Washington Semester Program
US Foreign Policy II Seminar
Dr. John Calabrese
AU Tel: 895-4913
MEI Tel: 785-1141 ext. 208
Office Hours W/F (by appointment)
The Foreign Policy Seminar aims to familiarize you with the process and content of US foreign policy. It is intended to help you acquire a sound conceptual and practical understanding of the foreign policy challenges that US policy-makers face, and of the reasons for and implications of their decisions. It is also intended to help prepare you for the professional world of international relations and diplomacy. This eight-credit course is designed to complement your internship and your research project (if you are required to complete one). Generally, there are six seminar sessions per week, totaling approximately eight hours of contact (i.e., excluding commuting time). These sessions take place Wednesdays through Fridays. The seminar consists partly of lectures, class discussions, and simulations. However, the distinctive feature and emphasis of the seminar is direct exposure to the policy process through briefings by public officials, policy analysts, and other professionals who are involved in the shaping of US foreign policy. Briefings will be held both on and off campus.
COURSE OBJECTIVES This course will:
- Broaden and deepen students’ knowledge of the contextual factors, elements and challenges
related to the crafting and conduct of US foreign policy.
- Sharpen students’ analytic, oral communication and writing skills through student-led discussions, simulations, team briefings, and policy papers.
- Introduce students to the Washington policy community by incorporating into the curriculum guest briefings by policy-makers and other practitioners.
At the conclusion of this course, students will be able to:
- Understand the basic principles and purposes of US foreign policy.
- Identify current US foreign policy priorities and the core objectives related thereto.
- Identify key actors and forces that inform and constrain US foreign policy decision-making and implementation.
- Compare and contrast diverse positions on key issues related to the conduct of US foreign policy.
- Articulate their own perspectives on important issues in the field.
- Demonstrate active learning and engagement through critical questioning, synthesis and evaluation of course readings and resource materials, active discussion, written and oral presentation, and analytical writing.
As previously mentioned, classes will be held on Wednesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Weekly schedules containing meeting times, locations and directions, topics, and the names/bios of guest speakers will be distributed over email on the previous Friday. (Schedules will be provided further in advance when possible). This is a reading and writing intensive course. You are expected to read all assigned reading materials in preparation for class discussion (i.e., the full article unless page numbers are provided). You are also expected to be courteous in your interaction with peers and guests, respecting the right of others to express their opinions, whether or not you share them.
1. Attendance and Participation (20 percent)
For this seminar to function effectively and for you to derive the maximum benefit from it, you are required to attend and arrive on time for all meetings. You may not enter a briefing after a guest has begun speaking. The only valid reasons for missing class are personal illness or a family emergency. You are responsible for material covered in all classes. You are required to participate regularly. You will be evaluated on the quality of your comments and questions.
2. Team Background Briefing (20 percent)
Every student must produce a Background Briefing (i.e., an oral presentation followed by an interactive exercise such as a debate, a focused Q/A or discussion period, or a policy options exercise). Students will work in pairs or small teams for this purpose. The sign-up/assignment schedule will be posted on Google Docs. At least one week before the scheduled date of each presentation, I will supply specific guidelines and suggestions for the Background Briefing team.
3. Two Reaction Papers (40 percent)
You are required to write two papers (1,000-1,200 words, typewritten, double-spaced). Each paper should focus on two or more required readings. Reaction Paper #1 should be based on readings from weeks 1–6. Reaction Paper #2 should be based on readings from weeks 7–13. A sign-up sheet with due dates/times will be posted on Google Docs.
These papers are intended to assist you to read the weekly assignments critically and thoroughly, and to help generate questions for guest speakers. You should not simply summarize the readings. You should “respond” to them; for example, by highlighting a point that you think is of particular interest, discussing an argument with which you agree or disagree, comparing the readings, or linking the readings to lectures, briefings, or current events.
The handout Writing the Reaction Paper (available on Google Docs) offers tips on how to prepare your paper. Save your papers in Microsoft Word or rich text format. Electronic copies are due over email by 9:00 a.m. on Monday. Late papers will not be accepted.
4. Final Examination (20 percent)
The final examination is a 90-minute in-class exercise in which you will be asked to write one long essay (20%). A review sheet/study guide containing a list of topics, readings and briefings will be provided during the last week of class. [Note: No early, late, or make-up exams will be given.]
Final Exam: covers material as described above. Held on Monday, December 10.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY CODE
Standards of academic conduct are set forth in the AU Academic Integrity Code which can be found at http://www.american.edu/academics/integrity/code01.htm. It is expected that all assignments will be completed according to the standards set forth in this code. By registering, students have acknowledged awareness of the Academic code and are obliged to become familiar with their rights and responsibilities as defined by the Code. Violations of the Academic Integrity Code will not be treated lightly, and disciplinary action will be taken should such violations occur. Please see me if there are any questions about the academic violations described in the Code in general, or as they relate to particular requirements for this or any other course or work at AU.
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
If you experience difficulty in this course for any reason, please do not hesitate to consult with me. In addition to the resources of the department, a wide range of services is available to support you in your efforts to meet the course requirements.
Academic Support Center (x3360, MGC 243) offers study skills workshops, individual instruction, tutor referrals, and services for students with learning disabilities. Writing support is available in the ASC Writing Lab or in the Writing Center, Battelle 228.
Counseling Center (x3500, MGC 214) offers counseling and consultations regarding personal concerns, self-help information, and connections to off-campus mental health resources.
Disability Support Services (x3315, MGC 206) offers technical and practical support and assistance with accommodations for those with physical, medical, or psychological disabilities.
If you qualify for accommodations because of a disability, please notify me in a timely manner with a letter from the Academic Support Center or Disability Support Services so that we can make arrangements to address your needs.EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
In the event of a declared pandemic (influenza or other communicable disease) (or other emergency), American University will implement a plan for meeting the needs of all members of the university community. Should the university be required to close for a period of time, we are committed to ensuring that all aspects of our educational programs will be delivered to our students. These may include altering and extending the duration of the traditional term schedule to complete essential instruction in the traditional format and/or use of distance instructional methods. All faculty members will design alternative means of completing classes. Specific strategies will vary from class to class, depending on the format of the course and the timing of the emergency. I will communicate class-specific information to students via e-mail, while you must inform me immediately of any absence due to illness or emergency. Students are responsible for checking AU e-mail regularly and keeping themselves informed of emergencies. In the event of a declared pandemic or other emergency, you should refer to the AU Web site (www. prepared american<.edu) and the AU information line at (202) 885-1100 for general university-wide information. AND contact your faculty and/or respective dean’s office for course and school/ college-specific information.
Week 1: August 29, 30, 31
US Foreign Policy:
Integrating Power and Purposes
What is foreign policy? What are the various approaches to the study of foreign policy? Which individuals and institutions shape, formulate and implement foreign policy? What is meant by the term “national interest”? What principles and values should guide US foreign policy? What are some of the recurring themes and tensions in US foreign policy? What are the principal geopolitical, economic and domestic factors that inform and constrain US foreign policy? What are the most important foreign policy challenges facing the Obama Administration?
? Selective Engagement in the Era of Austerity Robert J. Art. In America’s Path: Grand Strategy for the Next Administration. Richard Fontaine and Kristin Lord (eds.) Center for New American Security. [pp. 13–28]
? American Strategy: Grand Versus Grandiose Richard K. Betts. In America’s Path: Grand Strategy for the Next Administration. Richard Fontaine and Kristin Lord (eds.) Center for New American Security. [pp. 29–42]
? A Grand Strategy of Network Centrality Anne-Marie Slaughter. In America’s Path: Grand Strategy for the Next Administration. Richard Fontaine and Kristin Lord (eds.) Center for New American Security. [pp. 43–56]
? American Grand Strategy at the Crossroads: Leading from the Front, Leading from behind or Not Leading at All Peter Feaver. In America’s Path: Grand Strategy for the Next Administration. Richard Fontaine and Kristin Lord (eds.) Center for New American Security. [57–69]
? The End of the American Era Stephen Walt. The National Interest.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS BLOGS:
Week 2: September 5, 6, 7
Transatlantic Relations in Context:
The Euro-Crisis and the US Economic Malaise
? Saving the Euro without Losing the Europeans Stefan Lehne. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
? The Coming Eurozone Austerity Battle Sebastian Mallaby. Council on Foreign Relations.
? Alliances in the 21st Century: Implications for the US-European Partnership
Jeremy Ghez. RAND Corporation.
? Turkey and the Arab Spring: Implications for Turkish Foreign Policy from a Transatlantic Perspective Nathalie Tocci, et al. German Marshall Fund of the United States.
Week 3: September 12, 13, 14
Putin 2.0 and the US-Russia “Reset” Reconsidered
? The United States, Russia, Europe, and Security: How to Address the “Unfinished Business” of the Post-Cold War Era Isabelle Francois. Center for Transatlantic Security Studies, Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University.
? How the US Should Deal with Putin’s Russia Ariel Cohen. Heritage Foundation.
? Russia and USNational Interests: Why Should Americans Care? Task Force on Russia and US National Interests. Center for National Interest and the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.
? The Transatlantic Partnership and Relations with Russia Frances G. Burwell and Svante E. Cornell, eds. Institute for Sec. and Dev. Policy and Atlantic Council of the US.
? Russia’s Energy Diplomacy John Lough. Chatham House.
? Russia and the 2010 NATO Strategic Concept: New Era of Partnership or Wishful Thinking? Mikayel Bagratuni. Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute.
? RussiaandtheFormerSovietRepublicsMaps From the University of Texas at Austin.
? BBC News Resources RussiaCountryProfile AND RussiaTimeline.
? RussiaCountryAnalysisBrief Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy.
? TheNewSTARTTreaty: CentralLimitsandKeyProvisions Amy F. Woolf. Congressional Research Service.
? NonproliferationandThreatReductionAssistance: USProgramsintheFormerSovietUnion Amy F. Woolf. Congressional Research Service.
? RussianFederation: Parties& Organizations Political Resources on the Net.
Week 4: September 19, 20, 21
The United States and Afghanistan:
Towards a Responsible Withdrawal?
Is Afghanistan of “vital” interest to the United States? What were, and are the primary aims of US policy in Afghanistan? What progress has been made in the development of Afghanistan’s political institutions, the strengthening of its military and police forces, and the resuscitation of its economy? What questions and concerns remain regarding the US-Afghanistan strategic partnership? To what extent did the May 2012 NATO Summit chart a course for a responsible exit from Afghanistan?
? Disjointed Ways, Disunified Means: Learning from America's Struggle to Build an Afghan Nation Lewis G. Irwin. Strategic Studies Institute [Read Chapter 1, “Defining the Afghan Problem”].
? In Brief: Next Steps in the War in Afghanistan? Issues for Congress
Catherine Dale. Congressional Research Service.
? Afghanistan from 2012-2014: Is a Successful Transition Possible? Anthony H. Cordesman. Center for Strategic and International Studies.
? Measuring Success: Are We Winning? Over 10 Years in Afghanistan Joshua Foust. American Security Project.
? Beating a Retreat: Prospects for the Transition Process in Afghanistan
Barbara J. Stapleton. Afghanistan Analysts Network.
- Afghanistan Transition: Elevating the Diplomatic Components of the Transition Strategy at the Chicago NATO Summit and Beyond
Caroline Wadhams, Colin Cookman, and Brian Katulis. Center for American Progress
? The US Must Move Cautiously on Taliban Reconciliation Lisa Curtis. Heritage Foundation.
? The Next Fight: Time for a Change of Mission in Afghanistan David W. Barno, Andrew Exum, and Matthew Irvine. CNAS Policy Brief.
? Gambling on Reconciliation to Save a Transition Ashley Tellis. Carnegie Policy Outlook.
? The Afghanistan-Pakistan War at the End of 2011: Strategic Failure? Talk Without Hope? Tactical Success? Spend not Build (And Then Stop Spending)? Anthony Cordesman. Center for Strategic and International Studies.
? A Review of the 2001 Bonn Conference and Application to the Road Ahead in Afghanistan Mark Fields and Ramsha Ahmed. Strategic Perspectives.
? BeyondAfghanistan: ARegionalSecurityStrategyforSouthandCentralAsiaLTG David W. Barno, USA (ret.), Andrew Exum, and Matthew Irvine. Center for a New American Security.
? Afghanistan2011–2014 andBeyond: FromSupportOperationstoSustainablePeace Luis Peran and Ashley Tellis (eds). European Union Institute for Security Studies and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Joint Report.
? Deconstructing“Democracy” inAfghanistanAnna Larson. Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit.
? TheBattleforAfghanistan: NegotiationswiththeTaliban: HistoryandProspectsfortheFutureThomas Ruttig. New America Foundation.
? WinningHeartsandMinds? ExaminingtheRelationshipbetweenAidandSecurityinAfghanistan’sHelmandProvinceStuart Gordon. Feinstein Internat’l Center.
? AfghanistanMaps From the University of Texas at Austin.
? ProfileofAfghanistanfromtheAsiaSociety Features a map and statistical data.
? BBC News Resources AfghanistanCountryProfile and AfghanistanTimeline
? Afghanistanin2010: ASurveyoftheAfghanPeopleThe Asia Foundation.
? USAIDinAfghanistan. US Agency for International Development.
? AfghanistanOpiumSurvey2011: WinterRapidAssessmentAllRegions- Phases1 and2 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
Week 5: September 26, 27, 28
The United States and Pakistan:
A Troubled and Tenuous Relationship
? Getting Back to a Functional Relationship with Pakistan: The United States Needs to Stay Engaged Brian Katulis. Center for American Progress.
? A Strategy of “Congagement” toward Pakistan Zalmay Khalilzad. The Washington Quarterly.
? The Anarchic Republic of Pakistan Ahmed Rashid. The National Interest.
? Drone Warfare: Blowback from the New American Way of War Leila Hudson, Colin S. Owens, and Matt Flannes. Middle East Policy.
? My Drone War Pir Zubair Shah. Foreign Policy.
? Pakistan-US Relations Alan Kronstadt. CRS Report for Congress.
? Subnational Governance, Service Delivery, and Militancy in Pakistan Robert D. Lamb and Sadika Hameed. Center for Strategic and International Studies.
? Pakistan’s Impending Defeat in Afghanistan Ashley J. Tellis. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
? US-Pakistan Relations: Common and Clashing Interests Shehzad Qazi. World Affairs Journal.
? Pakistan’s Relations with India: Beyond Kashmir? International Crisis Group.
? Backgrounder: Targeted Killings Jonathan Masters. Council on Foreign Relations.
? The Year of the Done: An Analysis of US Drone Strikes in Pakistan, 2004–2012 New America Foundation.
? Charting the Data for US Airstrikes in Pakistan, 2004–2012 Bill Roggier and Alexander Mayer. The Long War Journal.
? US-Pakistan Reset: Still Need to Deal with Terrorist Sanctuaries Lisa Curtis. Heritage Foundation.
? Practice Makes Perfect?: The Changing Civilian Toll of CIA Drone Strikes in Pakistan Avery Plaw, Matthew S. Fricker and Brian Glyn Williams. Perspectives on Terrorism.
? 2014 and Beyond: US Policy Toward Pakistan C. Christine Fair. Testimony Before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
? Pakistan-USRelations: ASummaryK. Alan Kronstadt. Congressional Research Service.
? AfterbinLaden: BringingChangetoPakistan’sCounterterrorismPoliciesLisa Curtis. Heritage Foundation.
? Pakistan’sCounterterrorismStrategy: SeparatingFriendsfromEnemiesAyesha Siddiqa. The Washington Quarterly.
? PakistanMaps From the University of Texas at Austin.
? PakistanIndex- TrackingVariablesofReconstructionandSecurityinPakistan
? ProfileofPakistanfromtheAsiaSociety Features a map and statistical data.
? BBC News Resources PakistanCountryProfile AND PakistanTimeline.
? PakistanDoublingRateofMakingNuclearWeapons: TimeforPakistantoReverseCourseDavid Albright and Paul Brannan. Institute for Science and Int’l. Security.
? NuclearRiskReductioninSouthAsiaafterMumbaiTranscript of a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace event.
? EndingPakistan’sNuclearAddictionDaryl G. Kimball. Arms Control Association.
? PakistanDoublesitsNuclearArsenal: IsitTimetoStartWorrying?
Alexander H. Rothman and Lawrence J. Korb. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
? Managing the Danger from Pakistan’s Nuclear Stockpile Jeffrey Lewis. New America Foundation.
? Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation and Security Issues Paul K. Kerr and Mary Beth Nikitin. Congressional Research Service.
Week 6: October 3, 4, 5
The US–India “Strategic Partnership”:
Parameters, Possibilities and Constraints
Why is it in the long-term interest of the United States to build a multifaceted partnership with India? Are the national interests, strategic objectives and external policies of the United States and India congruent? What tangible progress has been made in the development of US–India relations in recent years? To what extent have domestic politics advanced or constrained the broadening and deepening of US–India relations?
? India’s Internal Security Challenges Ajai Sahni. National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR) [Read pp. 1–24].
? Managing Multipolarity: India’s Security Strategy in a Changing World C. Raja Mohan. National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR) [pp. 25–49].
? Hillary Clinton Visits India: Understanding the Unstated S. D. Muni. Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore.
? Limits of the Jugaad Growth Model: No Workaround to Good Governance for India Russell A Green. James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy.
? The United States and India: A Shared Strategic Future Robert D. Blackwill, Naresh Chandra and Christopher Clary. Council on Foreign Relations.
? India’s Rise as an Asia-Pacific Power: Rhetoric and Reality Sandy Gordon. Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
? The Politics of India's Unfinished Economic ReformsSwaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar. German Marshall Fund of the United States.
? India’s Continuing Search for ‘Strategic Autonomy’ Harsh V. Pant. International Relations and Security Network.
? The Pragmatic Challenge to Indian Foreign Policy Deepa Ollapally and Rajesh Rajagopalan. The Washington Quarterly.
? UnderstandingtheDualityinIndianStrategicThinking Manvendra Singh. German Marshall Fund of the United States.
? WorldBankChart: IndiaataGlance.
? IndiaMaps From the University of Texas at Austin.
? ProfileofIndiafromtheAsiaSocietyFeatures a map and statistical information.
? TheUS-IndiaNuclearCooperationDealArms Control Association.
? USNuclearCooperationwithIndia: IssuesforCongressPaul K. Kerr. Congressional Research Service.
Weeks 7 and 8: October 10, 11 and 17, 18, 19
China’s Rise and the “Rebalancing” of US Policy toward Asia
For Week 7:
? An Asian Security Standoff Alan Dupont. The National Interest.
? The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: Challenges and Potential
Hearing before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, and Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.
? “The United States and Asia in 2011: Obama Determined to Bring America ‘Back’ to Asia.” Douglas Paal. Asian Survey [Full text: use Academic Search Premier database AU Bender Library page via http://www.my.american.edu portal]
? America’s Pacific Century Hillary Clinton. Foreign Policy.
For Week 8:
? Reassessing China: Awaiting Xi Jinping William Overholt. The Washington Quarterly.