GSIS: Introduction to International Relations
Jong Kun Choi, PhD
BK 21 Post-Doctoral Fellow
Department of Political Science, Yonsei University
Yonhee Hall 503-ho
jongchoi@yonsei.ac.kr
Office) 2123-3902 Mobile) 010-8389-9489
1. Introduction
This is an introductory graduate level course/seminar specifically designed to accommodate graduate
students who are planning to major IR or relevant areas of studies during their graduate career. The
course offers the first exposure of International Politics to students with key theories, concepts, and
historical (and contemporary) events in International Relations. The course will survey the founding
blocs of International Relations theories from system level to individual levels. In so doing, such
fundamental questions as why peace breaks out and war occurs will be asked. Moreover, the course
essentially emphasizes the ways for students to develop the analytical ability to about international
relations from a variety way of theoretical and conceptual perspectives. Thus, about 3/5 of the course
during the semester will concentrate on addressing theories and concepts of International Relations,
and the 2/5 will be speared for applying these theories and concepts to historical and contemporary
events of the 20th and 21st century. Of course, the class will also spend some time in analyzing the
issues of Northeast Asian security. At the end of the semester, students should be able to think about
international politics more systematically, less of person bias, and with greater sophistication in
academic and professional settings, in reading journals and newspapers, and, above all, in daily life.
2. Required Textbooks and Readings (and my expectation)
The instructor ( that is me,,,) will expect that students have done their readings before coming to
class. Please make sure that this is a graduate level course/seminar, which means that each class
meeting will consist of my lectures “AND” our interactive discussion. There are two required
textbooks and some additionally assigned readings from the world-class academic journals that I bet
every IR students commonly read throughout the World. The course is designed to rely less on
lectures and more on discussion as the semester progresses.
1
So, in short, you must read.
1. Charles Kegley with Eugene Wittkopf, World Politics: Trends and Transformation 10th
edition (Thomson Wardsworth, 2006).
2. Marc A. Genest, Conflict and Cooperation: Evolving Theories of International Relations
2nd edition ((Thomson Wardsworth, 2004).
3. Requirements
A. Class Attendance: 10 % (Trust Me, this is critical)
B. Class Discussion: 20%
C. Mid-Term Exam: 30%
D. Final Paper: 30% (or Comprehensive Final Exam: 40 %)
Requirements of Assigned Paper
A 10-15 page paper on an approved topic is required. Thus, you need to email me, talk to me and
meet with me before/after class for discussion and I will welcome your trials.
The paper can take one of two forms.
First, you may critique an article on international relations using the models and concepts learned in
the course. If you do so, you should summarize the article’s argument in a page or two at most, and
focus most of the paper on critiquing the article’s argument. Point out its strengths and weaknesses
and critique its explicit or implicit models, theories, and hypotheses. For example, “Jong Choi adopts
essentially a constructivists interpretation of X, but fails to anticipate or address the following five
points that neo-realists or neo-liberalists raise: A, B, C, D, E.” For examples of such critiques, look
at the reviews of books on international relations in the journal American Political Science Review.
The article you critique should be a full-length work chosen from a reasonably recent (1985 or after)
issue of one of the following journals: World Politics, International Organization, International
Security, Security Studies, Foreign Affairs, American Political Science Review or Foreign Policy.
(Or you can choose from one of the in-class readings after my approval).
The second option for the paper is to take any regional or functional international issue of your
choice and to write a paper that uses course models and concepts to analyze why an organization,
nation, or group of nations has adopted particular policies on this issue. Again, the emphasis is on
using course concepts and theories to explain events instead of merely describing them, or you might
use events to test or challenge theories. Avoid excessive advocacy on what you think a policy
2
"should" be -- you can say something on this in your conclusions, but your main focus should be on
explaining the behavior of particular international actors or on testing a specific hypothesis. You
might want to choose from among the issues raised in class, or you can select any other current issue
if you get the approval of the instructor.
Or if you do not like these two options, take my final exam!
4. Course Schedule
Week 1. Introduction
Orientation and Ice-Breaking!
Week 2.World Politics of Theories: Levels and Units of World Politics
Why do we learn theories? How can we better analyze the world of complexities? How do we
efficiently simplify it while not sacrificing the complex context and theoretical parsimony?
Why do we just learn diplomatic history rather than IR theories ?
Read) Kegley Ch.1 and Genest , Ch.1 (Particularly, Stephen Walt on pg.29)
Week 3. Theories of World Politics – Classical-Realism and Neo-Realism
What is anarchy? What is “Structure” in International Politics? Why is war inevitable in the
world of anarchy? Why do states seek power while distrusting each other? What is security
dilemma? After all, how do they perceive human and our history?
Read) Kegley, Ch.2 and Genest Ch.2 (Particularly, Morgenthau, p.63; Randall Schweller,
“New Realist Research on Alliances: Refining, Not Refuting, Waltz's Balancing Proposition,"
American Political Science Review, Vol. 91, No. 4 (December 1997)
Week 4. Theories of World Politics- Liberalism
How does Liberals agree and disagree with the world perceived by realism? Why liberals belive
that institutions matter? How does an institution can contribute to overcoming the curse of
security dilemma?
Read) Kegley, Ch.2 and Genest Ch.3 (Particularly, Nye, p154 and Keohane, 163) ); Keohane
and Lisa L. Martin, “the Promise of Institutional Theory,” International Security, Vol.20 No.1
(Summer, 1995), pp. 39-51.
3
Week 5. Theories of World Politics – Constructivism
How does constructivism perceive the notion of rationality? What does it mean by “anarchy is
what states make of it”? What does it mean by collective identity? Does power matter more
than norm and culture to constructivist?
Read) Kegley, Ch.2 and Genest Ch.5 & 6 (Particularly, Wendt, p.281, Fukuyama, p393,
Huntington, p.412); Alexander Wendt “Constructing International Politics” International
Security, Vol. 20, No.1, (summer, 1995)
Week 6. Military Power, Coercive Diplomacy, and National Security
Does “Power” matter? What Kinds of Power? What is the role of software (i.e. perception, norm
and culture) in activating material powers?
Read) Kegley, Ch.5 and the Following; Richard Herrmann and Jong Kun Choi, “From
Prediction to Learning: Opening Experts’ Minds to Unfolding History” International Security
Vol. 31, No. 4 (Spring, 2007), pp.132-161 [Skim but concentrate on pp.141-153]
Week 7. Paths to War and Peace Making (I): Realist Roads to Security
Why states form alliances? What is balance of power ? and how does it differ from hegemonic
stability theory in terms of perceiving the role of hegemonic power? How do states achieve
cooperation under anarchy?
Read) Kegley, Ch.13 and the Following : Kenneth Waltz, “the Origin of War in Neorealist
Theory,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History Vol.18, No.4 (Spring, 1998), pp. 615-628;
Week 8. Paths to War and Peace Making (II): Liberalist Roads to Security
How does international organization work under anarchy? Does international law matter? What
about functionality in brining out cooperation between distrustful states?
Read) Kegley, Ch.13 and the Following : ; G. John Ikenberry, “Institutions, Strategic
restraint, and the Persistence of American Postwar Order” International
Security 23, 3 (Winter 1998-1999), pp. 43-78.
Week 9. Paths to War and Peace Making (III): Alternative Roads to Security
Is the notion of International Society really a viable concept if we observe the world of
anarchy? How does international norm affect state-interactions? Is war a die-hard concept?
4
What about the idea of war-aversion?
Read) Kegley, Ch.14 and the Following; Robert Jervis, “Theories of War in an Era of LeadingPower Peace,” American Political Science Review 96:1 (March 2002), pp.1-14; John Muller,
“The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability in the Postwar World,” International
Security 13, no.2 (Fall 1988), pp.55-79
Week 10. Mid-Term.
Have Fun and don’t be afraid. Just let it out! And Don’t hate your teacher.
Week 11. Market and Money in the Global Political Economy
Does international interdependence contribute to peace-making? Is free trade going to change
the dynamics of state cooperation? OR state cooperation increase free trade? How do financial
international regimes affect durability of stable international orders?
Read) Kegley, Ch.9 and Genest Ch.4 (Particularly, Wallerstein, p.213)
Week 12. Globalization: Cure or Curse for Peace-Making?
What is globalization anyway? Would it change the dynamics of world politics? Has it changed
a bit? What about the North-South division still looming large over the world economy?
Read) Kegley, Ch.8 and Genest Ch.4 (Particularly, Wallerstein, p.213 and Chomsky, p.240)
Week 13. IR Issue (I): Rising China and International Relations Order in the 21 st Century.
Is China going to be a thereat or an opportunity for World Politics in the 21 st Century? What is
the stance taken by each major perspective of IR theories and How do they differ based on what
assumptions?
Read) Zbigniew Brzezinski and John J. Mearsheimer, “Clash of the Titans,” Foreign Po
licy (Jan./Feb. 2005); David Shambaugh, “China Engages Asia: Reshaping International
Security, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Winter 2004/5), p. 66; Thomas Christensen, “China, the U.S.-Ja
pan Alliance, and the Security Dilemma in East Asia”, International Security, Vol. 23 N
o. 4, pp. 49–80; Gilbert Rozman, “China’s changing images of Japan, 1989-2001: the s
truggle to balance partnership and rivalry,” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, V
ol.2. No.(2002).
5
Week 14. IR Issue (II): Predictions of Tragedy vs. Tragedy of Predictions in Northeast Asian
Security.
Is Northeast Asia going to be a region of tragedy meaning a sub-continent of conflicts and
tensions? How have IR theories captured this region since the end of the Cold War? And how
much have they been right?
Read) Jong Kun Choi, "Predictions of Tragedy vs. Tragedy of Predictions in Northeast Asian
Security," the Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, Vol.28, No.1. (Spring, 2006), pp. 733;Gayes Chrisoffersen, “The Role of East Asia in Sino-American Relations,” Asian Survey,
Vol. 42, No.3 (May/June, 2002), pp.369-396; Aaron Friedberg, “The Future of U.S.-China
Relations: Is Conflict Inevitable?,” International Security, Vol. 30, No.2 (Fall 2005), pp. 7–45.
Week 15: IR Issue (III): the Korean Peninsula
How can IR theories contribute to understanding the Korean Peninsula? Or do we not need
them at all?
Read) Victor D Cha. “A Hawk Engagement and Preventive Defense on the Korean Penin
sula,”International Security, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Summer 2002), pp. 40-78; David C Kang, “I
nternational Relations Theory and the Second Korean War,” International Studies Quarterl
y, Vol. 47, No.3 (September 2003), pp. 301-324; Jae Ho Chung, “South Korea Between
Eagle and Dragon: Perceptual Ambivalence and Strategic Dilemma,” Asian Survey, Vol. 4
1, No.5 (Sep/Oct, 2001), pp. 777-796.
Week 16. Final Exam / Paper Submission!
6