Veidlapa Nr. M-3 (8)
Study Course Description
International Security
Course Code
JF_429
Branch of Science
Law
ECTS
3.00
Target Audience
Civil and Military Defense; Juridical Science; Political Science
LQF
Level 7
Study Type And Form
Full-Time; Part-Time
Study Course Implementer
Course Supervisor
Jānis Teivāns-Treinovskis
Structure Unit Manager
Ieva Puzo
Structural Unit
Faculty of Social Sciences
Contacts
Dzirciema street 16, Rīga, szf@rsu.lv
About Study Course
Objective
The main goal of this course is to give students an understanding of the most important features and dynamics in international politics and the central problems of international security in the 21st century. During this course, we will address debates on issues such as traditional and non-traditional threats, the effectiveness of deterrence, the impact of international organisations on security cooperation, and others. This course will cover major theories of international relations and boost students’ ability to apply theoretical concepts in integrated empirical analysis. This study course provides a context-rich and historically grounded understanding of the key concepts that shape international security environment. Instead of being organised based on cases studies, geographically or chronologically, the course is divided into conceptual clusters that deal with the most significant, enduring, contested, and/or ambiguous categories that form the core of the contemporary international security understanding and are reflected in different levels of international agenda.
Preliminary Knowledge
General knowledge of the post-WWII history.
Learning Outcomes
Knowledge
1.By the end of the course, students are expected to be familiar with the major international relations theories and international security concepts and their reflection on the central problematics and conflicts of international security in the 21st century. Students will understand the causes of conflict and the conditions for peace, complexity of traditional and non-traditional threats, dilemmas in international security, as well as expand knowledge on current conflicts and wars and evaluate possibilities and limitations of international response. The course will enable students to develop interpretations and responses to international security issues systematically.
Skills
1.During the course, students’ skills to synthesize theoretical approaches with empirical facts and ability to assess the complexity and causality of international conflicts will be trained. Academic discourse skills and academic text strategies will be trained during academic discussions, and development of coherent argument will be trained during specific practical assignments.
Competences
1.Students will improve the ability to interpret current developments in international security environment, to historicize those categories in a competent and context-rich way and analyse international conflict and stability issues in a broad historical and theoretical framework. In the course papers and final essays, students will demonstrate their original academic work and will be encouraged to come forth with original and argument-based conclusions and ideas for solutions to existing problematics in international security environment.
Assessment
Individual work
|
Title
|
% from total grade
|
Grade
|
|---|---|---|
|
1.
Individual work |
-
|
-
|
|
Students and the lecturer will discuss the mandatory literature, followed by presentation of students’ papers (please see the list of topics of the papers below “Paper Topics”).
|
||
Examination
|
Title
|
% from total grade
|
Grade
|
|---|---|---|
|
1.
Examination |
-
|
-
|
|
Written essay
Technical requirements for the essay: 800-1 000 words, single space, Times New Roman 12 or equivalent.
|
||
|
2.
Examination |
-
|
-
|
|
The student is required to hand in and present a Paper according to the topics provided below; it is an individual work. Each topic should have only one author (presenter). The paper should be well academically written, precise, well structured, include either hypothesis or a research question, deal with theoretical approaches and concepts of international relations, include references to trustful sources, and operate with well-grounded arguments, that combine both knowledge and opinion. The presentations of the draft papers will take place during the seminar (class) section of the Course, the papers are to be amended after the seminars and the final versions handed in for the evaluation.
Technical requirements for the paper: 4 pages, single spaced, Times New Roman 12 or equivalent. References in footnotes, Chicago Manual of Style.
|
||
|
3.
Examination |
-
|
-
|
|
Attendance – 10%
Activity and preparedness during seminars – 20%
Mid-term exam – 20%
Presentation and paper – 25%
Final essay – 25%
|
||
Study Course Theme Plan
FULL-TIME
Part 1
-
Class/Seminar
|
Modality
|
Location
|
Contact hours
|
|---|---|---|
|
On site
|
Auditorium
|
2
|
Topics
|
Blind spots of IR theories:
1. International terrorism and realism.
2. The conflict in Syria and constructivism.
3. United Nations Security Council’s P5 and liberalism.
|
-
Class/Seminar
|
Modality
|
Location
|
Contact hours
|
|---|---|---|
|
On site
|
Auditorium
|
2
|
Topics
|
Blend of IR theories:
1. NATO Enhanced forward presence in the Baltic countries.
2. Mali civil war and international responses.
3. Challenges and opportunities implied by China’s rise for international security.
|
-
Class/Seminar
|
Modality
|
Location
|
Contact hours
|
|---|---|---|
|
On site
|
Auditorium
|
2
|
Topics
|
International organisations:
1. Rwanda genocide and the factors of United Nations’ failure.
2. NATO, China and Transatlantic Security.
3. OSCE Response to the Crisis in and around Ukraine.
|
-
Class/Seminar
|
Modality
|
Location
|
Contact hours
|
|---|---|---|
|
On site
|
Auditorium
|
2
|
Topics
|
Non-traditional threats:
1. Case study [migration].
2. Case study [climate and environment].
3. Case study [poverty].
|
-
Class/Seminar
|
Modality
|
Location
|
Contact hours
|
|---|---|---|
|
On site
|
Auditorium
|
2
|
Topics
|
Hybrid threats:
1. Russia and targeting of elections in USA.
2. China and Huawei: The scope of problematics.
3. Covid-19 and disinformation: Implications for international security.
|
-
Class/Seminar
|
Modality
|
Location
|
Contact hours
|
|---|---|---|
|
On site
|
Auditorium
|
2
|
Topics
|
Conceptual debate in IR:
1. The role of non-state actors in international security in the 21st century.
2. North Korea's nuclear agenda and the room for international response.
3. The dilemma of the use of force in international relations – gains and losses.
|
Total ECTS (Creditpoints):
3.00
Contact hours:
24 Academic Hours
Final Examination:
Exam (Written)
PART-TIME
Part 1
Total ECTS (Creditpoints):
3.00
Contact hours:
10 Academic Hours
Final Examination:
Exam (Written)
Bibliography
Required Reading
1.
Kydd, Andrew H., Walter, Barbara F. The Strategies of Terrorism. International Security, Vol. 31, No. 1 Summer, 2006, pp. 49-80. (akceptējams izdevums)
2.
Deudney, Daniel, Ikenberry, G. John. Liberal World. The Resilient Order. Foreign Affairs, Vol 97, No. 4. 2018, pp. 16-24.
3.
Kramer, Franklin D., Butler, Robert J. Cybersecurity: Changing the Model. Atlantic Council, Apr. 1, 2019.
4.
Fearon, James D. Cooperation, Conflict, and the Costs of Anarchy. International Organization, Vol. 72, Issue 3, Summer, 2018, pp. 523-559.
5.
Wood Forsyth, James, Pope, Billy E. Structural Causes and Cyber Effects: Why International Order is Inevitable in Cyberspace. Strategic Studies Quarterly, Winter, 2014, pp. 112-127.
6.
Mearsheimer, John J. Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 93, No. 5. 2014, pp. 400-417.
Additional Reading
1.
Moravcsik, Andrew. Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. International Organization, Vol. 51, No. 4, Autumn, 1997, pp. 513-553.
2.
Huth, P., Russett, B. What Makes Deterrence Work? Cases from 1900 to 1980. World Politics, Vol. 36, No. 4, Jul., 1984, pp. 496-526.
3.
Ellul, Jacques. Propaganda. The Formation of Men’s Attitudes. Vintage books edition, February, 1973, pp. 61-105.
4.
Fearon, James D. Rationalist Explanations for War. International Organization, Vol. 49, No. 3. Summer, 1995, pp. 379-414.
5.
Posen, Barry R. The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict. Ethnic Conflict and International Security, Princeton University Press, 1993, pp. 103-124.
6.
Finnemore, M., Sikkink, K. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, International Organization at Fifty: Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics, Autumn, 1998, pp. 887-917.
7.
Luttwak, Edward N. Give War a Chance. Foreign Affairs, Vol 78, no. 4, 1999, pp. 36-44.
8.
Gartzke, E., Li, Q., Boehmer, C. Investing in the Peace: Economic Interdependence and International Conflict. International Organization, Vol. 55, Issue 2, Spring, 2001, pp. 391 – 438.
9.
Barnett, Michael N., Finnemore, Martha. The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations. International Organization 53(4), 1999. pp. 699-732.
10.
Schroeder, Paul. Historical Reality vs. Neo-Realist Theory. International Security, Vol. 19, No. 1, Summer, 1994, pp. 108-148.
11.
Walt, Stephen M. Rigor or Rigor Mortis? Rational Choice and Security Studies. International Security. Vol. 23, Issue 4, Spring, 1999, pp. 5-48.
12.
Lonsdale, David J. Information Power: Strategy, Geopolitics, and the Fifth Dimension. In: Colin S. Gray, Geoffrey Sloan (eds.). Geopolitics. Geography and Strategy. Frank Cass Publishers, 2003, pp. 137-161.
13.
Mearsheimer, John J. The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security, Vol. 19, No. 3, Winter, 1994-1995, pp. 5-49.
14.
Ross, Michael L. How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from Thirteen Cases. International Organization 58(01), February, 2004, pp. 35-67.
15.
Pape, Robert A. The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. American Political Science Review, Vol. 97, Issue 3, August, 2003, pp. 343–361.
16.
Kalyvas, Stathis N. "New" and "Old" Civil Wars: A Valid Distinction? World Politics, Vol. 54, No. 1, Oct., 2001, pp. 99-118.
17.
Walt, Stephen M. International Relations: One World, Many Theories. Foreign Policy, No. 110, Special Edition: Frontiers of Knowledge, Spring, 1998, pp. 29-32; 34-46.
18.
Van Evera, Stephen. Offense, Defense, and the Causes of War. International Security, Vol. 22, Issue 4, Spring, 1998, pp. 5-43.
19.
Sagan, Scott D. Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons? Three Models in Search of a Bomb. International Security, Vol. 21, No. 3., Winter, 1996-1997, pp. 54-86.
20.
Rovner, Joshua, Moore, Tyler. Does the Internet Need a Hegemon? Journal of Global Security Studies, Vol. 2, Issue 3, July, 2017, pp. 184–203.
21.
Choucri, N., Tuan, Nguyen A., Rotenberg, M. Social contract for the artificial intelligence age. Safety, security, & sustainability for AI world. Riga Conference policy brief, Riga, Latvian Transatlantic Organisation, 2020.
22.
Monteiro, Nuno P., Debs, Alexandre. The Strategic Logic of Nuclear Proliferation. International Security. Vol. 39, Issue 2, 2014, pp. 7-51.
23.
Biddle, Stephen. Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern Battle. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004, pp. 1-51. (akceptējams izdevums)
24.
Fortna, Virginia P. Scraps of Paper? Agreements and the Durability of Peace. International Organization 57(02), February, 2003, pp. 337-372. (akceptējams izdevums)
25.
The Impact of New Technologies on Peace, Security, and Development. Independent Commission on Multilateralism, International Peace Institute, 2016.
26.
Asal, Victor H., Rethemeyer, Karl R. The Nature of the Beast: Organizational Structures and the Lethality of Terrorist Attacks." Journal of Politics, January, 2008, pp. 437-449. (akceptējams izdevums)
27.
Crescenzi, Mark J. C. Reputation and Interstate Conflict. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 51 (2) – Apr 1, 2007, pp. 382-296. (akceptējams izdevums)
28.
Fortna, Virginia P. Does Peacekeeping Keep Peace? International Intervention and the Duration of Peace after Civil War. International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 48, no. 2, 2004, pp. 269-292. (akceptējams izdevums)
29.
Cohen, Saul B. Geopolitics. The Geography of International Relations. Rowmann & Littlefield, 2015, pp. 15-63.
30.
Downes, Alexander B. How Smart and Tough are Democracies? Reassessing Theories of Democratic Victory in War. International Security, Vol. 33, Issue 4, Spring, 2009, pp. 9-51. (akceptējams izdevums)