THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
ELLIOTT SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
SECURITY POLICY STUDIES PROGRAM
PSc 6348.10 (CRN 33383)
Politics of U.S.
National Security Policy
Thursdays 7:10 - 9 p.m.
Location: Rome Hall 202
Fall 2012
Dr. Chuck Cushman
Phone: (202) 333-4838
email: cushmanc@gwu.edu
or cc844@georgetown.edu
Office Hours: By Appointment
Course Objectives:
This is a process-oriented course; as such, we seek to turn theoretical perspectives into useful guide
posts for actual, hands-on work in the policy-making establishment. For those of you in the Security
Studies program, this course ties into your core courses; we will only touch on the related fields of national security strategy and defense budgeting. For Ph.D. candidates, please arrange to meet with me
shortly after the course starts so we can find more, and more appropriate readings to give you the theoretical richness you will likely want.
This course is designed to help you understand the means and procedures through which the US
government sets national security policy. At the end of this course, students should be able to:



Identify the key players, rules, and processes in the US national security policy process;
Apply the lessons of the main theoretical explanations to US policy decision-making; and
Explain current US national security policies, national interests and key issues.
Course description:
This is a semester-long conversation about how the US makes policy in the four related national security policy fields (foreign, defense, intelligence and homeland security). I want to hear everyone take
part, and to share their assessments, experience, and analysis of the material we will be covering.
Since we will be discussing national security issues every week in class, I hope you are all regular
consumers of the main national newspapers (Washington Post, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal),
regional/opinion leader papers (Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Washington Times, and
The Christian Science Monitor), and defense and foreign policy journals like Defense News, Foreign Affairs,
Foreign Policy, Washington Quarterly, and Jane’s Defense Weekly. And I expect many of you already follow
a broad array of foreign news outlets as well.
We will be trying to come to terms with the challenge of national security policy making today, but
many of our leaders came of age during a very different time: the Cold War. Cold War thinking about
US national security policy divided the world into “us” and “them” and was essentially a policy of conflict and confrontation with the Soviet Union. A broad and sustained consensus supported this approach,
which was developed over nearly fifty years. But the main feature of US defense and foreign policy
making since 1991 has been discord – leaders in both parties and at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue
have not been able to agree on the interests or goals of US policy. Even after 9-11, US leaders never
came to a consensus about the US’s role in the world, and how to accomplish that role. This lack of
agreement makes an already-complex policy process even worse.
We will approach this challenging situation theoretically, institutionally, and practically. The course
consists of four sections. Section One provides a framework for understanding US national security
policymaking. We will review the basic theoretical models used for making sense of the decisionmaking process, from both the IR and bureaucratic politics fields. Section Two concerns the process
2
itself: What is current policy? Who are the key players? What do they worry about, and how do they
interact to make decisions? We will engage in a three-part simulation interspersed through this section
of the class, which gives you the chance to get some hands-on experience with the complexity, ambiguity, and confusion of policymaking in Washington. A separate handout describes the policy simulation.
Section Three concludes the course – does our security policy process work, or is it too large and amorphous to respond to the threats the US faces today? We should be able to assess the utility of current
US processes and to suggest future directions for reform or additional policy.
Course grading:
The grade for this course is based on the elements listed below. The descriptions follow the list.
 One-pagers, for lessons 2-8 (7 papers)
21 %
 Class presentation (lsns 2-12)
9%
 Simulation documents:
55 % total:
 Bio and individual position paper (lsn 4)
20 %
 Group paper (lsn 9)
15 %
 Testimony or opening statement (lsn 9)
15 %
 Simulation participation 360° evaluation (lsn 13)
5%
 Final reflection paper (lsn 14)
15 %
100 %
One-pagers are one-page (single-spaced) critical assessments of the course readings. In each onepager, you answer three questions:
 What, VERY briefly, is the main argument of the week’s material?
 Offer your analysis of the reading—does it make a sensible, supported argument?
 Does the reading help you make sense of the course objectives… should we read it, or is there
something else that would be better?
These one-pagers are due at the end of each class period – if you must be absent, e-mail them to me.
One if due for each lesson marked with an asterisk (*) in the class listing below.
Each student will give a ten to fifteen minute class presentation in one class, as well. Topics will be
listed for sign-up in lesson one. The student speaker owns the floor for their presentation and can do it
in any format desired, as long as you get the information across and successfully answer any questions
from your fellow students….
Simulation documents: The bio, position paper, group paper, and testimony/opening statement
are all described in the simulation memo I will hand out separately. At the end of the simulation, you
will also do a short evaluation of each other’s contribution to the simulation, which I will use for the
360° grade.
Finally, your reflection paper makes up the remaining fifteen per cent of the grade. Your final paper is due the end of the final week of class (i.e., the Friday after our last class at lesson 14). This fivepage (maximum, single-spaced) essay should address two topics. First, quickly tell me what you expected out of this class, and whether we met those expectations, overall; this includes the class meetings, readings, and your preparation (one-pagers, class presentation, etc.) for the class. Second, capture
your observations and analysis of the simulation – did your role, and the others in the simulation, track
with the theory, processes and practices we studied in Sections I and II? What happened and why?
Based on our readings, assigned and otherwise, what did you expect to happen? Why did it, or did it
3
not happen? What were your policy objectives for that role? What was your strategy to achieve your
objectives? What went right or wrong and why? What would you do differently?
Final note:
You are in a graduate seminar, and I expect graduate students to have mastered research skills and
argumentative writing already. Much of what you learn in graduate school, and in this class, will depend on you. I expect you to take active part in the class, using your personal experience and interests
to contribute to our discussions. I also expect you to be able to make strong cases for your recommendation(s) in all of the written work for this class, and to be able to do so clearly, with correct reference
to the experts you cite. If you need help with this, please talk to me – I am happy to work with you if
you feel you need further guidance on policy writing. Grammar, spelling, and proper citations matter!
Finally, I expect all course work to be submitted on time. I do not offer “incomplete” grades. Late
submission of any requirement will be subject to automatic grade reduction at the rate of one letter
grade per week until the end date of the course. Any paper submitted after the due date for the final
paper will be issued an automatic failing grade. Start early and complete your work on time.
Required texts: (* indicates a Kindle version is available.)
Allison, Graham. 1999. Essence of decision. 2nd edition. Pearson. ISBN: 978-0321013491.*
George, Roger and Harvey Rishikof, Editors.2011. The national security enterprise: Navigating the labyrinth. Georgetown University Press. ISBN: 978-1589016989
Hersman, Rebecca. 2000. Friends and foes: How Congress and the President really make foreign policy. Brookings Institution. ISBN: 0815735650.
Jordan, Amos, William Taylor, Michael Meese, and Suzanne Nielsen. 2009. American national security.
Sixth edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN: 9780801891540.*
Kettl, Donald. 2007. System under stress: Homeland security and American politics. 2nd Edition. CQ. ISBN:
978-0872893337.*
Wilson, James Q. 1991. Bureaucracy. Basic Books. ISBN: 978-0465007851.*
Classroom Emergency Preparedness and Response Information:
To Report an Emergency or Suspicious Activity: Call the University Police Department at 202-9946111. If the line is unavailable or you are calling from another University location, dial 911.
Shelter in Place – General Guidance: Although it is unlikely that we will ever need to shelter in
place, it is helpful to know what to do just in case. No matter where you are on campus, the basic steps
of shelter in place will generally remain the same:
• If you are inside, stay where you are unless the building you are in is affected. If it is affected, you
should evacuate. If you are outdoors, proceed into the closest GW building or follow instructions
from emergency personnel on scene.
• Shelter-in-place in an interior room, above ground level, and with the fewest windows.
• Shut and lock all windows (locking will form a tighter seal) and close exterior doors.
• Turn off air conditioners, heaters, fans. Close vents to ventilation systems if you can.
• Make a list of the people with you and call UPD so they know where you are sheltering.
• Visit GW Campus Advisories for incident updates (campusadvisories.gwu.edu) or call the GW
Information Line 202-994-5050. If possible, turn on a radio or television and listen for further in-
4
•
structions. If you have Alert DC, check for alert notifications.
You will get word as soon as it is safe to come out.
Evacuation: An evacuation will be considered if the building we are in is affected or we must move
to a location of greater safety. We will always evacuate if the fire alarm sounds. In the event of an evacuation, please gather your personal belongings quickly (purse, keys, cell phone, GWorld card, etc.) and
proceed to the nearest exit. We will examine the exit routes at our first class meeting. Do not use the
elevator. Once we have evacuated the building, proceed to our primary rendezvous location, the
Kogan Plaza area in front of the Well (H street, between 21st and 22nd streets). In the event that this location is unavailable, we will meet at the Marvin Center, monumental entrance (21st street side).
Date
Topic and readings:
I. A framework for analyzing US National Security policy
30
Aug
1: Introduction/Overview: How does the US make national security policy?
Y, Mr. 2011. A National Strategic Narrative. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Available on Blackboard site and at
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/A%20National%20Strategic%20Narrative.pdf
Scan: (also all on Blackboard site)
Bush, George W. 2002. Graduation Address, US Military Academy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/01/international/02PTEX-WEB.html
Obama, Barack. 2009. Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on the Way Forward in Afghanistan and Pakistan. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarkspresident-address-nation-way-forward-afghanistan-and-pakistan
Byrd, Robert C. 2003. We Stand Passively Mute. 108th Congress, 1st Session, 13 February.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/We_Stand_Passively_Mute
Note: Selection of student presentation topics/lessons
6
Sep
13
Sep
2: Theories of policy-making I and II (The international system, and levels of analysis)*
Allison, Introduction, Chs. 1, 3, 5, 7
Scan:
Jordan, et al., Chs. 1-3
Note: Simulation topic selection during class
3: Theories of policy-making III (Bureaucratic politics 101)
Wilson, Introduction, Parts I, II;
Scan:
Wilson, Parts V-VI
Note: Simulation role selection during class
Note: Simulation Biography due Monday, 17 September, by 11:59 PM
20
Sep
4: Simulation: NSC meeting and committee markups
27
Sep
5: What is the official US national security policy?*
White House. 2010. The National Security Strategy of the United States.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/national_security_strategy.pdf
5
Department of Defense. 2011. The National Military Strategy of the United States of America.
http://www.jcs.mil/content/files/2011-02/020811084800_2011_NMS_-_08_FEB_2011.pdf
Department of Defense. 2008. The National Defense Strategy of the United States of America.
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/2008%20National%20Defense%20Strategy.pdf
27
Sep
cont
White House. 2007. The National Strategy For Homeland Security.
www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/nat_strat_homelandsecurity_2007.pdf
Optional:
Previous editions of the National Security Strategy (on Blackboard site)
United States Commission on National Security/21st Century. 1999-2001. Phase I Report:
New World Coming; Phase II Report: Seeking a National Strategy; and Phase III Report: Road Map
for National Security. All available at http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/nssg/Reports/reports.htm
II. Making US National Security policy
4
Oct
11
Oct
18
Oct
6: Congress and policy making*
Hersman
George and Rishikof, Chs. 11, 13-15
Scan:
Jordan, et al.: Ch.5
Haas, Karen. 2011. Rules of the House of Representatives. Rule X: Committees.
US Senate. n.d. Standing Rules of the Senate. Rule XXV: Standing Committees.
http://rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=RulesOfSenateHome
King, Kay. 2010. Congress and National Security. Council Special Report No. 58. Council on
Foreign Relations. http://www.cfr.org/congress/congress-national-security/p23359
7: White House, EOP, OMB, and the Interagency process*
George and Rishikof, Introduction, Chs. 1-3, 16
Scan:
Jordan, et al., Chs. 4, 9-10
White House. 2011. Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2012.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Overview (look at President’s Budget Message, DOD, Department of State, DHS, and National Intelligence Program)
Optional:
Adams, Gordon, and Cindy Williams, 2009. Buying National Security: How America Plans and
Pays for Its Global Role and Safety at Home. Routledge.
Deutch John, Arnold Kanter, Brent Scowcroft, with Christopher Hornbarger. 2001. Strengthening the National Security Interagency Process. In Carter, Ashton, and John P. White, editors. Keeping the edge. http://www.ciaonet.org/book/caa01/caa01l.pdf
Note: Simulation Position Paper due Friday, 12 October, by 11:59 PM
8: The foreign policy establishment: State*
George and Rishikof, Ch. 4
State Department, 2010. Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review.
http://www.state.gov/s/dmr/qddr/
Scan:
Jordan, et al., Chs. 11-12, 16
6
Optional:
Binnendijk, Hans. Editor. 2002. Transforming America’s Military. NDU. Chapters 1-8, 12.
www.ndu.edu/CTNSP/docUploaded/TAM.pdf
25
Oct
9: The defense policy establishment: DOD*
1
Nov
11: The Intelligence Community*
8
Nov
10: Simulation:
15
Nov
12: The new kid: Department of Homeland Security
Jordan, et al., Chs. 8, 13-15
George and Rishikof, Chs. 5-6
Defense Department, 2010. Quadrennial Defense Review. http://www.defense.gov/qdr/
Optional:
Deutch John, Arnold Kanter, Brent Scowcroft, with Christopher Hornbarger. 2001. Strengthening the National Security Interagency Process. In Carter, Ashton, and John P. White, editors. Keeping the edge. http://www.ciaonet.org/book/caa01/caa01l.pdf
Jordan, et al., Ch. 7
George and Rishikof, Chs. 7-9
Office of the Director, National Intelligence. 2009. National Intelligence Strategy.
www.dni.gov/reports/2009_NIS.pdf
Note: Simulation Hearing Materials due Friday, 2 November, by 11:59 PM
Congressional Hearings
Kettl
George and Rishikof, Ch. 10
Scan:
Jordan, et al., Ch. 6
III. Conclusion: The System Makes a Policy Choice?
29
Nov
13: Simulation:
6
Dec
14: Conclusion: Does the process work?
Floor Action, presidential decisions, congressional reactions, and after action review
Note: Final Paper due Friday, 7 December, by 11:59 PM