Introduction

Welcome to IRPG 833, The United States in the International System. It is often assumed that US foreign policy was transformed in the years after September 11, 2001. There is no shortage of evidence that seems to substantiate this assessment. The ‘global war on terror’ (GWOT), US unilateralism and a related hostility to multilateral institutions, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the doctrine of preventive war, all seem to confirm a radical rupture with the US’s foreign policy stance prior to 9/11. While this view has some truth, it is, in many respects, over-stated. Some of the most prominent features of President Bush’s foreign policy had deep ideological and political roots that are recurrent in U.S. history and U.S. involvement in world history. With the Presidential baton passing to Barack Obama in 2008, the question arose as to how U.S. foreign policy had changed, and how it had stayed the same. In this course, we attempt to disentangle these continuities from the discontinuities in U.S. international relations, as a way of interpreting the contemporary and historical role played by the U.S. in the international system.

We approach this task through a number of discrete but related sections of the unit, which broadly (though not exactly) follow the text we will be using and which students must have – Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Additional, supplementary readings will be provided on ilearn. Students are strongly encouraged to do these additional readings. (1) We begin by introducing students to the debate about the nature of contemporary U.S. power, whether or not it is imperial, and if so how it conforms to or diverges from previous imperial models; (2) We continue with an historical overview of U.S. international relations. A number of different theoretical approaches will be integrated with this historical survey, so that we might get a better handle on the ‘why’ as well as the ‘how’ of U.S. international relations and foreign policy; (3) We follow this with a consideration of the choices and challenges facing American foreign policy makers in the 21^st century, including several regionally focused case studies (4) Finally, we return to the questions raised in the very first lecture (about the nature of contemporary U.S. power and foreign policy), but hopefully this time with a more enriched and informed understanding of the issues involved than when we began. Organizing the course in this way aims to realize the following objectives:

Unit Requirements and expectations

• Students must come to each lecture and each seminar
• Each students must give a seminar presentation
• Students must complete all required reading
• Students must contribute to the seminar discussions each week
• Students must submit all assignments on time, unless they have an extension

Submission of Written Work

• Essays must be submitted via the boxes on the ground floor of W6A
• Read and sign the declaration before submitting your work
• Make sure to include the course number, your name, your student number
• Keep a copy of your essay

General Texts and Background Reading on the U.S. and International Relations

Alperovitz III, G. (1995) The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb. New York: Vintage Books.

Art, R. & Cronin, P. (2003) The United States and Coercive Diplomacy. Washington: US Institute for Peace.

Bacevich, A. J. (2002) American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Bacevich, A. J. (2005) The New American Militarism: How Americans are seduced by War. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bacevich, A. J. (2008) The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Barber, B. (2003) Fear’s Empire: War, Terrorism, and Democracy. New York: Norton.

Beisner, R. L. (ed.) (2003) American Foreign Relations Since 1600: a Guide to the Literature. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.

Bennis, P. (2003) Before and After: U.S. Foreign Policy and the War on Terrorism. New York: Olive Branch Press.

Boggs, C. (ed.) (2003) Masters of War: Militarism and Blowback in the Era of American Empire. New York, London: Routledge.

Bronner, S. E. (2005) Blood in the Sand: Imperial Fantasies, Right-Wing Ambitions, and the Erosion of American Democracy. Lexington: The University of Kentucky Press.

Burns, R. D. (1983) Guide to American Foreign Relations Since 1700. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.

Buzan, B. (2004) The United States and the Great Powers. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Carter, R. G. (ed.) (2002) Contemporary Cases in US Foreign Policy: From Terrorism to Trade. Washington: Congressional Quarterly Inc.

Chomsky, N. (1999) Fateful Triangle: the United States, Israel and the Palestinians. London: Pluto.

Chomsky, N. (2003) Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance. Crows Nest NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Chomsky, N. (2006) Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. Crows Nest NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Cohen, W. I. (ed.) (1993) The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations (4 Volumes). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cohen, W. I. (2005) America’s Failing Empire: U.S. Foreign Relations since the Cold War. Malden, Ma & Oxford: Blackwells Publishing.

Combs, J. A. (1986) The History of American Foreign Policy, Volume II. New York: Alfred Knopf.

Crabb, C. V. (1982) The Doctrines of American Foreign Policy: Their Meaning, Role, and Future. Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press.

Daalder, I. H. & Lindsay, J. M. (2005) America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy (2^nd edn.). Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley & Sons Inc.

Ferguson, N. (2004) Colossus: the Price of America’s Empire. New York: Penguin.

Forsythe, D. P., McMahon, P. C. & Wedeman, A. (eds.) (2006) American Foreign Policy in a Globalized World. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.

Fukuyama, F. (2006) After the Neocons: America at the Crossroads. London: Profile Books.

Gaddis, J. (1992) The United States and the End of the Cold War: Implications, Reconsiderations, Provocations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gaddis, J. (1997) We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War History. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Gaddis, J. (2005) The Cold War. New York: Penguin Group.

Gardner, L. G. (2008) The Long Road to Baghdad: The History of U.S. Foreign Policy from the 1970s to the Present. New York: The New Press.

Garthoff, R. L. (1994) Détente and Confrontation: American-Soviet Relations from Nixon to Reagan. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

Garthoff, R. L. (1994) The Great Transition: American-Soviet Relations and the End of the Cold War. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

Halper, S. & Clarke, J. (2005) America Alone. The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Held, D. & Koenig-Archibugi, M. (eds.) (2004) American Power in the 21^st Century. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hippel, K. von (2000) Democracy by Force: US Military Intervention in the Post-Cold War World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hodson, G. (2009) The Myth of American Exceptionalism (New Haven: Yale).

Hogan, M. J. (ed.) (1999) The Ambiguous Legacy: U.S. Foreign Relations in the “American Century”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Hogan, M. J. & Paterson, T. G. (eds.) (2004) Explaining the History of American Foreign Relations (2^nd edn.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hudson, M. (2004) ‘The United States in the Middle East’, in Fawcett, L. (ed.) International Relations of the Middle East. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 283-305.

Hunt, M. H (2007) The American Ascendancy: How the United States Gained and Wielded Global Dominance. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.

Huntington, S. P. (2003) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (2^nd edn). New York: Simon Schuster.

Jentleson, B. (20014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5th edn.). New York & London: W.W. Norton & Company

Joffe, J. (2014) The Myth of America’s Decline: Politics, Economics, and a Half Century of False Prophecies. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

Johnson, C. (2000) Blowback: the Costs and Consequences of American Empire. New York: Henry Holt.

Johnson, C. (2004) The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy and the End of the Republic. London, New York: Verso.

Johnson, I. (2004) ‘US-UN Relations after Iraq: the End of the World (Order) as we Know it’, European Journal of International Law, 15 (4) Pp. 813-838.

Kaplan, E. (2004) With God on Their Side: George W. Bush and the Christian Right. New York, London: The Free Press.

Kaplan, R. (2000) The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War. New York: Random House.

Kennedy, P. (1988) The Rise and Fall of Great Powers. London: Fontana Press.

Klare, M. (2001) Resource Wars. New York: Henry Holt.

Klare, M. (2004) Blood and Oil: How America’s Thirst for Petrol is Killing the US. London: Penguin.

LaFeber, W. (1994) The American Age: US Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad, 1750 to the Present. New York, London: W. W. Norton.

LaFeber, W. (2002) America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-2000 (9^th edn.). Boston: McGraw Hill.

Lawton, T. C., Rosenau, J. N. & Verdun, A. C. (eds.) Strange Power: Shaping the Parameters of International Relations and International Political Economy. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Lind, M. (2006) The American Way of Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Luce, H. R. (1999) ‘The American Century’, Diplomatic History, 23 (2) Pp. 159-171.

Mann, M. (2003) Incoherent Empire. London: Verso.

McDougall, W. A. (1997) Promised Land, Crusader State: The American Encounter with the World Since 1776. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Mead, W. (2002) Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and how it changed the World. London, New York: Routledge.

Melanson, R. A. (2005) American Foreign Policy since the Vietnam War: The Search for Consensus from Richard Nixon to George W. Bush. New York, London: M. E. Sharpe.

O’Brien, P. K. & Clesse, A. (eds.) (2002) Two Hegemonies: Britain 1846-1914 and the United States 1941-2001. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Painter, D. S. (1999) The Cold War: An International History. London: Routledge.

Paterson, T. G., Clifford, J. G. & Hagan, K. J. (2000) American Foreign Policy: A History since 1885 (5^th edn.) Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Peck, J. (2010) Ideal Illusions: How the U.S. Government Co-opted Human Rights. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Petras, J. & Veltmeyer, H. (2005) Empire with Imperialism: The Globalizing Dynamics of Neo-liberal Capitalism. London: Zed Books.

Prados, J. (2006) Safe for Democracy: The Secret Wars of the CIA. (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee).

Ryan, D. (2000) US Foreign Policy in World History. London, New York: Routledge.

Schlesinger, Jr., A. M. (2005) War and the American Presidency. New York, London: W. W. Norton & Company.

Schulzinger, R. D. (ed.) (2003) A Companion to American Foreign Relations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Smith, T. (2000) Foreign Attachments: The Power of Ethnic Groups in the Making of American Foreign Policy. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Walt, S. M. (2005) Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Westad, O. A. (2005) The Global Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zelizer, J. E. (2010) Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security – From World War II to the War on Terror (New York Basic Books).

Useful Journals

• American Historical Review
• American Political Science Review
• American Journal of Political Science
• Diplomatic History
• Foreign Affairs
• Foreign Policy
• International Organization
• International Security
• International Studies Quarterly
• International Studies Review
• Journal of Cold War History
• Journal of Conflict Resolution
• Journal of Politics
• Millennium
• Security Studies
• Survival
• The National Interest
• World Politics

Useful Websites

• Http://meria.biu.ac.il/research-g/us-policy.html [Internet Resources on American Foreign Policy]
• www.gwu.edu/ [see link on ‘national security archive’]
• www.opendemocracy.net
• www.zmag.org
• www.politics1.com
• www.americanpolitics.com
• www.americanempireproject.com
• www.newamericancentury.org
• www.datagold.com/empire-ip
• www.wilsoncenter.org
• www.bbc.co.uk
• www.brookings.edu

Lectures and Tutorials begin on Thursdays, 30 July

Lectures: Thursday 1pm - 3pm W5C 211

Tutorials: Thursday 3pm - 4pm W5C211

               Thursday 6pm-7pm W5A 202

Lecture and Seminar Program Summary

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

Week One: Introduction: The Nature and Forms of US Power

In the aftermath of 9/11, U.S. foreign policy took a decidedly more muscular turn. The destruction of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was followed little more than a year later by the invasion of Iraq and much saber rattling with respect to Iran, Syria and North Korea. President Bush’s state of the union address in 2002 identified an ‘axis of evil’, and proclaimed that those who did not join his global war on terror were automatically in the camp of the enemy. Subsequently, the U.N. was vilified, international law was flouted, and the U.S. reserved for itself the right of unilateral, pre-emptive attack on those whom it defined as enemies. With Obama’s election victory in 2008, and with the resulting change in the tone of US foreign policy making, many detected a qualitative shift in US foreign policy. Both of these developments have given rise to much debate about the nature and forms of contemporary U.S. power, the degree of continuity that it shares with previous expressions of U.S. power in the ‘American Century,’ and whether or not the U.S. today constitutes an Empire. We begin to discuss these issues in this introductory lecture and seminar, paying particular attention to the notions of American exceptionalism and manifest destiny and the distinctions between isolationism/internationalism and unilateralism/multilateralism.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter One.

RECOMMENDED READING

Western, J. (2006) ‘American Security, the Use of Force, and the Limits of the Bush Doctrine’ in Forsythe, D. P., McMahon, P. C. & Wedeman, A. (eds.) American Foreign Policy in a Globalized World. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. Pp. 105-122.

Hogan, M. (1999) ‘Partisan Politics and Foreign Policy in the American Century’ in Hogan, M. J. (ed.) The Ambiguous Legacy: U.S. Foreign Relations in the “American Century”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 356-377.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• What are the distinctions being drawn between ‘multilateralism’ and ‘unilateralism’, and ‘internationalism’ and ‘isolationism’?
• What is meant by the terms ‘manifest destiny’, ‘American exceptionalism’ and ‘American exemptionalism’, and in what ways do they manifest themselves in contemporary U.S. foreign policy?
• What was the significance of 9/11 for U.S. foreign policy?
• What are the key elements of the Bush Doctrine?
• To what extent does Obama’s foreign policy represent a rupture with that of George W. Bush’s?
• Does it make sense to speak about the USA as an Empire, or to describe its actions as imperial?

Week Two: The Making of U.S. Foreign Policy

When referring to ‘U.S. policy’, ‘U.S. interests’ or ‘U.S. action’, we conceal differences and conflict within the subject – the ‘U.S.’ – frequently assuming a unity of form and purpose that seldom exists. This is no less true in U.S. foreign policy than in other areas of U.S. politics, which are fragmented by a constitutional order that embeds a separation of powers (between Congress, the Executive, the Judiciary, and between state and federal governments). Hence, competing sources of authority and power often pursue different foreign policy ends and means, and vie with one another for control of the foreign policy agenda. We here explore the competition between the key players in U.S. foreign policy – the State Department, the National Security Council, The Department of Defense and, of course, the President and Congress – and the domestic constituencies that they serve.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter Two.

RECOMMENDED READING

Clifford, J. G. (2004) ‘Bureaucratic Politics’ in Hogan. M. J. & Paterson, T. G. (eds.) Explaining the History of American Foreign Relations (2^nd edn.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 91-102.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• In what ways does the idea and reality of a ‘separation of powers’ reveal itself in U.S. foreign policy making?
• Who are the key actors, and what are the main institutions of state, in the determination of U.S. foreign policy, and what are their formal roles?
• What are some examples where the State Department, the Pentagon, and the National Security Council have differed sharply over U.S. foreign policy?
• What are the potential tensions that exist between the President and Congress when it comes to foreign policy decisions, and what are some concrete examples of these tensions expressing themselves?
• How does the U.S.’s federal political structure impinge upon foreign policy?

PART TWO: HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

Week Three: Rise to world Power, 1776-1945

The United States was forged in revolutionary war with its hitherto colonial master, Britain. The resolution of the war in the rebels’ favour, and the subsequent development of the U.S. Constitution, very much shaped the new Republic’s position in and orientation to the world. President Washington’s strictures against getting involved in foreign entanglements, and Thomas Jefferson’s celebration of the ‘Empire of Liberty,’ were two key ideas that infused early U.S. foreign policy thinking. But through the Nineteenth and early decades of the Twentieth Centuries, these ideas began to change and take on a different meaning and significance. In this lecture, we explore some of the key episodes in this transformation, which saw the United States emerge from a marginal power at the end of the eighteenth century, to a world power at the end of the nineteenth century, to the world power in 1945. Amongst other things we consider the Monroe Doctrine, the Continental expansion of the U.S., the impact of Civil War, the Spanish-American War, Wilsonianism and the role of the U.S. in the years leading up to and during the Second World War.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter Four.

RECOMMENDED READING

Perkins, B. (1993) The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations, Volume 1: The Creation of a Republican Empire, 1776-1865. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 147-160.

LaFeber, W. (1994) The American Age: U.S. Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad, 1750 to the Present. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Pp. 193-231.

Iriye, A. (1993) The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations, Volume III: The Globalizing of AMERICA, 1913-1945. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 58-72.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• What did Jefferson mean by the ‘Empire of Liberty’?
• What were the motivations behind the Monroe Doctrine, and what were the principal features of that doctrine?
• It is often said that the U.S.’s swift victory in the Spanish-American War in 1898 announced the arrival of the U.S. as a world power. Why?
• Are the historical analogies often drawn between President Wilson ‘making the world safe for democracy,’ and President Bush’s more recent activity, valid?
• What role did economic protectionism play in contributing to the Pacific War?

Week Four: Cold War 1, 1945-1968

Many commentators view the dropping of a nuclear weapon on Hiroshima in August 1945 as the first act in the Cold War, in so far as it demonstrated to the Soviets the U.S.’s determination to use any means necessary to secure foreign policy and military objectives. It was not until 1947, however, that the global fault line of the Cold War was definitively established. This was the year that President Truman’s ‘doctrine of containment’ (of communism in general and the USSR in particular) was first articulated, and a number of regimes were established in Eastern-Central Europe that were dominated by, and bore a pattern of family resemblance with, the Soviet Union. We here consider the main themes in U.S. foreign policy thinking during the Cold War, the U.S.’s vision of a post-war capitalist order organized under its own tutelage, and the episode that brought the world to the brink of nuclear catastrophe – the Cuban missile crisis. We finish by briefly considering the causes of the U.S.’s growing involvement in Vietnam.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter Five

RECOMMENDED READING

Zelizer, J. E. (2010) Arsenal of Democracy: The Politics of National Security – From World War II to the War on Terror (New York Basic Books). Chapter Four

Cohen, W. I. (1993) ‘Origins of the Cold War’ in Cohen, W. I. (ed.) The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations, Volume IV: America in the Age of Soviet Power, 1945-1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 21-57.

Painter, D. S. (1999) ‘Competition and Coexistence, 1950-62’ in Painter, D. S. The Cold War: An International History. London: Routledge. Pp. 31-55.

LaFeber, W. (1994) ‘JFK and LBJ: from the New Frontier through the Great Society to Vietnam (1961 – 1969)’ in La Feber, W. The American Age: US Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad 1750 to the Present. (2^nd edn.). New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Pp. 580-632.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• What were President Truman’s stated reasons for deploying nuclear weapons against Japan, and in your opinion were these reasons sufficient justification?
• Who was George Kennan, and what was his significance for the origins of the Cold War?
• What were the key elements of Truman’s doctrine of containment, and what were the arguments for and against it during its early phases?
• What does the Cuban missile crisis reveal about the Cold War more generally, and was President Kennedy justified in bringing the world to the point of nuclear war by issuing what was, in effect, an ultimatum to the Soviets?
• What was the ‘domino theory’ and was it a sound rationale for U.S. involvement in Vietnam?
• What was the rationale for, and the content of, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in 1964?

Week Five: Cold War 2, 1969-1989

President Nixon came to power in 1969 promising to end the Vietnam War. While some troops would be drawn down in the coming years, the war in many ways actually intensified. At the same time, Nixon and his National Security Advisor (later to be Secretary of State) Henry Kissinger pursued a strategy of ‘Détente’ with the U.S.’s Soviet and Chinese rivals. This strategy would eventually unravel after the Watergate imbroglio, and then be definitively displaced by the intensification of Cold War rivalry under President Reagan in the 1980s. In the meantime, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iranian revolution transformed the context within which U.S. foreign policy-makers worked. We explore these developments, and end by considering the causes and historical significance of the end of the Cold War.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter Six.

RECOMMENDED READINGS

LaFeber, W. (2002) ‘A New Containment: The Rise and Fall of Détente’ (1966-1976)’ in LaFeber, W. America, Russia and the Cold War, 1945-2000 (9^th edn.). Boston: McGraw Hill. Pp. 266-297.

Garthoff, R. L. (1994) ‘The Reagan Administration’s Challenge, 1981-82’ in Garthoff, R. L. The Great Transition: American-Soviet Relations and the End of the Cold War. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institute. Pp. 7-53

Garthoff, R. L. (1994) ‘Competition in the Third World’ in Garthoff, R. L. The Great Transition: American-Soviet Relations and the End of the Cold War. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institute. Pp. 678-748.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• Why did Nixon and Kissinger advocate their policy of détente, and what were the policy’s successes and failures?
• What political lessons can be drawn from the U.S.’s eventual defeat in Vietnam, and do these lessons have any bearing on the Iraq and Afghanistan situation today?
• What was the essence of the Republican critique of Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy, and was it warranted?
• In what ways did President Reagan’s foreign policy embody the emergence of a Second Cold War?
• What was the political significance of the distinction that Reagan made – following Jean Kirkpatrick – between authoritarian and tyrannical regimes?
• What was the main thrust of President Reagan’s approach to the Third World, and what were some examples of this approach in action
• What credit can President Reagan’s foreign policy take for the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War?

Week Six: US Foreign Policy in a Post-Cold War World: 1989-2014

In the triumphant aftermath of Communism’s collapse, the first Gulf War was the occasion for the older Bush to proclaim a ‘New World Order.’ This proclamation was quickly shown to be hollow, as a variety of new security challenges confronted U.S. foreign policy officials disoriented by the end of the Cold War. In particular, ethno-nationalist conflicts exploded in Yugoslavia, Africa, and in some of the states of the former Soviet Union. This week we identify they key Post-Cold-War challenges for U.S. foreign policy makers, and consider how President Clinton’s foreign policy team sought to deal with them. Amongst other things, we explore the significance of the end of the Cold War for international relations, the impact of accelerated globalization on U.S. foreign policy, ‘assertive multilateralism’ and other core elements of the so-called Clinton doctrine. We also consider the U.S.’s increasing willingness to use military means to address foreign policy issues.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter Seven.

RECOMMENDED READING

Gardner, L. G. (2008) The Long Road to Baghdad: The History of U.S. Foreign Policy from the 1970s to the Present. New York: The New Press. Pp. 62-90.

Bacevich, A. (2002) American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Pp. 55-78.

Melanson, R. A. (2005) ‘The Clinton Administration’ in Melanson, R. A. American Foreign Policy Since the Vietnam War: The Search for Consensus from Richard Nixon to George W. Bush. New York, London: M. E. Sharpe. Pp. 239-287.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• Is it true that the end of the Cold War disoriented U.S. foreign policy makers and, if so, in what ways did the disorientation manifest itself?
• In what ways did the first Gulf War, and President George H. W. Bush’s approach to that war, differ from the second Gulf War and the approach of President George W. Bush?
• What was the vision that President George H. W. Bush had of a ‘New World Order,’ and in what ways did reality differ from this vision?
• What is meant by ‘assertive multilateralism’ and ‘humanitarian interventionism,’ and to what extent can President Clinton’s foreign policy be said to embody these notions?
• Is it fair to characterize President Clinton’s and Obama’s foreign policies as multilateralist and George W. Bush’s as unilateralist?

PART THREE: Choices and Challenges for US Foreign Policy Makers Today

Week Seven: Case Study 1: The U.S. and the Asia Pacific

The Asia-Pacific region is rapidly emerging as the most dynamic region of the global capitalist economy, and therefore is a central concern for U.S. foreign policy. This is especially the case for U.S. relations with China. From the Nineteenth Century, China, and the fabled Chinese market, has exercised the minds of U.S. diplomats, businessmen, missionaries and foreign affairs experts. With the liberalization of the Chinese economy in the 1980s, and with the subsequent explosive growth of Chinese manufacturing and resource consumption, it has become even more important in the calculations of U.S. officials. But in addition to the tremendous opportunities that it promises for trade, it is also viewed as the only possible challenger to the U.S.’s ‘permanent pre-eminence’ on the global stage. In this first case study, we explore the economic, political and purported military threat that China’s growth portends, and try to identify what this means for U.S. foreign policy and for international relations more generally.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter Ten.

RECOMMENDED READING

Gurtov, M. (2006) ‘The Bush Doctrine in Asia’ in Forsythe, D. P., McMahon, P. C. & Wedeman, A. (eds.) American Foreign Policy in a Globalized World. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. Pp. 287-312.

Garrison, J. A. (2005) ‘From Strategic Competitor to Uneasy Ally: G. W. Bush and the Fragile U.S.-China Relationship’ in Garrison, J. A. Making China Policy: From Nixon to G. W. Bush. Boulder: Lynne Rienner. Pp. 165-186.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• Historically, what have been the main considerations shaping U.S. foreign policy-maker’s views of China?
• What are the main considerations shaping U.S. foreign policy towards China today?
• From the U.S. government’s point of view, should China be viewed as a strategic competitor or a potential ally, and why?
• Does China represent any sort of threat to the United States – militarily, economically, or strategically?
• In the longer term, is friction, and even conflict, inevitable between China and the United States as some proclaim?

Week Eight: Case Study 2: The U.S. and the Middle East

For many decades, the Middle East has been a central foreign policy focus for U.S. leaders. This has become even more so since the end of the Cold War. The principal reason for this is clear: at the center of global energy production, the region has profound geo-strategic significance, which every U.S. leader since Truman has recognized. The first and second Gulf Wars, the U.S.’s unwavering support for Israel, and its more general orientation to the region, all must be understood in light of this centrality of Middle East energy production to the global economy. After providing a general introduction to the history of U.S. involvement in the region, we focus more specifically on U.S support for Israel, and the causes of the invasion of Iraq.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy: The Dynamics of Choice in the 21^st Century (5^th edn.) (New York: Norton and Norton). Chapter Eleven

READING

Hudson, M. C. (2005) ‘The United States in the Middle East’ in Fawcett, L. (ed.) International Relations of the Middle East. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 283-306.

Mearsheimer, J. J. & Walt, S. M. (2006) ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Working Paper No. RWP06-011. http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011

Dershowitz, A. (2006) ‘Debunking the Newest – and Oldest – Jewish Conspiracy: A Reply to the Mearsheimer-Walt “Working Paper.”’

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/research/working_papers/dershowitzreply.pdf

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• Historically, what have been the main drivers of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East?
• Is it true, as many on the political left argue, that oil is the principal reason for the U.S.’s projection of power in the Middle East?
• It is universally recognized that the U.S is a strong supporter of Israel. Why is this, what forms does it take, and why has such support strengthened since the Israeli occupation of the West Bank in 1967?
• What position did the U.S. play in the ‘Peace Process’ from 1992, and what caused that process to implode?
• Why has the U.S. refused to recognize the democratically elected leadership of the Palestinians, Hamas, and is this refusal warranted?
• What are the implications of unconditional U.S. support for Israel for broader international relations in the Middle East?

Week Nine: US foreign Policy, Human Rights and Humanitarian Intervention

In the decade following the end of the Cold War, the United States was faced with a number of foreign policy challenges that arose as a consequence of ethnic cleansing and genocide in regions where US interests were not directly at stake. In Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia and Darfur, civil wars of unimaginable brutality erupted that demanded international attention. As the World’s sole remaining superpower, the US was frequently called upon to intervene into nominally sovereign states in the name of protecting human rights and advancing human freedom. Such “humanitarian intervention” was often applied inconsistently and was seemingly governed by shifting principles and imperatives. In this lecture we examine the grounds on which humanitarian intervention has been justified by the United States, and discuss the US’s relationship with the United Nations.

REQUIRED READING

James Peck (2010) Ideal Illusions: How the U.S. Government Co-opted Human Rights (New York: Metropolitan Books). Chapter Five.

RECOMMENDED READING

Kurth, J. (2001) ‘First War of the Global Era: Kosovo and U.S. Grand Strategy’ in Bacevich, A. & Cohen, E. A. (eds.) War Over Kosovo. New York: Columbia University Press. Pp. 63-96.

Power, S. (2003) “A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide” (London: Flamingo). Chapter Ten.

Prados, J. (2006) Safe For Democracy: The Secret Wars of the CIA (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee). Chapters 24 and 25.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• Is it legitimate for the United States to intervene into other countries, and thus violate their sovereignty, in circumstances where human rights are being violated, and/or genocide is being perpetrated?
• Do human rights trump state sovereignty, and if so why?
• Some commentators have argued that that the preservation of human rights has been but a convenient pretext for US intervention. Do you agree?
• What are the relevant differences, if any, that led the US to intervene into the Bosnia and Kosovo conflicts, but not Rwanda and Darfur?
• Did humanitarian intervention cease to motivate US foreign policy under the administration of G. W. Bush?
• Has humanitarian intervention made, or is it likely to make, a comeback under the Presidency of Barack Obama?

Week Ten: The Globalization Agenda

From the late 1980s, “globalization” emerged as a buzzword that purported to describe and explain many key economic, political and ideological developments in the world. In addition to being a descriptive and explanatory term, however, it has also found favour as a normative term. Some analysts suggest that it is more of a political project than a disembodied economic process, and that this project has its roots in US capitalist development. We explore this possibility, in addition to discussing the spread and global dominance of U.S. multinational corporations. We examine the domestic economic determinants of U.S. foreign policy, and the role of economic motives in shaping the U.S.’s strategic thinking and action on the global stage. In the seminar, we will discuss the global financial crisis and the implications that it has for U.S. foreign policy under President Barack Obama.

REQUIRED READING

Bruce W. Jentleson (2014) American Foreign Policy5^th edn. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company) Chapter Eight

RECOMMENDED READINGS

McMahon, P. C. & Wedeman, A. (2006) ‘Sustaining American Power in a Globalized World’ in Forsythe, D. P., McMahon, P. C. & Wedeman, A. (eds.) American Foreign Policy in a Globalized World (New York: Routledge).

Nederveen Pieterse, J. (2004) Globalization or Empire? (New York: Routledge) Chapter One.

SEMINAR QUESTIONS

• What is meant by globalization, and by the globalization project?
• Is globalization simply synonymous with Americanization?
• What is the link, if any, between US multinational corporations and US foreign policy
• Is global free trade and open markets a force for a more or less conflicted world
• In what ways, if any, has the global financial crisis impacted on US foreign and national security policy?

Week Twelve: Democracy and US Foreign Policy

As we briefly sketched in the very first lecture of the course, U.S. actions under President Bush generated a major debate about the nature and consequences of U.S. power. To simplify greatly, this can be described as a debate between those who view the U.S. as exercising a largely benign but necessary hegemony for the good of the planet, its peoples and democracy, and those who view the U.S. as a new empire bent on global domination. We once again return to this debate, but deploy the knowledge accumulated over the past eleven sessions to evaluate the relative merits of the contending views. In particular, we will examine the significance of Barack Obama’s ascent to power for U.S. foreign policy and international relations.

RECOMMENDED READING

Petras, J. & Veltmeyer, H. (2005) ‘Imperialism as War: The Neo-cons Take Action’ in Petras, J. & Veltmeyer, H. Empire with Imperialism: The Globalizing Dynamics of Neo-liberal Capitalism. London: Zed Books. Pp. 186-204.

Ferguson, N. (2004) ‘A World Without Power’, Foreign Policy, July/August, 2004, Issue 143, Pp. 32-39.

Bacevich, A. (2008) The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. New York; Metropolitan Books. Pp. 170-182.

SEMINAR READINGS

• What is meant by ‘empire’ and ‘imperialism’, and are these concepts appropriate for understanding the actions of the U.S. today and/or in the past?
• Is Niall Ferguson correct to assume that a world without a hegemonic power would be more anarchic, destructive and crisis-prone than a world with such a hegemonic power?
• What is meant by “democracy promotion” and does the US promote or impede democracy?
• In what ways is the U.S. similar to empires of the past, and in what ways in it different?
• Do the empires of the past, and particularly the factors that contributed to their decline, hold any lessons for the contemporary U.S.?
• When President George W. Bush and his political fellow travelers left the White House, did this make much difference to the foreign policy stance of the U.S.?
• In what ways has US foreign policy reformed under President Obama and in what ways has it remained the same?

WEEK THIRTEEN – IN CLASS TEST, usual time usual place!