar. Students writing a one page paper on a particular topic are expected to play the role of discussant in the relevant seminar.

 

- In class participation presentation (30% of the grade)

Each student will apply one of the theoretical interpretations to one of the historical periods (seminar classes 9-14) in a concise, 4-slides, powerpoint (or equivalent) presentation (use readable fonts), to be sent to the instructor three days before the seminar. Reference to recommended material for the relevant theory is expected. The assessment will not be restricted to factual knowledge but will also consider the ability to link theoretical approaches and empirical realities, as well as to identify relevant discussion questions. This assignment will count for 20% of the overall grade (from 0 to 6 points)

Attendance and participation in other seminar discussions is also assessed (10% of the overall grade, from 0 to 3 points).

 

- Take home final (40% of the grade, from 0 to 12)

A take-home exam handed the last day of class and to be submitted through EOL by a deadline that will be communicated by the end of the course (approximately one week). Prior registration on Almaesami is required. The take-home exam will consist of 2 answers (1.000 words each) from a set of questions applying one of the theoretical approaches to one of the historical periods. The brief essays should be structured around an introduction (a brief overview of the topic and the way in which it will be treated), a main body where the main tenets of the theory/approach discussed and applied to the analysis of historical events, and a short conclusion. References to the required and recommended reading materials are expected (preferably according to the Harvard referencing style). The questions will be assessed according to: historical accuracy, coherence and relevance of the theoretical discussion, clarity and consistency of the argument, original and critical thinking.

 

Non-attending students will be assessed through a take home exam that will consist of 4 questions (1.000 words each) that test the knowledge of different theoretical interpretations as well as the ability to apply such interpretations to historical realities. The material for non-attending students is composed of the required readings in the list above.

 

 

 

 

Ethical behavior

Students are bound the by UNIBO’s ethics code. Plagiarism (written exams will be checked with the software Compilatio) invalidates the exam while unethical behaviour could be denounced to university authorities.

 

Diversity and inclusion

It is essential to underline that academic writing uses bias-free language: clear, objective, and free of stereotypes. Please use gender-neutral language where possible, person-first language, and the use of terms of identity as adjectives rather than nouns. For example, instead of using the term “welfare reliant” to describe a person or people, try using the person-first language, “families whose main income is from TANF benefits.” Instead of referring to groups of people as“drug users,” try adjectival forms or descriptive phrases like “people who use drugs.” Instead of using expressions like “man”, “men”, “mankind” or “policeman”, use gender neutral ones such as “person”, “people”, “humanity” or “police officer”

 

Grading policy

The final overall grade will be in the range 18-30:

- 30 cum laude (outstanding, sure grasp of all the material and many interesting insights)

- 28-30 (excellent, sure grasp of all the material and some interesting insights)

- 26-27 (very good, competent grasp of all the material)

- 24-25 (good, competent grasp of some the material)

- 21-23 (satisfactory, partial grasp of the material)

- 18-20 (pass, barely sufficient grasp of the material)

- 17 or below (fail, insufficient grasp of the material)

Teaching tools

Class slides, Videos and other material indicated in the syllabus.

Office hours

See the website of Francesco Niccolò Moro