DELIVERY AND RESOURCES

UNIT REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS

• You should spend an average of at least 12 hours per week on this unit. This includes listening to pre-recorded lectures prior to seminar discussions and reading weekly required readings detailed in iLearn.
• Internal students are expected to attend all seminar sessions and external students are expected to contribute to on-line discussions.
• Students are required to submit all major assessment tasks in order to pass the unit.

REQUIRED READINGS

• The citations for all the required readings for this unit are available to enrolled students through the unit iLearn site, and at Macquarie University's Library EReserve site.  Electronic copies of required readings may be accessed at the EReserve site.

• The compulsory textbook is: Paul D. Williams, (ed.), Security Studies: An Introduction, (London: Routledge, 2013).

  Students can purchase either a physical or electronic copy online directly from Routledge (www.routledge.com) or from Amazon (www.amazon.com) or the Book Depository (www.bookdepository.com). Copies are also available from the Macquarie University Co-op bookshop. All materials are available through the Macquarie University library. The compulsory textbook is available in Reserve.

TECHNOLOGY USED AND REQUIRED

• Personal PC and internet access are essential for this unit. Basic computer skills and skills in word processing are also a requirement.
• This unit has an online presence. Login is via: https://ilearn.mq.edu.au/
• Students are required to have regular access to a computer and the internet. Mobile devices alone are not sufficient.
• For technical support go to: http://mq.edu.au/about_us/offices_and_units/informatics/help
• For student quick guides on the use of iLearn go to: http://mq.edu.au/iLearn/student_info/guides.htm

SUBMITTING ASSESSMENT TASKS

• All assessment tasks are to be submitted, marked and returned electronically.  This will only happen through the unit iLearn site. 
• Assessment tasks must be submitted either as a PDF or MS word document by the due date.
• Most assessment tasks will be subject to a 'TurnitIn' review as an automatic part of the submission process.
• The granting of extensions of up to one week are at the discretion of the unit convener.  Any requests for extensions must be made in writing before the due date for the submission of the assessment task.  Extensions beyond one week are subject to the university’s Disruptions Policy (http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/disruption_studies/policy.html#purpose).

LATE SUBMISSION OF ASSESSMENT TASKS

• If an assignment is submitted late, 5% of the available mark will be deducted for each day (including weekends) the paper is late.
• For example, if a paper is worth 20 marks, 1 mark will be deducted from the grade given for each day that it is late (i.e. a student given 15/20 who submitted 4 days late will lose 4 marks = 11/20).
• The same principle applies if an extension is granted and the assignment is submitted later than the amended date.

WORD LIMITS FOR ASSESSMENT TASKS

• Stated word limits do not include references, bibliography, or title page.
• Word limits can generally deviate by 10% either over or under the stated figure.
• If the number of words exceeds the limit by more than 10%, then penalties will apply. These penalties are 5% of he awarded mark for every 100 words over the word limit. If a paper is 300 words over, for instance, it will lose 3 x 5% = 15% of the total mark awarded for the assignment. This percentage is taken off the total mark, i.e. if a paper was graded at a credit (65%) and was 300 words over, it would be reduced by 15 marks to a pass (50%).
• The application of this penalty is at the discretion of the course convener.

REASSESSMENT OF ASSIGNMENTS DURING THE SEMESTER

• Macquarie University operates a Grade Appeal Policy in cases where students feel their work was graded inappropriately (http://mq.edu.au/policy/docs/gradeappeal/policy.html). This process involves all assignments submitted for that unit being reassessed. However, in exceptional cases students may request that a single piece of work is reassessed.

PICT310: Syllabus

This module will introduce the security-development nexus. Peace studies focus on the link between development and security, suggesting that one cannot exist without the other. How does this understanding of insecurity impact conflict analysis? We will outline the structure and material of this course, which addresses the debates concerning the link between development and security.

Seminar

Class discussion: What is the relationship between security and development? What is security and why is it a ‘contested concept’? Whose security are we referring to? What counts as a security issue and how can security be achieved? What is development? Are economic, governance, societal, human, and technological development of equal importance? Are these categories of development mutually reinforcing or contradictory?

Case Study: Somalia

Compulsory Reading

Lawler, Peter. Chapter 6: Peace Studies, in Security studies: an introduction (Second edition.), Williams, Paul D (ed.).  Routledge, 2013.

Menkhaus, Ken. "Vicious circles and the security development nexus in Somalia." Conflict, Security & Development 4, no. 2 (2004): 149-165.

Recommended Reading

Hettne, Björn. "Development and security: Origins and future." Security Dialogue 41, no. 1 (2010): 31-52.

Buzan, Barry. "Rethinking security after the Cold War." Cooperation and Conflict 32, no. 1 (1997): 5-28.

Amer, Ramses, Ashok Swain, and Joakim Öjendal, eds. The security-development nexus: Peace, conflict and development. Anthem Press, 2013.

Hurwitz, Agnès, and Gordon Peake. "Strengthening the security-development nexus: assessing international policy and practice since the 1990s." New York: International Peace Academy (2004).

This module will explore the relationship between economic development and conflict. As large parts of the world experience unprecedented economic growth, it is worth asking whether economic development can produce security and/or conflict. Economic development has been argued to create peace by fostering internal stability and interdependence with other states. According to modernisation theory it also promotes democracy. However, other theories posit that economic development contributes to conflict due to ‘greed and grievance’.

Seminar

Debate: Does economic development create stability and incentives for keeping the peace? Does poverty or relative poverty fuel terrorism?  What is the relationship between economic inequality and civil war? To what extent do civil wars start over grievances due to inequality or greed in terms of seeking economic opportunism?

Case Study: Fiji

Compulsory Reading

Collier, Paul, and Anke Hoeffler. "Greed and grievance in civil war." Oxford Economic Papers 56, no. 4 (2004): 563-595.

Sriskandarajah, Dhananjayan. "Inequality and conflict in Fiji: From purgatory to hell?." Asia Pacific Viewpoint 44, no. 3 (2003): 305-324.

Recommended Reading

Nafziger, E. Wayne, and Juha Auvinen. "Economic development, inequality, war, and state violence." World Development 30, no. 2 (2002): 153-163.

Gartzke, Erik, Quan Li, and Charles Boehmer. "Investing in the peace: Economic interdependence and international conflict." International Organization 55, no. 02 (2001): 391-438.

Barbieri, Katherine, and Gerald Schneider. "Globalization and peace: Assessing new directions in the study of trade and conflict." Journal of Peace Research 36, no. 4 (1999): 387-404.

In this module we will address the relationship between democracy and conflict. What is the relationship between democracy and conflict? Competing theories have been constructed on this topic: The dominant ‘democratic peace theory’, building on the Perpetual Peace by Emmanuel Kant, is considered axiomatic by many practitioners. This theory suggests that democracies do not go to war against each other, implying that democracy promotion should be considered a security initiative. Other scholars have focused on states transitioning to democracy as being especially vulnerable to war, and even genocide. Democratic states are argued to create ‘new wars’, and have a reduced capacity to win small wars. If Plato is correct, democracies will incrementally lose control over society as power becomes too dispersed, which will bring about a return to tyranny as the people will seek a strongman to reassert control and stability.

Seminar

Debate: What role does democracy have for security? Should states actively seek to promote democracy as an intrinsic component of security? Why would states transitioning to democracy be more vulnerable to war and ethnic cleansing? Is it reasonable to argue democracies create ‘new wars’?

Case Study: The Balkans

Compulsory Reading

Mansfield, Edward D., and Jack Snyder. "Democratization and the Danger of War." International Security 20, no. 1 (1995): 5-38.

Russett, Bruce, Christopher Layne, David E. Spiro, and Michael W. Doyle. "The democratic peace." International Security 19, no. 4 (1995): 164-184.

Recommended Reading

Mann, Michael. The dark side of democracy: explaining ethnic cleansing. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Doyle, Michael W. "Liberalism and world politics." American Political Science Review 80, no. 4 (1986): 1151-1169.

Mansfield, Edward D., and Jack Snyder. "Democratic transitions, institutional strength, and war." International Organization 56, no. 02 (2002): 297-337.

Rummel, Rudolph J., “Democracy, Power, Genocide and Mass Murder,” The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 39, No. 1, (1995): 3-26.

In this module we will discuss the development and proliferation of military technology. What determines whether the development of military power increases or decreases security? The development or proliferation of new military technology can be a source of both conflict and stability. Scholars ascribing to the ‘offence-defence’ theory suggest that weapons can be assessed as having offensive or defensive advantage, with the former increasing the likelihood of war and the latter decreasing the incentive to seek a military solution. Critics of this theory detest whether it is possible to distinguish weapons as having clearly an offensive or defensive purpose. We will also address other methods to mitigate the uncertainties that fuel the security dilemma by enhancing transparency and confidence-building measures.

Seminar

Debate: What determines whether the development of military power creates certainty or uncertainty? Why is conflict more likely if there is an offensive advantage? Is it possible to distinguish between offensive and defensive weapons? How can we mitigate uncertainties by communicating defensive intentions and capacity? Are nuclear weapons an offensive or defensive weapon, and would an Iranian nuclear weapon be the source of conflict or stability?

Case Study: Iran

Compulsory Reading

Van Evera, Stephen. "Offense, defense, and the causes of war." International Security 22, no. 4 (1998): 5-43.

Waltz, Kenneth N. "Why Iran should get the bomb." Foreign Affairs 91, no. 4 (2012): 2-5.

Recommended Reading

Levy, Jack S. "The offensive/defensive balance of military technology: A theoretical and historical analysis." International Studies Quarterly (1984): 219-238.

Jervis, Robert. "Cooperation under the security dilemma." World Politics 30, no. 02 (1978): 167-214.

Shiping, Tang. "Offence-defence Theory: Towards a Definitive Understanding." The Chinese Journal of International Politics (2010).

In this module we will discuss state-building as a security initiative. Does state-building create sustainable peace or legitimise new imperialism? Johan Galtung drew a conceptual distinction between positive and negative peace to distinguish ceasefires from sustainable peace. While negative peace implied the temporary cessation of violence, positive peace aims to go beyond ending violence and to resolve the underlying political problems. State-building has produced a new approach of developing security through the restoration of society, government and economy. However, competing ideas about state-building can impede the development of a cohesive strategy. Critics of state-building tend to argue that foreign powers rarely come without their interest and motives, a familiar dilemma as states will only provide the resources required for state-building when they have their own interests and objectives.

Seminar:

Debate: Why is sovereignty at the heart of the debates on nation-building? What are the best approaches to achieve sustainable peace in conflict zones? What are some of the difficulties in achieving economic, political and social development and stability in the aftermath of war and conflict? Does the need for lasting peace outweigh the requirement for justice post-conflict? Should transitional justice be retributive, restorative, or rehabilitative? Do the concepts of negative peace and positive peace create competing objectives or competition for resources?

Case Study: Afghanistan and Iraq

Compulsory Reading

Krasner, Stephen D., and Thomas Risse. "External actors, state‐building, and service provision in areas of limited statehood: Introduction." Governance 27, no. 4 (2014): 545-567.

Fukuyama, Francis. "The imperative of state-building." Journal of Democracy 15, no. 2 (2004): 17-31.

Recommended Reading

Keane, Conor, and Glenn Diesen. "Divided We Stand: The US Foreign Policy Bureaucracy and Nation-Building in Afghanistan." International Peacekeeping 22, no. 3 (2015): 205-229.

Rubin, Barnett R. "Peace Building and State-Building in Afghanistan: constructing sovereignty for whose security?." Third World Quarterly 27, no. 1 (2006): 175-185.

Egnell, Robert. "The organised hypocrisy of international state-building." Conflict, Security & Development 10, no. 4 (2010): 465-491.

This module will be devoted to exploring the weak state insecurity dilemma. Does the strength or weakness of states create a major threat to the contemporary security environment? While security threats have traditionally been measured by the strength of adversaries, more focus is being devoted to the insecurity deriving from the weakness of other states.

Seminar

Debate: Is it the strength or weakness of states that causes the greatest security threat? How does the weak state insecurity dilemma affect decision-makers? Should they seek a balance between keeping their adversaries weak and strong?

Case Study: Syria and North Korea

Compulsory Reading

Patrick, Stewart. "Weak states and global threats: Fact or fiction?." Washington Quarterly 29, no. 2 (2006): 27-53.

Englebert, Pierre, and Denis M. Tull. "Postconflict reconstruction in Africa: Flawed ideas about failed states." International Security 32, no. 4 (2008): 106-139.

Recommended Reading

Piazza, James A. "Incubators of terror: do failed and failing states promote transnational terrorism?." International Studies Quarterly 52, no. 3 (2008): 469-488.

Fattah, Khaled. "Yemen's Insecurity Dilemma." The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs 33, no. 2 (2014).

Kirui, Peter, and John Mwaruvie. "The dilemma of hosting refugees: A focus on the insecurity in north-eastern Kenya." International Journal of Business and Social Science 3, no. 8 (2012).

Patrick, Stewart. "Weak States and Global Threats: Assessing Evidence of Spillovers." Center for Global Development Working Paper 73 (2006).

In this module we will address the decline of the state. There are scholarly disagreements whether the state is in decline and if it would be a source of security or insecurity. Globalisation presents several challenges as multinational corporations, non-governmental organisations and international institutions challenge the sovereignty of the state. Does the diminished primacy of the state and diffusion of power give way to peace and the rise of the global citizen, or does it inhibit the capacity of the state to represent its citizens fuel the return of nationalism?

Seminar

Debate: Is the state in decline? Does the diffusion of power away from the state produce security or insecurity? Is the security and prosperity of states enhanced or undermined by regional integration? Does the weakened primacy of the state reduce or fuel nationalism?

Case Study: The UK and the European Union

Compulsory Reading

Kaldor, Mary. "Nationalism and globalisation." Nations and Nationalism 10, no. 1‐2 (2004): 161-177.

Huntington, Samuel P. "Dead souls: The denationalization of the American elite." The National Interest (2004): 5-18.

Recommended Reading

Mosley, Layna. "Globalisation and the state: Still room to move?." New Political Economy 10, no. 3 (2005): 355-362.

Mann, Michael. "Has globalization ended the rise and rise of the nation-state?." Review of International Political Economy 4, no. 3 (1997): 472-496.

Rudra, Nita. "Globalization and the decline of the welfare state in less-developed countries." International Organization 56, no. 02 (2002): 411-445.

In this module we will discuss the concept of human security. Traditionally, security studies have considered the state as the referent object. Shifting the focus to the individual as the referent object has changed the way scholars and practitioners think about security. Proponents of viewing the individual as the referent object suggest that it also strengthens state security, while critics often propose a zero-sum relationship exists. We will address the concept of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) as a key concept and focal point of the human security debate.

Seminar

Debate: Should the individual or the state be the referent object in international security? Are there universal human rights and values, or should they be limited by tradition and culture? Is human security and state security complementary or mutually exclusive? Should the international community have a Responsibility to Protect (R2P)?

Case Study: Syria

Compulsory Reading

Hampson, Fen Osler, “Human Security”, in Security studies: an introduction (Second edition.), Williams, Paul D (ed.).  Routledge, 2013, 279-294.

Paris, Roland. "Human Security: Paradigm shift or hot air?." International Security 26, no. 2 (2001): 87-102.

Recommended Reading

Chandler, David. "Human security: The dog that didn’t bark." Security Dialogue 39, no. 4 (2008): 427-438.

Bellamy, Alex J, The Responsibility to Protect, in Security studies: an introduction (Second edition.), Williams, Paul D (ed.).  Routledge, 2013, 486-502.

Floyd, Rita. "Human Security and the Copenhagen School’s Securitization Approach." Human Security Journal 5, no. 37 (2007): 38-49.

Liotta, Peter H. "Through the looking glass: Creeping vulnerabilities and the reordering of security." Security Dialogue 36, no. 1 (2005): 49-70.

This module will explore energy security and how we can conceptualise the energy security dilemma. As new powers rise and their appetite for energy increases, we can expect the competition for energy resources and transportation infrastructure to intensify. We will focus on China as the largest consumer of energy and Russia’s dominant position as an energy supplier, and assess how this impacts the global security environment.

Seminar

Debate: What is ‘energy security’ and the energy security dilemma? How might the problem of energy security impact upon wider aspects of international security? What is meant by the “peak oil moment”, and how might this lead to increased energy insecurity? Is there competition between energy producers, energy consumers and energy transportation corridors? Why can energy producers and consumers be in competition? How could energy security lead to military conflict?

Case Study: China and Russia

Compulsory Reading

Klare, Michael T. “Energy Security”, in Security studies: an introduction (Second edition.), Williams, Paul D (ed.).  Routledge, 2013, 535-552.

Wang, Lirong. "Sea Lanes and Chinese National Energy Security." Journal of Coastal Research 73, no.1 (2015): 572-576.

Recommended Reading

Yergin, Daniel. "Ensuring energy security." Foreign Affairs 85, no. 2 (2006).

Leung, Guy CK. "China's energy security: Perception and reality." Energy Policy 39, no. 3 (2011): 1330-1337.

Monaghan, Andrew. "Russia-EU Relations: an emerging energy security dilemma." Pro et Contra 10, no. 2-3 (2006).

Vivoda, Vlado. "Evaluating energy security in the Asia-Pacific region: A novel methodological approach." Energy Policy 38, no. 9 (2010): 5258-5263.

Ross, Michael L. "Does oil hinder democracy?." World Politics 53, no. 03 (2001): 325-361.

In this module we will explore societal security. Cultural identity, religion and language have become a key focus of security studies as the state is not the only source of collective identity. A strong unifying national identity is recognised to be pivotal for the stability and strength of states, which are threatened by possible ethnic or religious secessionist movements, insurgencies or terrorism. These cultural, ethnic or religious grouping can feel that their ‘society’, is threatened by the state.

Seminar

Debate: What is societal security? Is there a societal security dilemma? Are states required to have a clear ethno-cultural core or is there greater strength with a civic identity and diversity? Why are ethno-federal states vulnerable?

Case Study: Tibet

Compulsory Reading

Topgyal, Tsering. "Identity Insecurity and the Tibetan Resistance Against China." Pacific Affairs 86, no. 3 (2013): 515-538.

Bilgin, Pinar. "Individual and societal dimensions of security." International Studies Review 5, no. 2 (2003): 203-222.

Recommended Reading

Roe, Paul. "Securitization and minority rights: Conditions of desecuritization." Security Dialogue 35, no. 3 (2004): 279-294.

Swimelar, Safia. "Education in post-war Bosnia: The nexus of societal security, identity and nationalism." Ethnopolitics 12, no. 2 (2013): 161-182.

Herd, Graeme P., and Joan Löfgren. "Societal Security', the Baltic States and EU Integration." Cooperation and Conflict 36, no. 3 (2001): 273-296.

Olesker, Ronnie.,“Israel's Societal Security Dilemma and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process”, Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 17, 4 (2011): 382-401.

In this module we will address the issue of environmental security. Environmental degradation and global warming is frequently cited as the most probable and most severe threat to human survival. It is also recognised to not have the traditional zero-sum security dilemma dynamic. We will discuss the difficulties to respond to security risks and threats emanating from environmental security.

Seminar

Debate: What is environmental security? Is it possible to develop the environment as the referent object, or will environmental security remain a branch of human security? Without a common global approach to protecting the environment, do states face a dilemma between environmental security and state security?

Case Study: Global warming and the carbon trading scheme

Compulsory Reading

Dalby, Simon, Climate Change and Environmental Security, in Security studies: an introduction (Second edition.), Williams, Paul D (ed.).  Routledge, 2013, pp: 311-323.

Podesta, John, and Peter Ogden. "The security implications of climate change," Washington Quarterly 31, no. 1 (2008): 115-138.

Recommended Reading

Brown, Oli, Anne Hammill, and Robert McLeman. "Climate change as the ‘new’security threat: implications for Africa." International Affairs 83, no. 6 (2007): 1141-1154.

Baechler, Günther. "Why environmental transformation causes violence: A synthesis." Environmental change and security project report 4, no. 1 (1998): 24-44.

Salehyan, Idean. "From climate change to conflict? No consensus yet." Journal of Peace Research 45, no. 3 (2008): 315-326.

 In this module we will explore the rise of international regimes and the impact on security. ‘Institutional peace’ suggests that regions can harmonise interests and resolve disputes through institutions. Imitating the Western model, other parts of the world are also developing regional institutions to harmonise interests and seek collective influence in the world. Regional and global institutions can develop predictability and manage international security issues. Others view institutions as alliances and argue that regional institutions will merely result in fewer, more powerful and less compatible entities of power confronting each other.

Seminar

Debate: How does the United Nations try to maintain international security? Has it been successful? Do regional institutions manage security or elevate competition and conflict to a higher level? What are the key contributions and main shortcomings of regional institutions?

Case Study: ASEAN

Compulsory Reading

Fawcett, Louise, Regional Institutions, in Security studies: an introduction (Second edition.), Williams, Paul D (ed.).  Routledge, 2013, pp: 355-373.

Jones, Catherine. "Great powers, ASEAN, and security: reason for optimism?." The Pacific Review 28, no. 2 (2015): 259-280.

Recommended Reading

Barnett, Michael, and Martha Finnemore. Rules for the world: International organizations in global politics. Cornell University Press, 2004.

Pevehouse, Jon, and Bruce Russett. "Democratic international governmental organizations promote peace." International Organization 60, no. 04 (2006): 969-1000.

Keohane, Robert O., and Lisa L. Martin. "The promise of institutionalist theory." International security 20, no. 1 (1995): 39-51.

Walt, Stephen M. "Alliance formation and the balance of world power." International security 9, no. 4 (1985): 3-43.

Hasenclever, Andreas, and Brigitte Weiffen. "International institutions are the key: a new perspective on the democratic peace." Review of International Studies 32, no. 4 (2006): 563-585.

Where is the world moving and what will be the insecurities of tomorrow? Will the main development occur in the area of democratisation, economy or military technology? Will development imply more global governance and limited sovereignty, and how will this impact security? Will human security, energy security, societal security and environmental security be improved or deteriorate? What evidence are we selecting and applying, and what are the theoretical assumptions for our assessment?

Compulsory Reading

Stuart Croft, “What Future for Security Studies?” in Paul D. Williams, (ed.), Security Studies: An Introduction, (London: Routledge, 2013), 568-580.

Recommended Reading

Browning, Christopher S., and Matt McDonald. "The future of critical security studies: Ethics and the politics of security." European Journal of International Relations 19, no. 2 (2013): 235-255.

Santini, Ruth Hanau, Sonia Lucarelli, and Marco Pinfari. "Interregionalism: A Security Studies Perspective." In Intersecting Interregionalism, pp. 71-88. Springer Netherlands, 2014.

Ditrych, Ondrej. "Security community: A future for a troubled concept?." International Relations 28, no. 3 (2014): 350-366.

Blagden, David. "Global multipolarity, European security and implications for UK grand strategy: back to the future, once again." International Affairs 91, no. 2 (2015): 333-350.

Rasmussen, Mikkel V., The Risk Society at War: Terror, Technology and Strategy in the Twenty-First Century, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).

Kaldor, Mary. New wars and old wars: Organized violence in a global era, Cambridge, Stanford University Press, (2001).

Singer, P. W., Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2003).