The Johns Hopkins University Department of Political Science Summer 2007 - Session II 191.319 Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, 1:00 pm – 3:30 pm Location: Gilman 42 Daniel Levine Email: [email protected] Office Hours: After class, or by appointment Changing Faces of Conflict: Issues and Debates in National Security Syllabus & Course Readings (Last Updated: 25 July 2007) Course Overview War, to paraphrase a well-known saying, has become too serious to be left to generals. To be sure, conflict has always been destructive and dangerous: the armies of Genghis Khan are said to have inflicted a million casualties. Yet the form of war that emerged in the industrial age far outstripped anything previously known in deadliness, intensity, or extensivity. The invention of gunpowder; the emergence of the modern administrative state and mass conscription; the development of motor transport and signal technology; the increased the deadliness of the battlefield and its size; and the ability to fight yearround, regardless of the weather, were all part of this. Rather than the defender of civilian life, the military seemed to have become its primary consumer. In the nuclear era – an era that also provided the first photographs of the earth from space – this trend would only continue. It became possible to see the planet itself as a single battlefield; all life brought together in the shadow of the mushroom cloud. To say that war is too serious to be left to generals is not to impugn their capabilities or competence; it is to acknowledge the exceeding seriousness of war at this scale. This newfound seriousness, at least initially, seemed to shock humanity into a kind of eleventh-hour maturity regarding its own power and responsibility. Nuclear weapons galvanized popular revulsion with the costs of war. At the same time, they seemed to have a stabilizing effect on world politics, moderating the expansionist tendencies of large powers, encouraging diplomatic transparency and careful crisis management, and pushing squabbling lesser powers into coercive long-term alliances. Since 9/11, however, many have increasingly begun to wonder whether this stability was due not specifically to nuclear weapons as such, but to the particular conditions in which they first emerged – the particular conditions of the Cold War. What came to be known as mutually assured destruction (MAD) – the foundation of a stable, if uneasy state of mutual deterrence, was due to a particular state of affairs: a few large states had massive stockpiles, and a virtual monopoly on their use. The result was that any attack could easily be traced back to an aggressor, with retaliation to quickly follow. With that

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

monopoly breaking down, what becomes of MAD? Can deterrence work in an era of nuclear-armed non-state and trans-state actors? If not, how will states – even strong ones – protect their citizens? To be sure, state power has not become irrelevant; the powerful still enjoy tremendous influence. Americans who travel abroad witness particular aspects of this: just as Britain and France had their colonies, territories of settlement and treaty ports, the US has its free trade areas and spheres of regulatory influence. The French and British established networks of colonial schools and clubs; US has Al-Hurra and the Voice of America, Euro-Disney and the Hard Rock Café. But powerful states also engender powerful resentments. Even largely unable to attack the major cities of France and Britain, the anti-imperialist campaigns of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries posed a serious threat to the great powers of the age. The US finds itself in an analogous – if not exactly similar – situation: challenges to its power exist. But the specter of 9/11, and the increasing spread of technologies of mass destruction, suggest that it is even more vulnerable than were France and Britain. Nor is American power “imperial” in the same sense; Americans find themselves at a loss to explain precisely what it is that their enemies resent so much. While it is now increasingly acknowledged that initial American efforts to meet this resentment have been either ineffective or counterproductive, the question remains: what should be done? We can rephrase this question in a more general way. To what changes – institutional, political, cultural and conceptual – will challenges to the present world order give rise? How can we make sense of them, both in ethical and political terms? The present course will challenge you to explore these questions, and their related strategic and political implications, for yourself. It will do so by encouraging you to consider security in a broad sense: as a concept that has emerged within a particular historical, philosophical and political context, one that has developed coevally with technological and material changes, as well as social and cultural ones. As you read the texts and consider the problems raised in this course, consider them in terms of what you know, in terms of the world you see around you. On the one hand – as many moralists frequently point out – fewer and fewer Americans are involved in traditional forms of civic life: only a minority vote and even fewer do military service. Yet new forms of transnational association and activism – from Amnesty International to global Evangelism – are emerging at the same time. Americans invest in multinational corporations, toil for multinational firms, and rely on goods and services provided through long, complex and highly orchestrated chains of production and supply. They politicize patterns of consumption: preferring fair-trade coffee, or asking whether Jesus would drive an SUV. Are Americans less involved? Or is it that they are involved in something new, something which remains as yet not fully defined? If so, what is it, and how will it be defended?

2

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Requirements You will be expected to attend and participate actively, to write a short (10-15 page) paper, and to write a final examination. Forewarned is Forearmed: the compressed nature of the summer session will place certain challenges in your path. First, while the total reading burden for this course will roughly equivalent to a regular-semester length seminar, you will have less time to prepare your readings between classes. Since participation comprises a significant portion of your final grade, you should be prepared to commit a considerable amount of time every day to this. I expect serious, informed participation. Second, you will need to formulate your paper topics in relatively short order. You may write on any question – so long as it relates to security and strategy – you wish. I expect that most of you will develop ideas that emerge from class readings and discussion; extensive additional readings are provided here to help you get started. Be proactive about discussing paper ideas with me, and with your colleagues. If you cannot attend office hours, we can meet before or after class. Readings: There is one required text, which is on sale at the bookstore. It is: Clausewitz, Carl von: On War. (Princeton, 1984), tr. Michael Howard and Peter Paret. Note: Do not use an alternative translation; there are many unreliable translations of this work in print. If you buy this text used, make sure it is the 1984 edition – earlier editions lack an index. All other readings can be found in the online reserve. Point your browser to the library website (library.jhu.edu) and follow the links. You will need the course password (LEV319) to access these. If you are accessing the reserve off-campus, you may have to download the university’s virtual private network (VPN) software; contact the IT department. As you go through the syllabus, you will find ample additional and suggested readings as well. These are intended to help you get started on your papers (see below), and for your edification. They are not required. A few of these have been uploaded to the electronic reserve; most have not. Paper requirements. I set no limits or particular demands to your papers other than the foregoing length limitation. Your presence at this university, and your enrolment in this course, lead me to presume that you have both sufficient interest and ability to craft a well-reasoned, informed discussion on an issue in which you are interested. This does not mean that you are obliged to muddle through alone: discuss ideas with me, or with your classmates. Feel free to walk me through an outline, or to submit a draft for review. If you have trouble finding a topic, come see me; we will work together to help find you one.

3

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

That said, the following ground rules do apply: papers must be well-reasoned, carefully crafted and researched, and with proper citations. Sloppy writing, poor proofreading, poor organizational or paragraph structure, and similar signs of laziness are unacceptable. So are improper citations, and the use of inappropriate sources: if you cite Wikipedia, you had better be writing about Wikipedia. Plagiarism will be dealt with according to the university code of ethics. You will not find me forgiving. One final word: I am much more interested in your general intellectual development than in your mastery of obscure facts, or the scholastic perfection of your argumentation. To be sure, technical mastery has its place, and excellent work will always be duly rewarded. But glorious failures often lie at the beginning of great breakthroughs, and genuine intellectual efforts – even efforts that stumble – will be rewarded as well. Final Examination. The final examination will be a blue-book essay test. You will be asked to write an essay-length response to a choice of open-ended questions. Superlative answers will thoughtfully synthesize texts and discussions in a clear and well-structured manner. Final Grades: 20% participation, 35% paper, 35% final exam. Part 1. Foundations: Issues, Concepts, Texts Monday, July 2: Session 1. Introductory Session War, Peace and History: Har Megiddo and Armageddon Levels of Analysis: Strategy, Tactics, and Operations Modes: Offense and Defense Clarification: Strategy vs. Grand Strategy Related arts & sciences: diplomacy & politics, economics, logistics, geography What’s in a name? The limits of concepts & categories

•

Introductory class; no readings.

Wednesday, July 4. No Classes. Friday, July 6: Session 2. The Art of War Clausewitz and his time: an overview War as an extension of strategy Concepts of War War and the state; war and the national community Clausewitz, Hegel and the state

4

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Required Reading: Read Carefully: • Clausewitz, Carl von: On War. (Princeton, 1984), tr. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, Preface and author’s introduction, Books I, II, VII (chs. 1-7 only) and VIII – pp. 61-3, 75-176, 523-31, 577-637). If you have time, you will benefit from looking over following: • Morgenthau, Hans J. and Thompson, Kenneth W.: Politics Among the Nations. (McGraw-Hill, 1993) 6th ed., chs. 1 and 2. • Field Manual 3-0: Operations. (US Department of the Army, 2001), chs. 1 and 5. http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/service_pubs/fm3_0a.pdf In Class Materials: •

Delacroix, Eugène: “Liberty Leading the People.” Online Photograph. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 1 July 2007

Further Reading: Aron, Raymond: Clausewitz: Philosopher of War. (Prentice-Hall, 1985). Bassford, Christopher: Clausewitz in English: The Reception of Clausewitz in Britain and America, 1815-1945. (Oxford, 1994). Beyerchen, Alan: “Clausewitz, Nonlinearity, and the Unpredictability of War,” International Security, 17, no. 3 (Winter 1992/93). Clausewitz, Carl von: Historical and Political Writings. (Princeton, 1991), ed. and tr. Peter Paret and Daniel Moran. Douhet, Giulio: Command of the Air. (Washington: Office of Air Force History/USAF Warrior Studies, 1983). Foucault, Michel: Society Must be Defended. (Picador, 2003). Gat, Azar: The Origins of Military Thought: from the Enlightenment to Clausewitz. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1989). Heuser, Beatrice: Reading Clausewitz. (London: Pimlico, 2002). Meinecke, Friedrich: The Age of German Liberation, 1795-1815. (California, 1977) [1906], tr. Peter Paret. Naveh, Shimon: In Pursuit of Military Excellence: The Evolution of Operational Theory. (Frank Cass, 1997). Peter Paret (ed.): Makers of Modern Strategy: from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age. (Princeton, 1986).

Monday, July 9: Session 3. The Science of War Art vs. Science in von Bülow & Jomini Jomini and the “pedagogical approach” Technology & innovation in war and peace

5

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Realism vs. Idealism: historical-materialism and the study of war, peace and politics Politics vs. Political Science: Two Approaches

Required Reading: Read carefully: • Bülow, Adam Heinrich Dietrich von [published under pseud.]: The Spirit of the Modern System of War. (London: T. Egerton, 1806), Books I (chs. 1-5) and Book II (entire), pp. 1-68, 187-231. • Jomini, Antoine, Baron de: Summary of the Art of War. (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1971 [1862]), tr. G. H. Mendel and W. P. Craighill, Conclusion, Summary and Appendix, pp. 321-45 Please also skim the following: • Van Evera, Stephen: Causes of War: Power and the Roots of Conflict. (Cornell, 1999), chs. 1, 9 and appendix. • Lanchester, Frederick William: “Mathematics in Warfare,” reprinted in James R. Newman, The World of Mathematics (Simon and Schuster, 1956), Vol. 4, pp. 2139-2157. Further Reading: Battilega, John A., and Judith Grange, The Military Applications of Modeling. (Government Printing Office, 1984), pp. 63-111. Biddle, Stephen: Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern Battle (Princeton University, 2004). Brodie, Bernard: The American Scientific Strategists. (Rand, 1964). Copeland, Dale C.: The Origins of Major War. (Cornell, 2000). Gat, Azar: The Origins of Military Thought: from the Enlightenment to Clausewitz. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1989). Glaser, Charles S. and Kaufman, Chaim: “What Is the Offense-Defense Balance and Can We Measure It?” International Security, 22:4 (Spring, 1998), pp. 44-82. Haas, Ernst, Williams, Mary Pat, and Babai, Don: Scientists and World Order: The Uses of Technical Knowledge in International Organizations. (California, 1977) Levy, Jack S.: “The Causes of War: A Review of Theories and Evidence.” Infra Tetlock, Husbands, Jervis, Stern and Tilly: Behavior, Society and Nuclear War. (Oxford, 1989). See also the author’s update to this essay: “The Causes of War and the Conditions of Peace.” American Political Science Review, 1998, I:139-65. Lynn-Jones, Sean M.: “Offense-Defense Theory and Its Critics.” Security Studies, (4:4), 1995, pp. 660-691. Oye, Kenneth A.: Cooperation under Anarchy. (Princeton, 1985). Peter Paret (ed.): Makers of Modern Strategy: from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age. (Princeton, 1986). Schelling, Thomas: The Strategy of Conflict. (Yale, 1960); see also Schelling’s “Game Theory and the Study of Ethical Systems.” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 12:1 (Mar., 1968), pp. 34-44. Tilly, Charles and Goodin, Robert. (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of Contextual Political Analysis.(Oxford, 2006).

6

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Wallerstein, Immanuel: The Uncertainties of Knowledge. (Temple, 2004). Walt, Stephen: “Rigor or Rigor Mortis?: Rational Choice and Security Studies.” International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4. (Spring, 1999), pp. 5-48. [Note: Those interested in rational choice may be interested in the essays that responded to Walt’s argument, in the Autumn 1999 issue of International Security.]

Part II. Modern Visions of War: 1815-1945 Wednesday, July 11: Session 4. Warmaking and the Nation-State. State-making as organized violence The great barter: Hobbes Making ‘mine’ and ‘thine’ distinct: Locke & Rousseau Statecraft as power + organization: Machiavelli’s “new modes and orders” The creation of smooth internal spaces: Adam Smith

Required reading: Please Review: • Clausewitz, esp. Book VIII, chs. 5-6. Read: • Tilly, Charles: Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990-1992. (Blackwell, 1992), chs. 1-4, pp. 1-122. • Deudney, Daniel H.: Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village. (Princeton, 2006), ch.1, pp. 27-60. • Smith Adam: Wealth of Nations. (Prometheus, 1991) Book V, part I, pp. 46871. • Machiavelli, The Prince. (Penguin, 1999), ch. 26, pp. 82-5. Further Reading: Bergson, Henri: The Meaning of the War: Life and Matter in Conflict. (London: TF Unwin, 1915). [Available on Project Gutenberg] Binkley, Robert C.: Realism and Nationalism: 1852-1871. (Harper & Row, 1935). Buzan, Jones, and Little: The Logic of Anarchy. (Columbia, 1993). [Readers may also find Buzan’s People, States and Fear (Lynne Rienner, 1991) of some interest.] Gilpin, Robert: War and Change in World Politics. (Cambridge, 1981). Hintze, Otto: The Historical Essays of Otto Hinzte. (Oxford, 1975). Kennedy, Paul: The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military History from 1500 to 2000. (Random House, 1987). Kier, Elizabeth: Imagining War: French and British Military Doctrine Between the Wars. (Princeton, 1997). Mackinder, Halford: “The Geographic Pivot of History.” The Geographical Journal, 23:4 (April, 1904), pp. 421-37.

7

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Mahan, Alfred Thayer: The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660-1805. (Prentice-Hall, 1980). McNeill, William H.: The Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed Force and Society since AD 1000. (Chicago, 1982). Ó Tuathail, Gearóid: Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Writing Global Space. (Minnesota, 1996). Posen, Barry: The Sources of Military Doctrine. (Cornell, 1984). Schmitt, Carl: The Concept of the Political. (Chicago, 1996). Snyder, Jack: The Ideology of the Offensive (Cornell University Press, 1984). Sprout, Harold: Foundations of National Power. (Princeton, 1945). Spruyt, Hendrik: The Sovereign State and Its Competitors. (Princeton, 1994). Tolstoy, Leo: War and Peace. [More than a novel – Tolstoy has a vision of the nation as an entity born in war.] Thomson, Janice: Mercenaries, Pirates, & Sovereigns: State-Building and Extraterritorial Violence in Early Modern Europe. (Princeton, 1994) Waltz, Kenneth N. Man, the State and War. (Columbia, 2001). Weber, Max: “On the Situation of Constitutional Democracy in Russia” and “Politics as a Vocation.” infra Political Writings. (Cambridge, 1994), ed. Peter Lassman and Ronald Spiers. [Note: Those interested in Weber’s thought and international relations may find this introduction useful: Tarak Barkawi: “Strategy as a Vocation: Weber, Morgenthau and Modern Strategic Studies.” Review of International Studies (1998), 24, 159-84. ]

Friday, July 13: Session 5. Civil-Military Relations Shakespeare’s Henry V and Polybius’s History (Bk. VI, ch. 6): Two Takes on Civil-Military Relations From organized crime to cartel: codifying civil military relations Two trends: isolation & professionalization Rationalization & industrialization: ‘Taylorism’ and the changing ethos of the warrior The military and nation-building: an ambivalent relationship

Required reading: Please Review: • Von Bülow, pp. 187-95. Read Carefully: • Huntington, Samuel P.: The Soldier and the State. (Harvard, 1957), chs. 1, 2 and 17, pp. 7-59, 456-66. • Janowitz, Morris: The Professional Soldier, a Social and Political Portrait. (Free Press, 1966), chs. 1, 2 and 20, pp. 3-38 and 417-442. • Lasswell, Harold D.: “The Garrison State.” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 46, No. 4 (Jan., 1941), pp. 455-468. • Perlmutter, Amos: The Military and Politics in Modern Times: On Professionals, Praetorians, and Revolutionary Soldiers. (Yale, 1977), chs. 1 and 2, pp. 1-41. Further Reading:

8

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Brecht, Bertold: Mother Courage and Her Children. (any edition) Cohen, Eliot A: Citizens and Soldiers: The Dilemmas of Military Service. (Cornell, 1985). See also Cohen’s more recent Supreme Command (Free Press, 2002). Feaver, Peter D.: Armed Servants: Agency, Oversight, and Civil-military Relations. (Harvard, 2003). Feaver, Peter D. and Gelpi, Christopher: Choosing your Battles: American Civil-Military Relations and the Use of Force. (Princeton, 2004) Hegel, G.W.F.: Doctrine of Right, §189-208; 272-320; 321-9; 341-end. Hasek, Jaroslav: The Good Soldier Schwejk and his Fortunes in the World War. (Heineman, 1973) (or any other edition). Heller, Joseph: Catch-22. (any edition). Janowitz, Morris (ed.): Civil-Military Relations: Regional Perspectives. (Sage, 1981). See also The Military in the Political Development of New Nations. (Chicago, 1964). Martin, Michael Louis, and McCrate, Ellen Stern (eds.): The Military, Militarism and the Polity. (Free Press, 1984). Russett, Bruce: Controlling the Sword: The Democratic Governance of National Security. (Harvard, 1990). Shils, Edward, and Janowitz, Morris: “Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II,” Public Opinion Quarterly 12, no. 2 (Summer 1948). Stanley, Jay (ed.): Essays on the Garrison State. (Transaction, 1997)

Part III. The Modern Vision Stalemated: 1945-91 Monday, July 16: Session 6. Never Again (1): The Liberal Response to World War The Twenty Years’ Crisis The assumptions and failures of 19th C. Liberalism Politics vs. administration Neo-Functionalism: creating conditions of peace Towards a new science of politics (1) The limits of the neo-functionalist order and the return of politics

In-Class Reading: • •

Arthur Koestler: Darkness at Noon. (Modern Library, 1941), pp. 155-6. Bertolt Brecht: “For those Born After.” Required Readings:

• •

Carr, Edward Hallett: Conditions of Peace. (Macmillan, 1942), Intro., Ch. 1, pp. ix-xxiv, 3-14. Mitrany, David: A Working Peace System. (Quadrangle, 1966), pp. 25-99.

Further Reading: Adler, Emanuel, and Barnett, Michael (eds.): Security Communities. (Cambridge, 1998). Adler, Mortimer J.: How to Think about War and Peace. (Simon and Schuster, 1944).

9

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Angell, Norman: The Great Illusion. (any edition) Beckett, Samuel: Happy Days: A Play in Two Acts. (Grove, 1970) Claude, Inis L.: Swords into Plowshares. (Random House, 1984). Deutsch, Karl, et al.: Political Community in the North Atlantic Area. (Greenwood, 1969). Doyle, Michael W.: Ways of War and Peace. (Norton, 1997). Haas, Ernst B.: Beyond the Nation-State. (Stanford, 1964). Kant, Immanuel: “Perpetual Peace” and “Idea for Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Intent.” (any edition) Katznelson, Ira: Desolation and Enlightenment. (Columbia, 2003). Kelsen, Hans: Peace through Law. (North Carolina, 1944). Laski, Harold: Reflections on the Revolution in our Time. (Viking, 1943). Lipson, Charles: Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace. (Princeton, 2003). Marcuse, Herbert: One-Dimensional Man. (Beacon, 1964). Meinecke, Friedrich: The German Catastrophe. (Beacon, 1950) Mills, C. Wright: The Causes of World War Three. (Simon and Schuster, 1958). Morgenthau, Hans J.: Vietnam and the United States. (Public Affairs, 1965). See also Truth and Power: Essays of a Decade. (Praeger, 1970). Mueller, John: The Retreat from Doomsday. (Rochester, 1996) Nye, J.S.: Peace in Parts: Integration and Conflict in Regional Organization. (Little, Brown, & Co., 1971). Polanyi, Karl: The Great Transformation. (Beacon, 1944) [or subsequent editions] Remarque, Erich Maria: All Quiet on the Western Front. [any edition] Russett, Bruce, et al.: Triangulating Peace: Democracy, Interdependence and International Organizations. (Norton, 2001) Wells, H.G.: The World Set Free: A Story of Mankind. (EP Dutton, 1914) Woolf, Leonard: The Intelligent Man’s Way to Prevent War. (V. Gollancz, 1933).

Wednesday, July 18: Session 7. Never Again (2): Deterrence The Peloponnesian Parable: on the use (and abuse?) of Thucydides in the Cold War Balance of power theory: A thumbnail history The nuclear challenge and the state: institutionalized impotence? Towards a new science of politics (2): The dangers of miscalculation and the rise of formal modeling The emergence of the bipolar bloc system: France and Hungary When tails wag dogs (1): Cuba and Korea

Required Reading: Please read the following essay first: • Herz, John H.: “The Rise and Demise of the Territorial State.” World Politics 9:4 (July, 1957), pp. 473-93. Then read: • Brodie, Bernard: Strategy in the Missile Age. (Princeton, 1965), chs. 8 and 9, pp. 264-357. • Jervis, Robert: The Meaning of the Nuclear Revolution. (Cornell, 1989), ch. 1, pp. 1-45.

10

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Further Reading: Allison, Graham, and Zelikow, Philip: The Essence of Decision. (Longman, 1999), 2nd ed. Aron, Raymond: On War. (Doubleday, 1959). Bobbit, Philip, Freedman, Lawrence and Treverton, Gregory F. (eds.): US Nuclear Strategy: A Reader. (NYU Press, 1989). Brodie, Bernard: Strategy in the Missile Age. (Princeton, 1965). Freedman, Lawrence: Evolution of Nuclear Strategy. (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2003), 3rd ed. Fussell, Paul: “Thank God for the Atom Bomb” in Fussell, Thank God for the Atom Bomb and Other Essays (Summit Books, 1988). Gaddis, John Lewis: The Long Peace. (Oxford, 1987). Gray, Colin F.: “Nuclear Strategy: The Case for a Theory of Victory.” International Security, 4:9 (Summer,1979), pp. 54-87. See also the author’s more recent The Second Nuclear Age. (Lynne Rienner, 1999). Harkabi, Yehoshefat: Nuclear War and Nuclear Peace. (Israel Programme for Scientific Translations, 1966). Huth, Paul K.: Extended Deterrence and the Prevention of War. (New Haven, 1988). Kahn, Herman: Thinking About the Unthinkable. (Horizon, 1962). See also On Thermonuclear War (Princeton, 1961). Kaplan, Fred: Wizards of Armageddon. (Simon and Schuster, 1983). Kennan, George [as ‘X’]: “The Sources of Soviet Conduct.” Foreign Affairs, (July, 1947). Available on http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19470701faessay25403/x/the-sources-ofsoviet-conduct.html. Morgan, Patrick: Deterrence Now. (Cambridge, 2003). National Security Council: NSC 68: United States Objectives and Programs for National Security. (April, 1950). Available on http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsc-hst/index.html. Nye, Joseph: Nuclear Ethics. (Free Press, 1986). Posen, Barry R.: Inadvertent Escalation: Conventional War and Nuclear Risks (Cornell, 1991). Sagan, Scott, and Waltz, Kenneth (eds.): The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed. (Norton: 2000). Schelling, Thomas: Arms and Influence. (Yale, 1966)

11

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Friday, July 20: Session 8. Small Wars and Terror Gone, or merely gone from sight? War in the 80s and 90s Terrorism: the return of the repressed, or positive social agenda? War in the ‘semiosphere’: the global media & fear cycle Defining and studying terrorism: the tunnel vision of tactics A strategic approach to terrorism: power and responsibility, means and ends Is Terrorism and Guerilla New?

Required Reading: • • • •

Laqueur, Walter: No End to War. (Continuum, 2003), chs. 1, 8, conclusion & appendix, pp. 7-11, 161-78, 209-238. Pape, Robert: “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism.” American Political Science Review, 97:3, (August, 2003), pp. 343-61. Agamben, Giorgio: Homo Sacer. (Stanford, 1998), Introduction, pp. 1-13. Bauman, Zygmunt: Modernity and the Holocaust. (Cornell, 2000), pp. 13-30, 83116.

(Recommendations for further reading: see the reading list for session 6, above)

Part IV: Post-Modern War: 1991-Present Monday, July 23: Session 9. A Revolution in Military Affairs? The RMA and Transformation: Key Concepts and Technologies “Smaller and Smarter”: Summarizing the Debate (73 Easting, etc.) The Lessons of Vietnam and the All-Volunteer Force Will the new technologies deliver? Does it matter?

Required Reading: • •

Owens, Bill: Lifting the Fog of War. (Johns Hopkins, 2001), chs. 1-3, pp. 27149. O’Hanlon, Michael: Technological Change and the Future of Warfare. (Brookings, 2000), chs. 2 and 5, pp. 7-32 and 106-43.

Further Reading Biddle, Stephen: “Victory Misunderstood: What the Gulf War Tells Us about the Future of Conflict.” International Security, 21:2 (Autumn, 1996), pp. 139-79. This article generated a vigorous response; see the Autumn, 1997 issue of International Security for a series of responses.

12

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Boot, Max: War Made New: Technology, Warfare and the Course of History, 1500 to Today. (Gotham, 2006) Cohen, Elliot, A.: “Change and Transformation in Military Affairs.” Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol.27, No.3, September 2004, pp.395 – 407. Der Derian, James: Virtuous War: Mapping the Military-Industrial-Media-Entertainment Network War. (Westview, 2001). Gray, Colin S.: Another Bloody Century: Future Warfare. (Orion, 2005) Maoz, Ze’ev, and Gat, Azar (eds.): War in a Changing World. (Michigan, 2001) Murray, Williamson, and Sinnreich, Richard Hart (eds.): The Past as Prologue: the Importance of History to the Military Profession. Rumsfeld, Donald: “Transforming the Military.” Foreign Affairs, 81:3 (May/June, 2002), pp. 2032. Toffler, Alvin and Heidi: War and anti-War: Making Sense of Today’s Global Chaos. (Warner, 1993) Van Creveld, Martin: The Changing Face of War. (Praesidio, 2007).

Wednesday, July 25: Session 10. Protecting Who? And From What? In Class Reading •

National Security Strategy of the United States of America. White House: September, 2002, coverletter.

Required Reading: • •

•

National Security Strategy of the United States of America. White House: March, 2006. (all) (Available on http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006/nss2006.pdf) Petraeus, David A., et. al: FM 3-24: Counterinsurgency. Department of the Army: December, 2006, Read Intro, ch. 1, and appendices A & B carefully, skim the rest. (Available on: http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24.pdf) Nagl, John A.: Institutionalizing Adaptation: It’s Time for a Permanent Army Advisor Corps. Center for a New American Security, June 2007. (Available on http://www.newamericansecurity.org/publications/Nagl_AdvisoryCorp_June07.pdf)

Friday, July 27: Session 11. The Post-National State? Required Reading: • •

Moskos, Charles C., Williams, John Allen, and Segal, David R.,: The Postmodern Military: Armed Forces After the Cold War. (Oxford, 2000), chs. 1 and 2, pp.1-31. Van Creveld, Martin: The Rise and Decline of the State. (Cambridge, 1999), chs. 6 and conclusion, pp. 336-421. (handout)

13

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

Monday, July 30: Session 12. What’s Next? Required Reading: • •

Deudney: Bounding Power, ch. 9, pp. 244-64. Sassen, Saskia: Territory, Authority, Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages. (Princeton, 2006), chs. 1, 3, and 8, pp. 1-23, 74-140 and 37898.

Further Reading: Appadurai, Arjun: Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. (Minnesota, 1996). Arrighi, Giovanni: The Long Twentieth Century. (Verso, 1994) Baudrillard, Jean: “The Violence of the Global.” CTheory.net. Available on: http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=385#_ednref1 Bauman, Zygmunt: Liquid Fear. (Blackwell, 2006), and Globalization, (Polity, 1998). Buzan, Barry: People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the PostWar Era. (Lynne Rienner, 1991). Castells, Manuel: The Rise of the Network Society. (Blackwell, 2000). Connolly, William E.: “The Evangelical Capitalist Resonance Machine.” Political Theory. 33:6 (December, 2005), pp. 869-886. Harvey, David: The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. (Blackwell, 1990). Held, David, and McGrew, Anthony: “The End of the Old Order? Globalization and the Prospects for World Order.” Review of International Studies. 24 (2001), pp. 219-45. Huntington, Samuel: The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order. (Simon and Schuster, 1996). Lyotard, Jean François: The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. (Minnesota, 1984). McLuhan, Marshall: War and Peace in the Global Village. (McGraw-Hill, 1968). Slaughter, Anne-Marie: A New World Order. (Princeton, 2004). Swofford, Anthony: Jarhead: A Marine's Chronicle of the Gulf War and Other Battles. (Scribner, 2003). Wallerstein, Immanuel: The Modern World System. (Academic Press, 1974)

Wednesday, 1 August: Session 13. Looking to the Future Required Reading: •

Barnett, Thomas P.M.: “The Pentagon’s New Map.” Esquire, 139:3 (March, 2003), start page: 174 (total 8pp).

14

191.319 Syllabus – Summer 2007

• • • •

Boot, Max: Savage Wars of Peace. (Basic Books, 2002), preface and ch. 15, pp. xii-xx and 336-352. Hardt, Michael, and Negri, Antonio: Multitude. (Harvard, 2004), preface, pp. xi-xvii Smith, Rupert: The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World. (Knopf, 2007), introduction, pp. 3-31. Arendt, Hannah: “Herzl’s Jewish State Fifty Years Later.” The Jew as Pariah. (Grove).

Friday, 3 July: Session 14. Final Exam. Good luck with papers & exams!!! Papers Due: In class, or by email (before 5 pm)

15