• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
For visually-impairedFor visually-impairedUser profile (HSE staff only)Search
Advanced search
Menu
HSE University
User profile (HSE staff only)Search
Advanced search

Course Syllabus

2023/2024

(Dis)Order and Governance in the Global Age

Category 'Best Course for Broadening Horizons and Diversity of Knowledge and Skills'
Type: Mago-Lego
Delivered by: School of Politics and Governance
When: 1 module
Open to: students of all HSE University campuses
Instructors: Mikhail Mironyuk
Language: English
ECTS credits: 3
Contact hours: 30

Course Syllabus

Full Syllabus

Abstract

This course combines a focus on major theoretical and conceptual approaches in IR and foreign policy formation with discussions of the pressing issues of world politics. The course is organized around three main goals. The first goal is to introduce students to major concepts, ideas, and issues in IR, which have been shaping its field. We will explore the essential problems and puzzles in the study of world politics and international relations: Under what conditions do politicians choose to settle disputes without fighting? What is the role of international institutions in world politics? How can institutions and norms shape the behaviour of a state? Under what conditions do politicians take into account the preferences of groups or the public when foreign policy decisions or major policies are made? Why do leaders decide to start trade wars? What means do states have at their disposal to get what they want? The second goal is to invite students to reflect critically on the relationship between theories and history in the study of world politics. The third goal is to stimulate students to critically read, understand and contest political statements and official policy objectives. This course is not about Russia, the United States, China, the EU. This course is not about retelling the news and criticising particular leaders or countries. Students will learn concepts, models, and ideas that can be used to analyse the choices available to leaders and to understand the rationale behind their choices. We will try not to make judgements on moral or partisan grounds. Our approach is mostly evidence-based. As for the prerequisites, students starting this course are expected to have a good knowledge of World Politics and International Relations, Comparative Politics, Economics, and Political Theory. The working language of the course is English. The readings for this course in .pdf or .doc formats are available online to download or through e-mail. They are intended for private use only and are not supposed to be distributed out of the class. Students are also provided with web-links to video materials (mostly, on YouTube).
Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

  • Students are expected to: (1) master theoretical and conceptual approaches to the analysis of international and transnational interactions and foreign policy analysis tools; (2) understand the forces of change within the contemporary international system; (3) familiarize with the pressing issues of world politics and national politics and their sometimes troubled interrelations.
Expected Learning Outcomes

Expected Learning Outcomes

  • To have knowledge of major concepts, ideas, and theories of IR.
  • To analyze critically the political statements and developments in world politics.
  • To be able to apply tools of IR research and foreign policy analysis to analyze problems in the sphere of international relations and world politics.
  • To be able to identify complex interrelations between national, international, and transnational politics.
Course Contents

Course Contents

  • Introduction to Class. How We (Can) Study IR and World Politics: A Very Brief Introduction
  • A Bit of History: How Our World Was Shaped and Where We Are Now. The Making and Expansion of the Territorial State, European Imperialism, the World Wars
  • Discussing the Liberal World Order
  • Competition and Cooperation among States. Hegemony: How It Starts, How It Ends, and What Comes After
  • Actors, Preferences and Interests, Institutions, and Interactions. Psychological Factors in Decision-Making
  • Means of Getting What You Want in World Politics: Hard, Soft, Smart, Sharp. When and How Sanctions Work (and Do Not Work)
  • Domestic Politics and Relations among States. When Migration Matters: Domestic and International Dimensions (and Vice Versa)
  • International Law and Norms. Human Rights in World Politics. The Logic of Appropriateness and the Logic of Consequentialism. Courts as Actors and Institutions
Assessment Elements

Assessment Elements

  • Partially blocks (final) grade/grade calculation Participation
  • Partially blocks (final) grade/grade calculation Attendance
  • non-blocking Academic Essay
  • non-blocking Op-ed
  • blocking Exam
Interim Assessment

Interim Assessment

  • 2023/2024 1st module
    0.2 * Academic Essay + 0.1 * Attendance + 0.2 * Exam + 0.3 * Op-ed + 0.2 * Participation
Bibliography

Bibliography

Recommended Core Bibliography

  • AVERRE, D., & DAVIES, L. (2015). Russia, humanitarian intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: the case of Syria. International Affairs, 91(4), 813–834. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12343
  • Axelrod, R. (1986). An Evolutionary Approach to Norms. American Political Science Review, (04), 1095. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.apsrev.v80y1986i04p1095.1111.18
  • Cooperation under the security dilemma /. (1977). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.55F214A7
  • Fazal, T. (2012). Why States No Longer Declare War. Security Studies, 21(4), 557–593. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2012.734227
  • Fearon, J. D. (1990). Counterfactuals and hypothesis testing in political science. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edssch&AN=edssch.oai%3aescholarship.org%2fark%3a%2f13030%2fqt8rc078pv
  • Fearon, J. D. (1994). Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes. American Political Science Review, (03), 577. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.apsrev.v88y1994i03p577.592.09
  • Feaver, P. D. (1999). Civil-Military Relations. Annual Review of Political Science, 2(1), 211. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.211
  • Gourevitch, P. (1978). The second image reversed: the international sources of domestic politics. International Organization, (04), 881. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.intorg.v32y1978i04p881.912.03
  • Ikenberry, G. J. (2014). The Illusion of Geopolitics. Foreign Affairs, 93(3), 80. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=95603432
  • Jervis, R. (1998). Realism in the Study of World Politics. International Organization, 52(4), 971–991. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550707
  • Johnston, A. I. (1995). Thinking about strategic culture. International Security, 19(4), 32. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539119
  • Keohane, R. O. (1998). International institutions: Can interdependence work? Foreign Policy, (110), 82. https://doi.org/10.2307/1149278
  • Kupchan, C. A., & Kupchan, C. A. (1995). The promise of collective security. International Security, 20(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539215
  • Lake, D. A. (2007). Escape from the State of Nature. International Security, 32(1), 47–79. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2007.32.1.47
  • Legro, J. W., & Moravcsik, A. (1999). Is Anybody Still a Realist? International Security, 24(2), 5–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228899560130
  • Löwenheim, O., & Heimann, G. (2008). Revenge in International Politics. Security Studies, 17(4), 685–724. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636410802508055
  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1998). The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders. International Organization, (04), 943. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.intorg.v52y1998i04p943.969.44
  • Mazarr, M. J. (2017). The Once and Future Order. Foreign Affairs, 96(1), 25. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=120043012
  • Mead, W. R. (2014). The Return of Geopolitics. Foreign Affairs, 93(3), 69. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=95603431
  • Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order. International Security, 43(4), 7–50. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00342
  • Montgomery, E. B. (2006). Breaking Out of the Security Dilemma: Realism, Reassurance, and the Problem of Uncertainty. International Security, 31(2), 151–185. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2006.31.2.151
  • Niblett, R. (2017). Liberalism in Retreat. Foreign Affairs, 96(1), 17. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=120043011
  • Nye Jr., J. S. (2017). Will the Liberal Order Survive? Foreign Affairs, 96(1), 10. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=120043010
  • Pape, R. A. (2003). The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. American Political Science Review, (03), 343. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.apsrev.v97y2003i03p343.361.00
  • Patrick, S. M. (2017). Trump and World Order. Foreign Affairs, 96(2), 52. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=f5h&AN=121177800
  • Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42(3), 427–460. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027697
  • Ratner, S. R. (1998). International law: The trials of global norms. Foreign Policy, (110), 65. https://doi.org/10.2307/1149277
  • Spruyt, H. (2002). The Origins, Development, and Possible Decline of the Modern State. Annual Review of Political Science, 5(1), 127. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.5.101501.145837
  • Valentino, B. A., Huth, P. K., & Croco, S. E. (2010). Bear Any Burden? How Democracies Minimize the Costs of War. Journal of Politics, 72(2), 528–544. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381609990831
  • Weeks, J. L. (2008). Autocratic Audience Costs: Regime Type and Signaling Resolve. International Organization, (01), 35. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.intorg.v62y2008i01p35.64.08
  • Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764

Recommended Additional Bibliography

  • Bruce Bueno, Mesquita James, D. Morrow, Randolph Siverson, & Alastair Smith. (1999). An Institutional Explanation of the Democratic Peace¤. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.C7362F40
  • Kevin Narizny. (2003). Both Guns and Butter, or Neither: Class Interests in the Political Economy of Rearmament. The American Political Science Review, 97(2), 203. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.3118204
  • Larson, D. W., & Shevchenko, A. (2010). Status Seekers. International Security, 34(4), 63–95. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2010.34.4.63
  • Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. International Organization, (04), 513. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.intorg.v51y1997i04p513.553.44
  • Tannenwald, N. (1999). The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Normative Basis of Nuclear Non-Use. International Organization, (03), 433. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsrep&AN=edsrep.a.cup.intorg.v53y1999i03p433.468.44