Political Science 695
Seminar: Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict
Professor Nadav Shelef
Fall 2009
Office Hours: Thursday 2-4, and by appointment
Office: 414 North Hall
Phone: 263-2280
Email: shelef@wisc.edu
Course Description
Nationalist conflict and ethnic contestation remain major components of global politics. Drawing on cases from around the world, this course explores why this is the case. In the process, we will address a number of crucial questions: What are nations and ethnic groups? Where do they come from? Why do they pick particular territories? How do they define who can be part of the group?
Why are they so successful in mobilizing people to kill and be killed? In the course of answering these questions, the course investigates the interactions between nations and states, religion and nationalism, globalization, citizenship and minority rights, and the causes and solutions for national and ethnic conflict.
Grading Criteria
Final course grades will be assigned according to the following weights:
Discussion anchoring 5%
Participation
Critical reaction papers
10%
10%
Mid-term exam
Research paper
30%
45%
Course Requirements
Students are expected to attend each class ready to contribute to the discussion and to have done the readings assigned for each week prior to class. Although I may provide contextual and introductory material for some books or set of readings, responsibility for the direction of class discussions will be shared among us.
Discussion anchors
. A single set of discussion questions (which should be jointly constructed when there are two or more discussion anchors) must be emailed to the class list (polisci695-5-f08@lists.wisc.edu) no later than twenty-four hours before class. During class discussion anchors will not only be responsible for leading discussion, but also be available to answer questions, share resources, and summarize major arguments of the reading. Discussion anchors can introduce the discussion in any way they choose. Creative discussion formats (e.g., class debates, in-class group projects, etc.) are welcome.
Critical reaction papers
1

Every student is required to email the professor a critical reaction paper each week by 9am
Wednesday morning . No more than 2 double-spaced pages, these are meant to sharpen your critical skills, stimulate thought and promote further exploration of the readings.
Critical reaction papers are not simply summaries of the readings. I want you to demonstrate that you have read and given serious thought to the material for that week. To do so, in addition to summarizing the arguments in the reading, include your own reactions to them, describe their implications in the context of the other readings we’ve done that week or previously and point out their limitations. An effective reaction paper demonstrates knowledge of all assigned readings, but may focus on one significant element (theme, argument, issue). You might consider the following questions as you write your reaction papers:
1) What are the principal arguments or points of view offered in the readings? What are the key theoretical points? What are they trying to explain? Are they successful?
2) What assumptions do the readings make? Are they plausible? How would you refute them?
3) Is the evidence offered by the readings to substantiate their argument relevant, effective, and convincing? What are its weaknesses?
4) What are the broader implications of the readings?
5) How does this reading compare/contrast to, or expand on, other material presented in this class, other classes, or your outside experience?
6) What questions remain unanswered once you’ve finished reading this week’s reading? What should have been addressed?
Regardless of the particular strategy you adopt for these assignments, your reaction papers should also be concise, well-written, and carefully proofread.
Research Paper
The research paper will provide you with an opportunity to explore nationalism or ethnic relations in a particular context in significant depth. I am relatively open about the scope of topics that can be chosen. However, if you have trouble coming up with one, I would be happy to assign a research topic to you.
Students are required to submit a research proposal to the professor by November 6 th . This proposal should be no more than one page long and include a discussion of the research question and no less than eight sources that you plan on using in your research. You are also strongly encouraged to meet with the professor to discuss the progress of your paper throughout the class.
The papers must be emailed to me by 5pm on December 15 th . Late papers will be penalized half of one letter grade for every day they are late.
The paper itself should be 20-25 pages double spaced using 12pt Times New Roman font.
Citations must be provided in footnotes using the Chicago Manual style. For information see, http://www.wisc.edu/writing/Handbook/DocChicago.html
A good paper both informs and persuades; to do this it must be logically organized, clearly argued, and well documented. Avoid writing a paper that merely restates the readings or repeats the lectures or discussion sections. You need to do some original thinking, research, and analysis in this paper. Stay away from normative arguments or political polemics. This is hard work. You
2

are strongly encouraged to meet with me to discuss the progress of your paper throughout the semester.
Style Counts! Spelling mistakes as well as errors of syntax and grammar are unacceptable. At best they are evidence of sloppy work. At worst they make your argument impossible to understand. While style does not replace substance, a poorly written or organized paper makes it difficult to get to your argument. I encourage you to consult the UW Writing Center’s “Writer’s
Handbook” for more information about style, organization and references. http://www.wisc.edu/writing/Handbook/index.html
There are also a number of excellent guides on the web that I encourage you to consult about how you could go about writing an analytical research paper. Some good sites include:

How to Research a Political Science Paper, by Peter Liberman: http://qcpages.qc.edu/Political_Science/researching.html

Writing Political Science Papers: Some Useful Guidelines, by Peter Liberman,: http://qcpages.qc.edu/Political_Science/tips.html

Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students, by Patrick
Rael: http://www.bowdoin.edu/writing-guides/

Writing a Research Paper, by Sarah Hamid: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/workshops/hypertext/ResearchW/index.html

An accurate summary of some things not to do, which (unfortunately) students commonly do, can be found at Advice on How to Write a Bad Paper.
Here is a rough explanation of how to understand the grading of the papers:
A: This is an outstanding paper. It is well organized around a clear and insightful argument that is logically organized and well-supported with evidence from the historical record and the scholarly literature. The paper considers alternative arguments, deals with countervailing evidence, and weighs their relative merits. It also convincingly shows that its main argument is better/more complete than the alternatives. This paper also shows how and why the question it pursues and the answer it offers are significant and important. There are few (or no) spelling or proofreading problems and the paper is well and appropriately documented.
AB: High quality in terms of style and content. The paper has a clear thesis statement, good organization and supporting evidence. It shows a solid grasp of the issues at stake and is well written. This paper shows evidence of original thought and planning. While it makes some reference to the scholarly literature it does not fully engage it.
B: The paper shows a decent understanding of the phenomenon and the overall argument is relatively clear although it may tend more toward summary than analysis. While the wider literature is acknowledged, the paper does not add its own insights. However, there may be significant grammatical and syntax errors, organizational problems, and the references to the literature may be perhaps a bit narrow, superficial or insufficient.
BC: The paper conforms to some of the requirements, but falls short on many, or is seriously marred by crucial shortcomings, including, but not limited to, poor organization, poor grammar or a poor understanding of the question. While there is some attempt to deal with the question,
3

the argument is unclear and/or it is not adequately supported by appropriate evidence. There is little attempt to anchor the argument in the literature on the topic.
C: The paper attempts to pose and answer a question but does not actually do so. In other words, it has no argument. It may also be plagued by, among other problems, poor organization, poor writing, over-generality, lack of evidence or its inappropriate, selective or partial use.
F: The paper does not meet the requirements of the assignment and/or is so poorly written as to be unintelligible or has plagiarized from a published text or another student. Note also that an adequate paper that is not on an appropriate topic also falls within this realm
I will take into consideration papers whose final draft shows substantial and significant improvement over earlier drafts. Note, to take advantage of this you have to complete drafts of your paper early enough to get feedback. I require at least 3 weekdays to get a draft back to you with comments. In other words, don’t wait until the last moment to start your paper.
Academic Conduct
This seminar is geared to maximize our joint exploration of the course material. Serious scholarly discussion becomes impossible when diatribe and invective displace scholarly analysis.
As a result, when posing questions or responding to others, students are expected to demonstrate an appropriate level of respect despite what might be deep disagreements.
The paper you are required to write will require you to cite other people’s work. Plagiarism will not be tolerated!
If you are caught turning in work that is not your own or using another author’s work without properly citing it, you will receive an F on the assignment. If you have any questions about what constituted academic dishonesty, please consult the Dean of Students
Web page, at http://www.wisc.edu/students/saja/misconduct/UWS14.html
Required Readings
Many of the required readings for this course are in the course reader, which is available at the
Underground Textbook Exchange. A copy of the reader has also been placed on reserve in
College Library.
The following books are required for the course and are available at the Underground Textbook
Exchange or on reserve in College Library:
Benedict Anderson, 2006. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism . Verso.
Rogers Brubaker, 1998. Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany . Harvard
University Press.
John Hutchinson and Anthony D. Smith, eds. 1994. Nationalism . Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
4

COURSE SCHEDULE
September 8: Introductions and definitions
Ernst Renan, “What is a nation,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 17-8.
Joseph Stalin, “The nation,” in Hutchinson and Smith, Nationalism , 18-21.
Max Weber, “The nation,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 21-6.
Karl Deutsch, “Nationalism and social communication,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism ,
26-9.
Walker Connor. “A Nation is a Nation, is a State, is an Ethnic Group is a…,” in Hutchinson and
Smith, Nationalism , 36-47.
September 15: How old are nations: Primordialism vs. modernism
Pierre Van Den Berghe, “A socio-biological perspective,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 96-103.
Clifford Geertz, “Primordial and Civic Ties,” in Hutchinson and Smith, Nationalism , 29-34.
Anthony Smith, “The Origins of Nations,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 147-154.
Kohn, Hans. 1939. "The Nature of Nationalism," The American Political Science Review , 33(6):
1001-1021.*
Walker Connor. 1993. “Beyond Reason: The Nature of the Ethnonational Bond,” Ethnic and
Racial Studies, 16(3): 373-389.*
Ernest Gellner, “Nationalism and High Cultures,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 63-70.
Franscisco J. Gil-White, 1999. “How Thick is Blood? The Plot Thickens . . . : If Ethnic Actors are Primordialists, What Remains of the Circumstantialist/Primordialist Controversy?”
Ethnic and Racial Studies , 22(5): 789-820.*
September 22: Imagined and real: the constructivist perspective
Benedict Anderson, 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism . London: Verso Press. 1-66, 163-206. (The rest is highly recommended, but not required).
September 29: Imagining, using, or inventing nations?
Eric Hobsbawm. “The nation as invented tradition,” in Hutchinson and Smith, Nationalism , 76-
83.
Trevor-Roper, Hugh. 1983. “The Invention of Tradition: The Highland Tradition of Scotland,” in
The Invention of Tradition . Eds. Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.*
Paul Brass. 1991. “Elite Groups, Symbol Manipulation and Ethnic Identity Among the Muslims of South Asia,” in Paul Brass (ed.)
Ethnicity and Nationalism: Theory and Comparison .
New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 69-108.*
Yael Zerubavel. 1995. Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National
Tradition . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 3-76.*
October 6: Nationalism and the state
Anderson, Imagined Communities , 83-113.
5

Eric Hobsbawm, 1990. Nations and Nationalism since 1780 . Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. pp. 80-100*
Eugen Weber. 1976. Peasants into Frenchmen: the Modernization of Rural France 1870-1914 ,
Stanford: Stanford University Press., pp.292-338.*
Benyamin Neuberger, “State and Nation in African Thought,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 231-236.
Michael Ignatieff. 1995. Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism . New York:
Noonday Press. Ch. 5.*
Michael Totten, Aug/Sep 2006. “Kurds go their own way,” Reason :18-28.*
Gellner, Ernest. 1997. “The Marriage of State and culture,” in
Nationalism . New York: NYU
Press.
October 13: Nationalism and citizenship
Mosse, George L. 1995. “Racism and Nationalism,”
Nations and Nationalism , 1(2):163-173.
Rogers Brubaker, 1992. Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany . Cambridge:
Harvard University Press. Everybody reads 1-34, 75-84 and either the chapters on France
(chs.2,5,7) or the chapters on Germany (chs. 3,6,8).
“Can Merkel’s Integration Summit Deliver More than Just Promises,”
Der Spiegel , July 11,
2007.*
“The integration dilemma,” The Economist , July 19, 2007.*
“Survey: Minority Report,”
The Economist , October 28, 2006.*
October 20: Mid-term
October 27: Nationalism and Colonialism
Crawford Young, “The Colonial Construction of African Nations,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 225-231.
Frantz Fanon, “On National Culture,” 206-248.*
Forrest, Joshua B. “Nationalism in Post-Colonial States,” in Lowell W. Barrington, ed.
After
Independence: Making and Protecting the Nation in postcolonial and postcommunist states . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 33-43.*
Herbst, Jeffrey. Autumn, 1989. “The Creation and Maintenance of National Boundaries in
Africa,” International Organization , 43(4): 673-692.*
Laitin, David D. 1985. “Hegemony and Religious Conflict: British Imperial Control and Political
Cleavages in Yorubaland,” in Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol, eds., Bringing the State Back In , pp. 285-316.*
November 3: Religious Nationalism
Marx, Anthony. 2003. Faith in Nation: Exclusionary Origins of Nationalism.
New York: Oxford
University Press, 73-112.*
Smith, Anthony D. 2000. “The 'Sacred' Dimension of Nationalism,”
Millennium , 29(3): 791-
814.*
Juergensmeyer, Mark. July, 1995. “The New Religious State.” Comparative Politics 27(4): 379-
91.*
6

Tamar Mayer. 2005. “National symbols in Jewish Israel: Representation and Collective
Memory,” in Michel E. Geisler, ed.,
National Symbols, Fractured Identities: Contesting the National Narrative . Middlebury, VT: University Press of New England, 3-34*
November 10: Nationalism and Conflict
Gellner, Ernest. 1997. “The murderous virulence of nationalism,” in Nationalism . New York:
NYU Press.
Michael Howard, “War and Nations,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 254-258.
Posen, Barry. Spring 1993. “The security dilemma and ethnic conflict,”
Survival , 35(1):27-47.*
Laitin, David. 1995. "National revivals and violence," European Journal of Sociology , 36: 3-43.*
V.P. Gagnon, Jr. Winter 1994/1995. “Ethnic Nationalism and International Conflict: The Case of
Serbia," International Security, 19(3), pp. 132-168.* with correction.
Kaufman, Stuart J. Spring 2006. “Symbolic politics or rational choice? Testing theories of extreme ethnic violence,”
International Security , 30(4): 45-86.*
Posner, Daniel. “The Political Salience of Cultural Difference: Why Chewas and Tumbukas Are
Allies in Zambia and Adversaries in Malawi.” American Political Science Review . 98.4
(2004): 529-545.*
Fearon, James and David Laitin. December 1996. “Explaining Interethnic Cooperation,”
The
American Political Science Review , 90(4): 715-735.*
November 17: Resolving ethnic and national conflict
Donald Horowitz, “The Logic of secessions,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 261-269.
James Mayall, “Irredentist and secessionist Challenges,” in Hutchinson and Smith, Nationalism ,
269-280.
Lijphart, Arend. 2004. “Constitutional Design for Divided Societies,” Journal of Democracy
15(2): 96-109.*
O’Leary, Brendan. 2003. “What States Can Do with Nations: An Iron Law of Nationalism and
Federation?,” in T. V. Paul, G. John Ikenberry, and John A. Hall, eds.,
The Nation-State in Question . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 51-78.*
Kaufmann, Chaim. Autumn, 1998. “When All Else Fails: Ethnic Population Transfers and
Partitions in the Twentieth Century,” International Security , 23(2): 120-156.
Horowitz, Donald L. April 2003. “The Cracked Foundations of the Right to Secede,” Journal of
Democracy 14(2):5-17.
Gerard Boismenu, 1996. “Perspectives on Quebec-Canada Relations in the 1990s: Is the
Reconciliation of Ethnicity, Nationality, and Citizenship Possible?” Canadian Review of
Studies in Nationalism , 23(1-2): 99-109.*
Chapman, Thomas and Philip Roeder, November 2007. “Partition as a Solution to Wars of
Nationalism: The Importance of Institutions,”
American Journal of Political Science ,
101(4):677-691.
November 24: Simulation: Ethnic conflict in Iraq
Crane, Conrad C. and W. Andrew Terrill. February 2003. “Reconstructing Iraq: Insights, challenges and Missions for Military Forces in a post-conflict scenario,” Strategic Studies
Institute monograph, Historical Background, 20-32.
Biden Memo.
International Crisis Group, “A Constitutional Process Gone Awry.”
7

Wimmer, Andreas. Winter 2003-4. “Democracy and Ethno-religious Conflict in Iraq,” Survival ,
45(4):111-134.
Brancati, Dawn.Spring 2004. “Can Federalism Stabilize Iraq,” The Washington Quarterly ,
27(2):7-21.
December 1: Nationalism, minorities, and democracy
Chaterjee, Partha. “National History and its exclusions,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism ,
209-214.
Will Kymlicka, April 2000. “Nation-Building and Minority Rights: Comparing East and West,”
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 26(2):183-212.*
Leah Greenfeld, “Types of European Nationalism,” in Hutchinson and Smith,
Nationalism , 165-
171.
Jack Snyder and Karen Ballentine. 1996. “Nationalism and the Marketplace of Ideas,”
International Security , 21(2):5-40.
Juan J. Linz and Alfred Stepan. 1996. Problems in Democratic Transition and Consolidation .
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 401-433.
David Brown. 1999. “Are there good and bad nationalisms?”
Nations and Nationalisms,
5(2):281-302.*
December 8: Nationalism, the nation-state, and globalization
Gueheno Jean-Marie. 1995. “The end of the nation” in The end of the nation-state , Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Smith, Anthony D. 1990. "The Supersession of Nationalism?" International Journal of
Comparative Sociology 31(1-2): 1-31.
Cable, Vincent. Spring 1995. “The Diminished Nation-State: A Study in the Loss of Economic
Power,”
Daedalus , pp. 23-53.
Benjamin Barber, 1992. “Jihad vs. McWorld,” Atlantic Monthly , 269(3):53-65*
Laitin, David. 2001. “National Identities in the European State.” in Minority Nationalism and the
Changing International Order . Michael Keating and John McGarry, eds. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.*
John McGarry, 2001. “Globalization, European Integration, and the Northern Ireland Conflict,” in Minority Nationalism and the Changing International Order . Michael Keating and
John McGarry, eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.*
December 15: Papers due
8