BSS 185/485 United States Foreign and Security Policy Faculty Prof Dr Schuyler Foerster, DPhil Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Social Studies, Department of Political Science 240648@mail.muni.cz skyfoerster@gmail.com Course Schedule When: Every Monday, 11:30 am – 1:00 pm, 20 February – 15 May EXCEPT 17 April, 1 May, and 8 May [holidays] Where: FSS Room P-22 Course Objective This course offers an analytical and historical framework for understanding contemporary U.S. foreign policy, with particular emphasis on U.S. national security policy. Through lectures and seminar discussions, case studies, and simulations, we will examine the following main topics: · How historical traditions and the persistent debate between values and interests have informed and shaped U.S. foreign policy throughout American history. · The evolution of U.S. foreign policy following World War II to the present, as the U.S. attempts to adapt to radically changing international political environments. · The domestic context of U.S. foreign policy, including the roles played by the executive and legislative branches of government. · Critical analysis of U.S. past and current global and regional policies through case studies. Course Requirements This course focuses on understanding and communicating complex concepts and applying them to the real world of policy. There is no midterm or final examination. Students are expected to complete a reasonable—but not excessive—amount of reading; to engage intellectually with the course material; to participate in class discussion; to write clearly in short analytical essays; and to conduct research on a case study and present both individual and team results to the class. Students will receive a final letter grade for the semester based on the following components, with a total possible of 100 points: · Written essays (65 points): Throughout the course, there will be four essays—each described in the syllabus—focused on your reading and class discussions. Each of the first three essays will be worth a maximum of 15 points; the fourth essay is more integrative and is worth a maximum of 20 points. Each essay should be approximately 500 words, typed, double-spaced. · Case study point paper (20 points): At the end of the course, students will research one of several a specific conflicts and a “bullet point paper” on this conflict and be prepared to engage in discussion in class. Students studying the same conflict may collaborate in their research, but each student must prepare his or her own point paper. · Seminar preparation, engagement and participation (15 points): This course is a combination of lecture and discussion. The classroom is an environment of academic freedom. You should feel free to challenge the ideas set forth by faculty members and your peers in a respectful and well-mannered fashion. Support your positions with sound analysis, evidence, and reason. Focus on developing better arguments; policy is a domain in which there are few “correct” answers. To succeed, students should: ü Prepare beforehand by completing (and digesting) the assigned readings; ü Engage in class, by actively paying attention to lecture and discussion, taking comprehensive notes on the class, and asking questions if you need assistance in understanding the course material; ü Participate in class discussions by offering thoughtful insights in a courteous manner and by asking good questions during class that aid the discussion or out of class with your professor. In this category, each student can earn up to 15 points, which your professor will determine using the following rubric: ü 14-15 points: Regular and courteous engagement and participation; asking good questions; answering questions intelligently and thoughtfully; contributing insight; clearly keeping up with the readings. ü 10-13 points: Clear engagement in class discussion by taking good notes, even if only occasionally participating actively in discussion; generally able to answer questions; keeping up with most of the reading; asking questions—either in or out of class—to help with understanding of the course material. ü 7-9 points: Some engagement or participation in class; only occasional evidence of having understood the reading material; argumentative with little reason or evidence of one’s position ü 4-6 points: Little or no participation; little or no evidence of having done the reading; passive demeanor or uncivil behavior in class ü 0-3 points: No engagement in the course or evidence of preparation for class. Grading Based on 100 possible points in the course, I will assign final letter grades as follows: A: 90-100 B: 80-89 C: 70-79 D: 60-69 E: 50-59 F: 0-49 Resources There are two principal textbooks in the course, both of which are available online (for purchase) and in the MU Faculty of Social Sciences library: Hook, Steven W., & Spanier, John. American Foreign Policy Since World War II, 20^th edition (CQ Press, Sage Publications, 2016) – Abbreviated in the syllabus as “Hook and Spanier, Chapter x” McCormick, James M. (ed). The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence, 6^th edition (Rowman & Littlefield, Publishers, 2012) – Abbreviated in the syllabus as “McCormick, Chapter x” All other reading assignments will be available to you electronically as .pdf documents. Please alert your professor if you have trouble accessing any of these materials. Assignments Specific assignments for each session of the course are on the following two pages. Date Subject & Assignment 20.2 The United States in a Changing World: What Role? ü Global Trends: The Paradox of Progress, U.S. National Intelligence Council Report, January 2017, pp. ix-xi, 3-6 27.2 Competing Visions for U.S. Foreign Policy ü Betts, “Conflict or Cooperation: Three Visions Revisited,” Foreign Affairs eBook: The Clash of Civilizations at 20, pp. 69-80 ü Essay #1 Due in Class (15 points): Summarize the three visions offered by Fukuyama, Huntington, and Mearsheimer. Which do you think is most accurate today and why? 6.3 An Ambivalent America: U.S. Foreign Policy Before the Cold War ü Hook & Spanier, Chapters 1-2, pp. 1-45 ü Carrese, “American Power and the Legacy of Washington: Enduring Principles for Foreign and Defense Policy” 13.3 Pax Americana? The United States in the Cold War ü Hook & Spanier, Chapter 3, pp. 46-71 ü Kennan, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,” Foreign Affairs 25, no. 4 (1947) 20.3 The End of Innocence: Vietnam and the Realpolitik of Détente ü Hook & Spanier, Chapters 4-5 (pp. 72-125) 27.3 From Cold War to Post-Cold War: Strategic Confusion ü Hook & Spanier, Chapters 6-9 (pp. 126-223) ü Foerster, “The American National Security Debate: Values vs. Interests” ü Essay #2 Due in Class (15 points): Summarize how the U.S. approach to its role in the world evolved from (a) before the Cold War, to (b) during the Cold War, to (c) the period following the Cold War. Assess whether there is continuity or discontinuity in this evolution. 3.4 Making U.S. Foreign Policy: The Constitution & Separation of Powers ü United States Constitution, Articles I and II ü Lindsay, “The Shifting Pendulum of Power” [McCormick, Chapter 12] 10.4 Making U.S. Security Policy: War Powers ü Fisher, “Presidents Who Initiate Wars” [McCormick, Chapter 10] ü Jervis, “Why Intelligence and Policymakers Clash” [McCormick, Chapter 15] ü Essay #3 Due in Class (15 points): Evaluate the concept of “separation of powers” in the U.S. Constitutional system as it applies to foreign and security policy. 4.17 Domestic Factors in U.S. Foreign & Security Policy: Elites and Public Opinion HOLIDAY – NO CLASS MEETING ü Mead, “The Tea Party, Populism, & the Domestic Culture of U.S. Foreign Policy” [McCormick, Chapter 3] ü Berinsky, “Events, Elites, and American Public Support for Military Conflict” [McCormick, Chapter 7] 24.4 America at War: The U.S. in a Post-9.11 World ü Krauthammer, “The Unipolar Moment Revisited,” The National Interest, Winter 2002-2003 ü Layne, “The Unipolar Illusion Revisited,” International Security, Vol. 31, No. 2, Fall 2006, pp. 7-41 ü Essay #4 Due in Class (20 points): Summarize Krauthammer’s and Layne’s views about (1) the nature of the world in which we live, and (2) how the U.S. should deal with that world. Assess to what extent Krauthammer’s or Layne’s views seem correct in 2017, drawing on one or more examples of 21^st century conflict. 1.5 8.5 Case Studies of 21^st Century Conflicts – Lessons Learned HOLIDAYS – NO CLASS MEETINGS ü Foerster, “The Ukraine Crisis & Implications for NATO Extended Deterrence” ü Foerster & Raymond, “Balanced Internationalism: Five Core Principles to Guide U.S. Security Policy,” The National Interest, 31 July 2016 ü H.R. McMaster, “The Pipe Dream of Easy War,” New York Times, 20 July 2013 ü Goldberg, “The Obama Doctrine,” The Atlantic, April 2016 ü Goldgeier, “NATO Expansion: The Anatomy of a Decision” [McCormick, Chapter 21] ü CSIS, “Recalibrating U.S. Strategy Toward Russia,” March 2017 ü Walt, “The End of the American Era,” The National Interest, Nov-Dec 2011 ü Western, “Sources of Humanitarian Intervention” [McCormick, Chapter 22] 15.5 Lessons Learned? Prospects for American Leadership ü Case Study Point Paper Due in Class (20 points): § Select one of the following conflict or potential conflict situations: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, South China Sea, Syria, Ukraine § Briefly summarize—using bullet points—the nature of the conflict; what is the issue? Why does it matter? § Briefly summarize—using bullet points—the U.S. role in this conflict or crisis. What has the U.S. done about this situation, and why? § Briefly assess whether U.S. strategy was effective, and why/why not.