Sylabus
Course structure and requirements:
There will be 13 sessions during the semester. These sessions will take a form of a seminar discussions based on a set of weekly readings. It is therefore absolutely necessary that students come to the class having read the assigned texts. The reading load is relatively heavy but typically does not exceed 60 pages per week. Attendance of each session is mandatory and class participation will form a substantial part of the overall grade. Students can miss one class during the semester but have to make up for it by writing a short summary of the text(s) assigned for the session they missed. Such a make-up paper (500 words in length) is due one week after the class you missed.
Each student will be required to give one class presentation on an assigned reading. A presentation will ideally consist of a very short summary of the text (max. 5 minutes; remember, others have read the text as well and do not want to be punished by having it retold), critical evaluation of the text and questions that you would like to discuss with regard to the reading in particular or the issue in general (5-7 minutes). All in all, a presentation should not last longer than 12 minutes. It is suggested that the presentation be accompanied by a handout that sums up the main points you will make.
Each student will write one term paper on the topic of his/her choice. The term paper has to identify a research question (theoretical or empirical) it will deal with, locate the question within a relevant body of literature, and make a clear argument. If the research question is empirical, the paper will also have to present theoretical and methodological backgrounds it will use, and support the argument with evidence. Topics should be relevant to the course and have to be discussed with/approved by the lecturer by week 8. Students should make a fairly intensive use of available sources. A first draft of the term paper is due on Monday of week 12, the final draft is due three weeks after that (an exact date will be set). The term paper shall be 3000-4000 words long.
All written assignments must be submitted by email at ruzicka@brandeis.edu
Grading:
The course is for a grade. Excellent will be given to those students who reach 92% or more. Very good to those with a result between 91%-84%. Good will be between 83%-76%. Results 75% and less will mean Fail for the entire course. See grade structure for the distribution of assignments' weight in the overall grade.
Grade structure:
Class participation - 30 %
Presentation - 25 %
Term paper - 45 %
Weekly topics and readings
Week 1: Introduction to the course. We will discuss the requirements, the readings, etc.
Week 2: Security
David Baldwin, "The Concept of Security," Review of International Studies, Vol. 23/No. 1, 1997, p. 5-26.
Week 3: National Security
Wolfers, Arnold J. Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Relations, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1962, Chapter 10 - "National Security as an Ambiguous Symbol," p. 147-165.
Week 4: The Security Dilemma
Herz, John H. International Politics in the Atomic Age, New York: Columbia University Press, 1959, Chapter 10 - "The Security Dilemma in the Atomic Age, p. 231-243.
Paul Roe, "Misperception and Ethnic Conflict: Transylvania's societal security dilemma," Review of International Studies, Vol. 28/No. 1, 2002, p. 57-74.
Week 5: Broadening the Concept
Richard H. Ulman, "Redefining Security," International Security, Vol. 8/No. 1, 1983, p. 129-153.
Keith Krause and Michael C. Williams, "Broadening the Agenda of Security Studies: Politics and Methods," Mershon International Studies Review, Vol. 40/No. 2, 1996, p. 229-254.
Week 6: Speech act; Signifier
Ole W?ver, "Securitization and Desecuritization" in Ronnie D. Lipschutz (ed.), On Security, New York: Columbia University Press, 1995, p. 46-86.
Jef Huysmans, "Security! What Do You Mean? From Concept to Signifier," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 4/No. 2, 1998, p. 226-255.
Week 7: Thinking Differently
Ole Waever, "Aberystwyth, Paris, Copenhage: New 'Schools' in Security Theory and their Origins between Core and Periphery," paper presented at the International Studies Association Annual Meeting in Montreal 2004, 26 pages.
Week 8: Security Bureaucracy
Barnet, Richard J. Roots of War: The Men and Institutions Behind U.S. Foreign Policy, Penguin Books, 1977, Chapter 4 - "The National Security Managers and the President," p. 76-94.
Didier Bigo, "When two become one: Internal and external securitisations in Europe," in Morten Kelstrup and Michael C. Williams (eds.), International Relations Theory and the Politics of European Integration: Power, Security and Community, London: Routledge: 2000, p. 171-204.
Week 9: Security Analysts
Jef Huysmans, "Defining Social Constructivism in Security Studies: The Normative Dilemma of Writing Security," Alternatives, Vol. 27/ Special Issue, 2002, p. 41-62.
Johan Eriksson, "Observers or Advocates? On the Political Role of Security Analysts" Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 34/No. 3, 1999, 311-330.
Week 10: Deterrence
Robert Jervis, "The Confrontation Between Iraq and the US: Implications for the Theory and Practice of Deterrence," European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 9/No. 2, 2003, p. 315-337.
Timothy W. Luke, "'What's Wrong with Deterrence?' A Semiotic Interpretation of National Security Policy," in James Der Derian and Michael J. Shapiro (eds.) International/Intertextual Relations, Lexington: Lexington Books, 1989, p. 207-229.
Week 11: Europe
Ole W?ver, "The EU as a security actor: Reflections from a pessimistic constructivist on post-sovereign security orders," in Morten Kelstrup and Michael C. Williams (eds.), International Relations Theory and the Politics of European Integration: Power, Security and Community, London: Routledge: 2000, p. 250-294.
Mark Webber, Stuart Croft, Jolyon Howorth, Terry Terriff and Elke Krahmann, "The Governance of European Security," Review of International Studies, Vol. 30/No. 1, 2004, p. 3-26.
Week 12: North America
Barry R. Posen, "Command of the Commons: The Military Foundation of U.S. Hegemony," International Security, Vol. 28/No. 1., 2003, s. 5-46.
The 9/11 Commission Report, Chapter 12 - "What to Do? A Global Strategy" p. 361-398.
Week 13: Conclusion
Didier Bigo, "Security and Immigration: Toward a Critique of the Governmentality of Unease." Alternatives, Vol. 27/Sepcial Edition, 2002, pp. 63-92.
Anotace
A quest for security is one of the most prevalent features in human lives. This is so on the levels of states, societies as well as individuals. Some have argued that the origins of a modern state are inextricably tied to the provision of security and we may observe today that states do devote substantial resources to this end, societies are frequently preoccupied with their own security, and individuals often base their actions on more or less rational decisions aimed at achieving security for themselves. Especially in recent years, (in)-security seems to lurk behind every corner. Yet, it would be a mistake to assume that the preoccupation with security has always been the same or even that security has always meant the same.
The course seeks to introduce students to various modes of thinking about security. It poses the following central question: "What is security in international relations?" In dealing with this question, we will pay attention especially to security as a concept. However, throughout the course we will also look into security problematic "out there" in "the real" international realm. The goal of the course is to provide students with conceptual and analytical categories when thinking about security so that they can think more precisely.