PhD Course: A Critical Survey of Theories of World Politics (fall term 2014)
COURSE DESCRIPTIONS AND AIMS
The course aims at providing students with a broad overview of key modes of theorising IR and of
equipping them with the advanced analytical skills to critically engage with world politics, employing
both dominant and subordinate styles of reasoning - the ontological assumptions appropriate to the
subject matter, the horizons of thinkable and interesting research questions and the standards of
validity used by scholars to interpret world politics. A key focus is on interrogating the various ways
different theoretical approaches are constructed and interact with one another, operationalised in
research designs and productive of particular perspectives on world politics. An additional aim is for
students to learn to relate their own research to these modes of doing IR. The scene setter of the
course is an engagement with the two currently dominant Western strands of thinking about world
politics: liberalism and constructivism. The course then goes on to chart divergent lines of flight away
from orthodoxy to heterodoxy. It discusses structural realism, neoclassical realism, realist extensions,
neo-Marxist IR and Foucauldian IR. The course will look at the key concepts, themes, arguments and
research design issues raised by each of these theories (orthodox and heterodox).
LEARNING OUTCOMES
By the end of the course the students will be:
 familiar with major debates in IR theories;
 able to identify and evaluate critically the intellectual styles and arguments of different ways
of theorising;
 familiar with current empirical research conducted within various theoretical frameworks
 able to relate their own research questions to alternative modes of theorising
METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
Each student will be assessed through a combination of seminar contributions, oral presentations
and written work.
The final grade is made up of the following components:
1. Seminar attendance and participation (20%). Attendance is mandatory, and all participants (for
credit & for audit) are expected to come to seminars prepared to discuss the readings for that
day.
2. Each student has to do three oral seminar presentations. The presentations are supposed to last
about 20-30 minutes. The presentations will identify and summarise the main arguments of the
assigned texts before they launch into a critical assessment, including reviewing and
comparatively evaluating the texts’ ontological, epistemological, social-theoretical and
methodological assumptions; their standards of validity; the main strengths and weaknesses of
the arguments/research, etc. (20%)
3. Each student teams up with another participant. The 2-person teams will each write up one
literature review of 2,000 words (each team will do one paradigm of their choice) on one of the
paradigms covered in class or any other major IR theory paradigm. The papers will identify the
main strands of the paradigm, their main arguments, their differences, their respective strengths
and weakness, etc. (30%)
4. Finally, each 2-person team will write up a 2,000 words paper on an important, across-theory
conceptual debate (say, rationalism vs constructivism; materialism vs idealism; explaining vs
understanding; agency vs structure) (30%).
Schedule of Seminars & Readings
1
Seminar 1: Introduction
Seminar 2: Overview of IR Theorising
- Reus-Smit, Christian and Duncan Snidal (2009) 'Overview of International Relations: Between
Utopia and Reality'. In Goodin, Robert E. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Political Science.
(Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 431-59.
Further Readings:
 Wæver, Ole (1996) 'The Rise and Fall of the Inter-paradigm Debate'. In Smith, Steve, Ken
Booth and Marysia Zalewski (eds.) International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press)
 Kristensen, Peter M. (2012): ‘Dividing Discipline: Structures of Communication in International
Relations’, International Studies Review, vol. 14, pp. 32-50.
Seminar 3: Liberalism & Neoliberalism
- Mark W. Zacher and Richard A. Matthew, 1995: ‘Liberal International Theory: Common
Threads, Divergent Strands’, in: Charles W. Kegley (ed.): Controversies in International
Relations Theory: Realism and the Neoliberal Challenge, pp. 107-140.
- Moravcsik, Andrew (2003): ‘Liberal International Relations Theory: A Scientific Assessment.’ In
Elman, Colin and Miriam Fendius Elman (eds.) Progress in International Relations Theory:
Appraising the Field. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 159-204.
Seminar 4: Interdependence & Transnational Relations
- Keohane, Robert O. and Joseph S. Nye, 1977: Power and Interdependence: World Politics in
Transition. Boston, MA: Little Brown, pp. 3-32.
- Milner HV (2009) Power, Interdependence, and Nonstate Actors in World Politics: Research
Frontiers. In: Milner H V and Moravcsik A (eds) Power, Interdependence, and Nonstate Actors in
World Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 3-27.
Further Readings:
 Keohane, R. O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political
Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
 Thomas Risse-Kappen, ed., 1995: Bringing Transnational Relations Back In: Non-State Actors,
Domestic Structures and International Institutions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Farrell H and Newman A (2014) Domestic Institutions Beyond the Nation State: Charting the
New Interdependence Approach. World Politics 65(2).
Seminar 5: Liberal War & Peace
- Lipson, C. 2005. Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, chapter 3
- Solingen, E. 1998. Regional Orders at Century's Dawn: Global and Domestic Influences on Grand
Strategy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Further Readings:
 Doyle, M. W. 1986. Liberalism and World Politics. American Political Science Review 80 (4):
1151-69.
 Russett, B. 1994. Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
 Russett, B., and J. R. Oneal. 2000. Triangulating Peace: Interdependence, and International
Organizations. New York, NY: Norton.
2
Seminar 6: Liberal International Order & Hegemony
- Ikenberry, G. J. 2011. Liberal Leviathan: The Rise, Decline and Renewal. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, chapters 2 & 4.
Further Readings:
 Lake, D. A. 2009. Hierarchy in International Relations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
 Slaughter, Anne-Marie (2004) A New World Order, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
Seminar 7: Constructivist IR – Introduction & Overview
- Adler, Emanuel (1997): ‘Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics'.
European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 319-63.
- Hurd, Ian (2010): ‘Constructivism,’ in Christian Reus-Smit and Duncan Snidal (eds.), The Oxford
Handbook of International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press)
Further Readings:
- Wendt, Alexander (1999): Social Theory of International Politics, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press).
Seminar 8: Constructivist Method & Theory
- Pouliot, Vincent (2007) '"Sobjectivism": Toward a Constructivist Methodology'. International
Studies Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 359-84.
- Adler E and Pouliot V (2011) International Practices. International Theory 3(1): 1-36.
Seminar 9: Strategic Ideas & International Order
- Legro, J. W. 2007. Rethinking the World: Great Power Strategies and International Order.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, chapters 1 & 2.
Further Readings:
 Owen, J. M. I. 2010. The Clash of Ideas in World Politics: Transnational Networks, States, and
Regime Change, 1510-2010. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
 Hurd, I. 2008. After Anarchy: Legitimacy and Power in the United Nations Security Council.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Seminar 10: Moral Purpose & International Order
- Reus-Smit, C. 2009. The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity, and Institutional
Rationality in International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, chapters 1 &
2.
Further Readings:
 Risse, T., S. C. Ropp, and K. Sikkink, eds. 2013. The Persistent Power of Human Rights: From
Commitment to Compliance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Sikkink, K. 2011. The Justice Cascade: How Human Rights Prosecutions are Changing World
Politics: Norton.
 Busby, Joshua W. (2010) Moral Movements and Foreign Policy, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press).
Seminar 11: Realist IR : Structural Balance of Power Theories
- Waltz, Kenneth N. (1988): ‘The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory’, Journal of
Interdisciplinary History, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 615-28.
- Mearsheimer, John J., 2001: The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York, pp. 29-54
3
Further readings
 Sebastian Rosato, 2011: Europe United: Power Politics and the Making of the European
Community, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press), chapter 2.
 Layne, Christopher, 2006: The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the
Present, Ithaca: Cornell University Press
 Walt, Stephen M. (1987): Origins of Alliances, (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press).
 Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979) Theory of International Politics, (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley).
Seminar 12: Hegemonic Stability Theory & Unipolarity
- Krasner, S. D. 1976. State Power and the Structure of International Trade. World Politics 28
(3): 317-47.
- Brooks, S. G., and W. C. Wohlforth. 2008. World Out of Balance: International Relations and
the Challenge of American Primacy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, chapter 2.
Further readings
 Norrlof, C. 2010. America’s Global Advantage: US Hegemony and International Cooperation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Robert Gilpin 1988: War and Change in World Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Seminar 13: Neoclassical Realism
- Rathbun, Brian (2008) ‘A Rose by Any Other Name: Neoclassical Realism as the Logical and
Necessary Extension of Structural Realism’, Security Studies, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 294-321.
- Schweller, Randall L. (2006) Unanswered Threats: Political Constraints on the Balance of
Power, (Princeton: Princeton University Press), chapter 2.
Further readings
 Lobell, S. E., N. M. Ripsman, and J. W. Taliaferro. 2009. Neoclassical Realism, the State and
Foreign policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Christensen, T. J. 1996. Useful Adversaries: Grand Strategy, Domestic Mobilization, and SinoAmerican Conflict, 1947–1958. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.
 Snyder, J. L. 1991. Myths of Empire : Domestic Politics and International Ambition. Ithaca:
Cornell University Press.
 Colin Elman, 1996: ‘Horses for Courses: Why Not Neo-Realist Theories of Foreign Policy?’
Security Studies 6: 7-51.
Seminar 14: Realist Extensions
- Glaser, Charles L. (2010): Rational Theory of International Politics, (Princeton: Princeton
University Press), chapter 3.
- Presenter choses another texts on realist constructivism or reflective realism!
Seminar 15: Marxist IR : Hegemony & Transnational Class Formation
- Cox, Robert W. (1981): ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International
Relations Theory,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 126-55.
- Robinson, W. I. 2004. A Theory of Global Capitalism: Production, Class, and State in a
Transnational World. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, chapter 2.
- Van der Pijl K (1984) The Making of an Atlantic Ruling Class. London: Verso.
- van der Pijl K (1998) Transnational Classes and International Relations. London: Routledge.
Further Readings:
4
 Robert Cox (1987): Production, Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History,
Columbia University Press
 Gill, Stephen (2008) Power and Resistance in the New World Order (Houndmills: Palgrave),
chapter to be announced!
Seminar 16: Capitalist Empire or New-Old Imperialism?
- Panitch, L., and S. Gindin. 2012. The Making of Global Capitalism: The Political Economy of
American Empire. London: Verso, 1-21.
- Callinicos, A. 2009. Imperialism and Global Political Economy. Oxford: Polity, pp.188-227.
Further Readings:
 Wallerstein, Immanuel (2004) World-systems Analysis: An Introduction, Duke University Press.
 Harvey, David (2003) The New Imperialism, (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Seminar 17: Relations of Production in the History of World Politics
- Teschke B (2002) Theorizing the Westphalian System of States: International Relations from
Absolutism to Capitalism. European Journal of International Relations 8(1): 5-48.
- Anievas A (2013) 1914 in World Historical Perspective: The “Uneven” and “Combined” Origins of
the First World War. European Journal of International Relations 19(4): 721-746.
Seminar 18: Michel Foucault’s Governmentality
- Walters, William (2012): Governmentality: Critical Encounters, (London: Routledge), chapters
1&2
Seminar 19: Global Governmentality
- Sending OJ and Neumann IB (2006) Governance to Governmentality: Analyzing NGOs, States,
and Power. International Studies Quarterly 50(3): 651-672.
- Kurki M (2011) Governmentality and EU Democracy Promotion: The European Instrument for
Democracy and Human Rights and the Construction of Democratic Civil Societies.
International Political Sociology 5(4).
Further Readings:
 Zanotti, Laura (2011): Governing Disorder: UN Peace Operations, International Security, and
Democratization in the Post-Cold War Era, (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University
Press).
 Merlingen, Michael (2003) 'Governmentality: Towards a Foucauldian Framework for the Study
of IGOs', Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association,
vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 361–84.
 Merlingen, Michael (2006) 'Foucault and World Politics: Promises and Challenges of Extending
Governmentality Theory to the European and Beyond', Millennium: Journal of International
Studies, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 181-96.
 Merlingen, Michael (2007) 'Everything Is Dangerous: A Critique of “Normative Power
Europe”', Security Dialogue, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 435-53.
 Tagma HM, Kalaycioglu E and Akçali E (2013) “Taming” Arab Social Movements: Exporting
Neoliberal Governmentality. Security Dialogue 44(4-5).
Seminar 20: Global Governmentality & its Critics
- Joseph, J. 2010. The Limits of Governmentality: Social Theory and the International. European
Journal of International Relations 16 (2): 223-46.
- Vrasti , W. 2013. Universal but Not “Truly Global”: Governmentality, Economic Liberalism and
the International. Review of International Studies 39 (1): 49-69.
5
Further Readings:
 Joseph, Jonathan (2012) The Social in the Global: Social Theory, Governmentality and Global
Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
 Selby, J. 2007. Engaging Foucault: Discourse, Liberal Governance and the Limits of Foucauldian
IR. International Relations 21 (3): 324-45.
Seminar 21: Wrap-up
6