Political Science 479: National Security
Fall 2013
Tuesday, Thursday: 2:00 – 3:15 (Adams Humanities 4131)
Professor Latha Varadarajan
Political Science Department
4136 Adams Humanities
lvaradar@mail.sdsu.edu
Office Hours: Tue, Thurs: 12:00 – 1:30, or by appointment
Purpose of the course:
The events of 9/11 are routinely presented as marking a radical departure for American
politics in general and national security strategy in particular. In the decade that has followed,
the United States has been directly involved in a series of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya,
and embroiled indirectly in many others. These wars, fought under the banner of the global
war on terror, have profoundly shaped the lives of people across borders and the contours
of global politics in general. They have resulted in the regime shifts, in the development of
new methods of warfare and the demarcation of new threats, be it terrorism defined broadly
or more specific issues such as nuclear proliferation. They have also had important
reverberations for American domestic politics, not just in terms of ballooning military
budgets, but also in defining the nature and limits of democratic citizenship. In many ways,
these shifts – both in international and domestic politics – do mark a break from the past.
However, in many others, they represent a continuation of a set of policies that have longer
historical roots. The aim of this course is to trace both the continuities and discontinuities in
making sense of contemporary security strategies, and thus subject issues framed in terms of
national security to much needed critical scrutiny.
At one level, the course deals with specific questions that are acknowledged as major
national security issues: what is the nature of the on-going U.S.-led war in Afghanistan,
already characterized as the “longest war”? What is it that makes groups characterized as
Islamic fundamentalists a threat to security in one context (for instance, Afghanistan) and
potential allies fighting for freedom in another (for instance, Libya and Syria)? How are the
new wars of today connected to the Iraq war, and the other wars that preceded it? In what
ways do the methods developed during the conduct of these wars (extraordinary rendition,
drone warfare) affect us? Who or what exactly is being threatened by the revelations of
individuals like Julian Assange, Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden? Are we more secure
today that we were at the turn of the century?
To address these questions, the course situates them in broader debates about the concept of
“national security.” By framing these debates in a systematic study of competing theoretical
approaches, the course provides a historically and politically situated understanding of the
development of national security strategies in the United States, as well as the concept of
national security itself.
1
This course is broadly divided into three segments. In the first part, we will engage closely
with the leading theoretical perspectives in International Relations that either explicitly or
implicitly shape our understanding of what national security is, and what constitutes a threat.
Through our engagement with this theoretical literature, we will lay the framework for
understanding the relationship between political systems (Bi-polar/multi-polar; liberal
democracies etc.) and the concept of national security. We will also discuss the ways in
which these understandings shape our stance on an issue like Iran’s nuclear program, which
not too long ago was presented as one the biggest threats to the security of the international
system. The second part of the course focuses on the historical evolution of the national
security policies of the United States, particularly after the Second World War. The goal of
this section is to provide a careful accounting of the ways in which the idea of democracy
figured in both theory and practice in this development. In the final section of the course,
we will critically examine some of the more recent developments in national security strategy
– particularly the new methods used in the open-ended war on terror, and the fate of the
individuals who brought it to the attention of the American public – to return to the
question of the relationship between democracy and security.
Required readings:
There are two required books for this class. They are available at KB Books:
 V. I. Lenin, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism, New York: International
Publishers, 2002
 Walter LaFeber, The American Age: U.S. Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad, Vol. 2, Since
1896, W.W. Norton, 2nd edn., 1994
In addition to these texts, the readings for the class include book chapters, journal and
newspaper articles. For the articles that are easily accessible online, the syllabus provides the
appropriate links. All other readings will be available on blackboard. For your convenience,
the readings have been printed and bound as a reader. The reader is available for purchase at
Cal Copy [5187 College Ave., 619-592-9949].
To help you engage with material that is relatively novel, I will post reading questions before
each class on the “Course Documents” section of blackboard. Unless asked to do so in class,
it is not essential to keep written responses to those questions. However, having them in
hand will help you not only engage better in class discussions, but also prepare for your
exams. Both exams will comprise of short answer questions and essays. This will give you
the opportunity to show both your grasp of the material and your analytical skills in
developing an argument.
Class Participation and attendance:
You are expected to have done the readings for class and participate in informal (or formal,
as the case might be) class discussions. This will determine 10% of you grade. A good grade
in participation is contingent on BOTH regular attendance AND consistent contributions to
2
class discussions. While I might not take attendance in every class, absences will be noted
and will affect your grade. Although you are expected to come to every class, over the course
of a semester unforeseen events will prevent some, if not most of you from having a perfect
attendance record. For this reason, missing two classes will not affect the attendance part
your grade. Missing more than two will, however, result in grade penalties. Depending on the
number of absences these penalties will be as drastic as receiving no credit whatsoever for
attendance and participation, or failing the course altogether. Please note that based on this
policy there are no “excused” or “unexcused” absences. If, however, an emergency situation
arises during the semester that will make it impossible for you to attend the course for a
substantial amount of time (several weeks), it is essential that you contact me.
Please note that the lectures and the readings, while complementary may not necessarily
cover exactly the same ground. Therefore, missing classes would imply missing valuable class
material that might appear on your exam. In addition, you also run the risk of missing a pop
quiz.
One of the most important elements of any class is the input offered by the students. It is
expected that you listen carefully and courteously to the comments made by your classmates,
and participate actively in the class by adding your own comments and questions. To
facilitate this process, use of cell-phones or laptops is not permitted in the classroom.
Cell-phone usage during class hours will lead to grade penalties. It is particularly
important that you refrain from using cell-phones, headsets, or any electronic device at any
point during the exam. Since it is not possible for me to determine exactly what the actual
purpose of any such activity might be – for example, a quick glance at your smart-phone, or
using headsets while you write – the use of any electronic device, however fleeting and for
whatever real or alleged purpose will constitute cheating and result in automatic failure for
the course.
If you have any concerns, do not hesitate to bring them to me.
Grading and Assignments
Throughout the semester, there will be an unspecified number of pop-quizzes that will
account for 10% of your total grade. Pop quizzes can be handed out at the beginning of any
given class period and will pertain only to the readings assigned for that particular class. For
this reason, it is important that you be punctual. There will be no make-up pop-quizzes.
However, your chances of getting full credit will not be harmed if you miss one quiz only. If
you take all the quizzes that are handed out during the semester, your lowest scoring test will
be discounted. Please note that if you have several tests with the same low score, the rule will
still apply – only one test will be excused.
During the course of the semester, you will have two in-class examinations (Oct. 1st, Nov.
7th) based on the class readings as well as lectures up to that point. To reduce examination
related stress as far as possible a substantial portion of the class period prior to it will be
devoted to reviewing themes and answering questions that you might have.
The final weeks of the semester will be devoted to the research and preparation for a
simulation exercise. The simulation itself is a group exercise that will account for 10% of the
3
total grade. In lieu of a final, you will write a 7 to 8 page analytical paper on a topic related to
your simulation that will also require you to draw on the class readings. The paper, to be
submitted in hard-copy version as well as electronic version (on turnitin.com, a plagiarism
detection software) will account for 30% of your grade.
The grade for the class will be determined as follows:
 Attendance and Class participation – 10%
 Pop-Quizzes – 10%
 First Mid-Term (in-class), October 1st– 20%
 Second mid-term (in-class), November 7th – 20%
 Simulation, and in-class preparation, November 21st, 26th, December 3rd, 5th– 10%
 Analytical paper (7-8 pgs.), Due December 12th – 30%
Due dates will be strictly observed, unless there are documented medical emergencies or
official exceptions granted by San Diego State University, in which case you will need
someone in the pertinent office to directly contact me.
Cheating or Plagiarism of any sort will result in automatic failure for the course and be
reported to the University.
Schedule of Readings
Aug. 27th – Introduction to the course, course requirements
I. “It’s the system, stupid”: Theoretical frameworks and the question of security
Aug. 29th – The “real” world…
 John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Chapter 1 (Introduction), pp. 1-14;
Chapter 2, pp. 29 – 54 [Blackboard]
Sept. 3rd –….and real concerns
 John Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Chapter 9, pp. 334-336; Chapter
10, pp. 360-392 [Blackboard]
Sept. 5th – The liberal vision
 John Owen, “How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace,” International Security, Vol.
19, no. 2 (1994), pp. 87-125 [Blackboard]
Sept. 10th – Common threats, uncommon responses
 Jean Bethke Elshtain, Just War Against Terror, pp. 1-8; 47-70 [Blackboard]
 “What we are fighting for: A letter from America,” Institute on American Values,
February 2002, http://www.americanvalues.org/html/wwff.html
4
Sept. 12th – The logic of insecurity
 V.I. Lenin, “Imperialism: The highest stage of capitalism,” pp. 16-67
Sept. 17th – The price of free trade
 V.I. Lenin, Imperialism: The highest stage of capitalism, pp. 68-98
 David North, “Seventy years since the outbreak of World War II: Causes,
Consequences and Lessons,” World Socialist Website, October 29, 2009
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2009/10/wwii-o29.html
Sept. 19th – Re-considering democracy and peace
 Mark Rupert, “Democracy, Peace: What’s Not to Love,” in Tarak Barkawi and Mark
Rupert (eds.), Democracy, Liberalism and War: Rethinking the Democratic Peace Debate,
Boulder: Lynne Reinner, 2001, pp.153-172 [Blackboard]
 David North, “War, social inequality and the crisis of American democracy,” Parts I
and II, World Socialist Website, Nov. 14, 15, 2006,
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2006/11/dn1-n14.html
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2006/11/dn2-n15.html
Sept. 24th – Taking stock: Nuclear weapons and world order
 Scott Sagan, “Why do states build nuclear weapons: Three models in search of a
bomb,” International Security, Vol. 21 (3), Winter 1996/1997, pp. 54-86 [Blackboard]
 Hugh Gusterson, “A double standard on nuclear weapons?” MIT Center for
International Studies, April 2006, http://web.mit.edu/cis/pdf/gusterson_audit.pdf
Sept. 26th – A proliferation of threats?





Kenneth Waltz, “Why Iran should get the bomb,” Foreign Affairs, July/Aug. 2012,
Vol. 91 (4) [Blackboard]
Scott Sagan, “How to keep the bomb from Iran,” Foreign Affairs, Sept/Oct. 2006,
Vol. 85 (5) [Blackboard]
Scott Sagan, “A call for global nuclear disarmament,” Nature, Vol. 487, July 5, 2012,
http://iis-db.stanford.edu/pubs/23778/Nature-Scott_Sagan.pdf
“Iran, the US and the UN nuclear conference,” May 6th 2010
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/may2010/iran-m06.shtml
“Obama’s nuclear disarmament hoax,” March 29th, 2012
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/mar2012/pers-m29.shtml
Oct. 1st - Mid-term
5
II. The making of “grand strategies”
Oct. 3rd – “Once upon a time…”: Tracing the roots of “national” security
 Walter LaFeber, “The US rise to world power, 1776 – 1945,” in Michael Cox and
Doug Stokes (ed.), US Foreign Policy, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008, pp.
46-60 [Blackboard]
 Woodrow Wilson, “The Fourteen Points,”
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/wilson14.asp
Oct. 8th – A war to re-make the world: FDR and the new American century
 Walter LaFeber, The American Age,
Chapter 12, pp. 369-370; 386-406
Chapter 13, pp. 413-422; 431-433; 438-453
Oct. 10th – Containing the enemy: Truman, Eisenhower and the beginning of the “Cold”
War
 Walter LaFeber, The American Age,
Chapter 14, pp. 457-458; 473-494
Chapter 16, pp. 540-548; 563-566
 Harry S. Truman, Speech to the Joint Session of Congress, 12 March 1947, available
on-line http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/trudoc.asp
Suggested Readings:
 George F. Kennan (“X”), “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,” Foreign Affairs, Spring
1987, available on-line http://www.foreignaffairs.org/19470701faessay25403p0/x/the-sources-of-soviet-conduct.html
Oct. 15th – Containment in Action: Korea and Cuba
 Walter LaFeber, The American Age,
Chapter 15, pp. 502-517; 523-531
Chapter 16, pp. 566-569
Chapter 17, pp. 586-590; 596-602
Suggested Readings:
 NSC-68: United States Objectives and Programs for National Security,
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsc-hst/nsc-68.htm
Oct. 17th – Containment in Action: The Vietnam Saga
 Walter LaFeber, The American Age,
Chapter 15, pp. 519-521
Chapter 16, pp. 548-554
Chapter 17, pp. 590-595; 611-623
Chapter 18, pp. 633-634; 665-669
Oct. 22nd – Star Wars, Evil Empires and the end of an era?
 Walter LaFeber, The American Age,
6
Chapter 19, pp. 680-688; 695-730; 735-737
Oct. 24th – Another “new” world order
 Walter LaFeber, The American Age,
Chapter 20, pp. 745-779
Suggested Readings:
 National Security Strategy 1991, http://www.fas.org/man/docs/918015-nss.htm
October 29th – Coming full circle: From containment to preemption
 George W. Bush, “Remarks at West Point,” http://georgewbushwhitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html
 Richard Falk, “The New Bush Doctrine,” in Micah L. Sifry and Christopher Cerf (ed.)
The Iraq War Reader: History, Documents, Opinions, New York: Simon and Shuster, 2003,
pp. 272-277 [Blackboard]
 George W. Bush, “The war begins: The tyrant will soon be gone,” in Micah L. Sifry
and Christopher Cerf (ed.) The Iraq War Reader: History, Documents, Opinions, New
York: Simon and Shuster, 2003, pp. 503-506 [Blackboard]
 John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, “An unnecessary war,” Foreign Policy, Jan/Feb
2003 [Blackboard]
 “Pre-emption, Iraq and Just War: A Statement of Principles,”
http://www.americanvalues.org/html/1b___pre-emption.html
 David North, “The crisis of American capitalism and the war against Iraq,”
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/mar2003/iraq-m21.shtml
Suggested Readings:
 National Security Strategy of the United States, 2002,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
Oct. 31st - Occupational hazards and the perils of a new world order
 Christopher Hitchens, “A war to be proud of,” The Weekly Standard, Sept. 5, 2005,
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/995phqjw
.asp
 Juan Cole, “Christopher Hitchens’ last battle,” Salon.Com, Sept. 5, 2005,
http://www.salon.com/2005/09/05/hitchens_9/
 Bill Keller, “My unfinished 9/11 business,” The New York Times, Sept. 6, 2011,
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/06/us/sept-11reckoning/keller.html?pagewanted=all
 Bill Van Auken, “The confessions of a liberal hawk,” World Socialist website, Sept. 15,
2011, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/sep2011/kell-s15.shtml
 Andrew Bacevich, “Obama wants us to forget the lessons of Iraq,” The New Republic,
August 31st, 2010, http://www.tnr.com/blog/foreign-policy/77356/obama-wantsus-forget-the-lessons-iraq
 John Mearsheimer, “Afghanistan: No more the good war,” Published in Newsweek,
December 4, 2009,
7
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/12/04/afghanistan-no-more-thegood-war.html
Nov. 5th – Exam review
Nov. 7th – Second mid-term
III. New wars, new threats: Securing the ‘demos’
Nov. 12th – Extraordinary times, extraordinary measures
 Andrew Bacevich, “Scoring the Global War on Terror,” Huffington Post, Feb. 20,
2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-bacevich/global-war-onterror_b_1289039.html
 Jonathan Alter, “Time to think about torture,” Newsweek, Nov. 4, 2001,
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2001/11/04/time-to-think-abouttorture.html
 Jane Mayer, “Outsourcing Torture: The secret history of America’s ‘extraordinary
rendition’ program,” The New Yorker, February 14, 2005 [Blackboard]
 Alan Dershowitz, “Should we fight terror with torture?,” The Independent, July 3,
2006, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/alan-dershowitzshould-we-fight-terror-with-torture-406412.html
 Seymour Hersh, “The General’s Report,” The New Yorker, June 25, 2007,
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/06/25/070625fa_fact_hersh
 Scott Horton, “New CIA docs detail brutal ‘extraordinary rendition’ process,”
Huffington Post, Sept. 28th, 2009,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/28/new-cia-docs-detailbruta_n_271299.html
Suggested Readings:
 John Yoo, “The torture memos,”
http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/safefree/yoo_army_torture_memo.pdf
 Dana Priest and William Arkin, “A hidden world, growing beyond control,” Top
Secret America, A Washington Post Investigation (last updated September 2010),
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/a-hidden-worldgrowing-beyond-control/1/
Nov. 14th – Predators and prey
 Jane Mayer, “The Predator War,” October 26, 2009, The New Yorker,
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/26/091026fa_fact_mayer
 Charlie Savage, “Secret US memo made legal case to kill a citizen,” Oct. 8, 2011, The
New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/world/middleeast/secretus-memo-made-legal-case-to-kill-a-citizen.html?pagewanted=all
 Eric Holder, “Speech at Northwestern University School of Law,” March 5, 2012,
http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2012/ag-speech-1203051.html
8
 Jo Becker and Scott Shane, “Secret ‘Kill List’ prove a test of Obama’s principles and
will,” May 29, 2012, The New York Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-alqaeda.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all
 Jimmy Carter, “A cruel and unusual record,” The New York Times, June 24, 2012,
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/opinion/americas-shameful-human-rightsrecord.html
 Scott Shane, “The moral case for drones,” The New York Times, July 14, 2012,
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/sunday-review/the-moral-case-fordrones.html
 David Walsh, “The New York Times makes the ‘moral case’ for Drones,” The World
Socialist Web Site, July 19, 2012, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/jul2012/dronj19.shtml
Nov. 19th – Orwell revisited: ‘1984’ and beyond
 Glenn Greenwald, Ewan MacAskill, and Laura Poitras, “Edward Snowden: The
whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations,” The Guardian, June 9, 2013,
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsawhistleblower-surveillance
 Glenn Greewald and Ewan MacAskill, “Boundless Informant: The NSA’s secret tool
to track global surveillance data,” The Guardian, June 11, 2013,
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-globaldatamining
 “Democratic rights are at stake in the fight to defend Edward Snowden,” World Socialist
Web Site, June 24, 2013, https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/06/24/persj24.html
 “Plugging the leaks in the Snowden case,” The Washington Post, July 1, 2013,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-keep-edward-snowden-fromleaking-more-nsa-secrets/2013/07/01/4e8bbe28-e278-11e2-a11ec2ea876a8f30_story.html?hpid=z4
 Rob Hager, “A real democracy would strip the military of court martial jurisdiction
over whistle-blowers,” Nation of Change, August 6, 2013,
http://www.nationofchange.org/real-democracy-would-strip-military-court-martialjurisdiction-over-whistle-blowers-1375795158
Suggested Readings:
 President Obama’s speech at the National Defense University, May 23, 2013,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/23/remarks-presidentnational-defense-university
 “Remarks by the President in a Press Conference,” August 9, 2013.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/09/remarks-president-pressconference
Nov. 21st – Simulation Preparation
Nov. 26th – Simulation Preparation
9
Dec. 3rd – Simulation
Dec. 5th – Simulation
Dec. 10th – Final wrap-up and PEER REVIEW
Final Paper due in Political Science Main office (AH 4142) on Thursday, December
12th by 2:00 PM.
10