Contemporary Issues in Conflict and Security Studies

Course Organisation:

Professor:

 

Assistant:

Course Description:

This course will examine contemporary and conceptual issues in conflict and security studies. The course does not deal directly with the “classical” issues in security studies (such as causes of war, strategy, deterrence, arms control or alliance theory), and does presume background knowledge in these areas. Instead, the course deals with contemporary themes and issues such as security communities, “securitisation,” communal conflicts, the political economy of conflicts, state collapse and reconstruction, and societal security. Overall, the course adopts a critical approach to security studies, and examines the twin pillars of Northern (European) and Southern (post-conflict) security challenges. While not comprehensive, the course is broad enough to allow students to explore a range of conceptual and practical issues within critical approaches to contemporary security studies.

 

Syllabus:

 

Introduction

This course will examine a selection of issues in contemporary security studies. The course does not deal directly with the “classical” issues (such as causes of war, strategy, deterrence, arms control or alliance theory), and does presume some background knowledge of them. Instead, the course deals with contemporary themes and issues such as security communities, “securitization,” the political economy of conflicts, state collapse and reconstruction, and migration and societal security.

Each issue is selected to illustrate a particular concept or approach to conflict and security studies, and the course makes no claim to being exhaustive. Overall, the course adopts a critical approach to security studies, and examines issues from both Northern (European) and Southern (post-conflict) security challenges. While not comprehensive, the course is broad enough to allow students to explore a range of conceptual and practical issues within critical approaches contemporary security studies.

The course is also a prerequisite for “Political Violence,” (E 626), an in-depth research seminar scheduled for the second semester that focuses on contemporary manifestations of violence and violent conflict.

Since security studies cannot claim theoretical coherence or a governing orthodoxy, students will be expected to demonstrate familiarity with a wide range of approaches and concepts. Those interested in practical or descriptive knowledge will be required to provide conceptual grounding for their analyses; conceptually inclined students will be forced to acquire “local knowledge” wherever possible.

Full participation is expected of students in the seminar. This includes reading all the required readings – and this is a heavy reading course – as well as being prepared to discuss them critically. Final grades will in part be determined by the level and quality of seminar participation, and by presentations of the readings that will be scheduled according to the number of students in the seminar.

Readings are not introductory-level, and presume some familiarity with main theoretical developments in International Relations. For those with too-little background, I recommend reading:

• Michael Sheehan, International Security: An Analytical Survey
• Edward Kolodoziej, Security and International Relations
• Peter Hough, Understanding Global Security.

These will not substitute for the course readings, but can bring you somewhat “up to speed.”

 

Assignments:

The main assignment in the course is the research paper. This must be an empirically-grounded, theoretically-informed, exploration of a particular theme relevant to this course. It cannot be a mere review of theoretical literature, or simply a narrative account of a particular case. It must have an argument, a conceptual framework, an empirical “field” (case or cases, or data, etc.), and a coherent research strategy or method. Case studies that examine a particular theme in the context of a recent or current conflict (Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Iraq, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, etc.) are particularly welcome.

On occasion, the large number of students in this course has made it impossible to assess an adequate participation grade for all students or to schedule class presentations for all students. I thus may use two slightly different grading schemes ­ ─ one for MIA and one for MIS and doctoral students. If this is the case, I will announce the scheme we will use in week three (when numbers of students becomes clear).

• 10%    class presentations
• 20%    literature review (6 pages), due week material is discussed
• 20%    participation
• 50%    research paper (about 30-35 pages), due 12 December

 

(Re)Thinking Security (September 29)

• Stephen Walt, “The Renaissance of Security Studies,' International Studies Quarterly, 35 (1991), 211-239.
• Barry Buzan, People, States and Fear, second edition, 1-34.
• Keith Krause and Michael Williams, “Politics and Method in Neorealist Security Studies,” Mershon International Studies Review, 40:supplement 2 (October 1996), 229-254.
• C.A.S.E. Collective, “Critical Approaches to Security in Europe: A Networked Manifesto,” Security Dialogue, 37:4 (December 2006), 443-487.

• Theo Farrell, “Constructivist Security Studies,: Portrait of a Research Program,” International Studies Review, 4:1 (2002), 49-72.

   

  Discussion Questions:  

  What are the foundations and core elements of the 'classical' definition of security?

  How and why (or why not) should we broaden the concept of security?

• Emanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, “Security Communities in Theoretical Perspective,” in Emanuel Adler and Michael Barnett, eds., Security Communities, 3-28.
• Benjamin Miller, “When and How Regions Become Peaceful: Potential Theoretical Pathways to Peace,” International Studies Review, 7 (2005), 229-267.
• Frank Schimmelfennig, “NATO Enlargement: A Constructivist Explanation,” Security Studies, 8:2-3 (1998), 198-234.
• Vincent Pouliot, “The Logic of Practicality: A Theory of Practice of Security Communities,” International Organization, 62 (Spring 2008), 257-288.
• Emanuel Adler, “The Spread of Security Communities: Communities of Practice, Self-Restraint, and NATO’s Post–Cold War Transformation,” unpublished paper, 2007.

• Alexandra Gheciu, “Security Institutions as Agents of Socialization? NATO and the “New Europe,” International Organization 59:4 (2005), pp. 973–1012.

 Discussion Questions:

 Is NATO a security community?

 What does the existence of security communities imply for inter-state cooperation?

 

Note: This class will have to be rescheduled

• Ole Waever, “Aberystwyth, Paris, Copenhagen: New Schools in Security Theory and Their Origins between Core and Periphery,” unpublished paper, 2004.
• Barry Buzan, Ole Waever and Jaap de Wilde, Security: A New Framework for Analysis, 21-47.
• Michael C. Williams, “Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International Politics,” International Studies Quarterly, 47 (2005), 511-531.
• Jef Huysmans, “Security! What Do You Mean? From Concept to Thick Signifier,” European Journal of International Relations, 4:2 (1998), 226-255.
• Thierry Balzacq, “The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency, Audience and Context,” European Journal of International Relations, 11:2 (2005), 171-201.
• Lene Hansen, “The Little Mermaid’s Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School,” Millennium, 29:2 (2000), 285-306.

• Holger Stritzel, “Towards a Theory of Securitization: Copenhagen and Beyond,” European Journal of International Relations, 13:3 (2007), 357-383.

   

  Discussion Questions:

  How are issues 'securitized' and by whom?

  What is the appropriate method for studying securitization?

• Didier Bigo, “When Two become One: Internal and External Securitizations in Europe,” in Morten Kelstrup and Michael C. Williams, eds., International Relations Theory and the Politics of European Integration: Power, Security, Community, 171-203.
• Nazli Choucri, “Migration and Security: Some Key Linkages,” Journal of International Affairs, 56:1 (Fall 2002), 97-122.
• Pinar Bilgin, “Individual and Societal Dimensions of Security,” International Studies Review, 5 (2005), 203-222.
• Jef Huysmans, “The European Union and the Securitization of Migration,” Journal of Common Market Studies, 38:5 (December 2000), 751-77.
• Ayse Ceyhan and Anastassia Tsoukala, “The Securitization of Migration in Western Societies: Ambivalent Discourses and Politicies,” Alternatives, 27 (2002), 21-39.

 

Christopher Rudolph, “Security and the Political Economy of International Migration,” American Political Science Review, 97:4 (November 2003), 603-620.

 

 

 

What is “societal security” and how could migration threaten it?What are the dangers and risks associated with “securitizing” migration issues”?Should society be protected?

• Stefan Elbe, “Should HIV/AIDS Be Securitized? The Ethical Dilemmas of Linking HIV/AIDS and Security,” International Studies Quarterly, 50 (2006), 119-144.
• Susan Peterson, “Epidemic Disease and National Security,” Security Studies, 12:2 (Winter 2002/03), 43-81.
• Alex de Waal, “How will HIV/AIDS Transform African Governance?” African Affairs, 102 (2003), 1-23.
• P.W. Singer, “AIDS and International Security,” Survival, 44:1 (Spring 2002), 145-158.
• Stefan Elbe, “AIDS, Security, Biopolitics,” International Relations, 19:4 (2005), 403-419.

• Colleen O’Manique, “The ‘Securitisation’ of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa: A Critical Feminist Lens,” in Sandra J MacLean, David R Black and Timothy M Shaw (eds), A decade of Human Security, Global Governance and New Multilateralisms, 24-47.

   

  Discussion Questions:

  In what ways (if any) can HIV/AIDS threaten international or national security?

  Does the securitization of HIV/AIDS advance or hinder the development of appropriate responses to the problem?

 

Environmental Security (November 3) 

• Thomas Homer-Dixon, “Environmental Scarcities and Violent Conflict: Evidence from Cases,” International Security, 19:1 Summer 1994), 5-40.
• Nils Peter Gleditsch, Armed Conflict and the Environment: A Critique of the Literature,” Journal of Peace Research, 35:3 (May 1998), 381-400.
• Simon Dalby, “Ecology and Security Studies,” in Environmental Security, 143-162.
• Günther Baechler, “Why Environmental Transformation Causes Violence: A Synthesis,” Environmental Change and Security Project, 4 (Spring 1998), 24-44.
• Jon Barnett, “Security and Climate Change, Global Environmental Change 13 (2003) 7–17
• Clionadh Raleigh, Henrik Urdal, “Climate change, environmental degradation and armed conflict,” Political Geography, 26 (2007) 674-694.

• Daniel M. Schwartz, Tom Deligiannis, and Thomas F. Homer-Dixon, “The Environment and Violent Conflict: A Response to Gleditsch’s Critique and Some Suggestions for Future Research,” Environmental Change and Security Project Report, 6 (Summer 2000), 77-94.

   

  Discussion Questions:

  In what ways could or should environmental change be considered a security issue?

  What are the costs and benefits of doing so in different environmental issue areas?

• Charles Tilly, “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime”, in Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Theda Skocpol, eds., Bringing the State Back In, 169-191.
• Charles Tilly, Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990-1990, 192-225.
• Brian Taylor and Roxana Botea, “Tilly Tally: War-Making and State-Making in the Contemporary Third World,” International Studies Review, 10:1 (March 2008), 27-56.
• Georg Sorensen, “War and State-Making: Why Doesn't it Work in the Third World?” Security Dialogue 32 (2001), 341-354.
• Michael Niemann, “War Making and State Making in Central Africa,” Africa Today, 53:3 (Spring 2007), 21-39.

 

Discussion Questions:

• “The Failed States Index 2008,” Foreign Policy, 149 (July-August 2008), 56-65.
• Also: read the Fund for Peace 2008 Failed State Index country profiles available at: http://www.fundforpeace.org
• William Reno, “The Politics of Violent Opposition in Collapsing States,” Government and Opposition, 40:2 (Spring 2005), 127-151.
• David Carment, “Assessing State Failure: Implications for Theory and Policy,” Third World Quarterly, 24:3 (2003), 407-427.
• Christopher Clapham, “The Challenge to the State in a Globalized World,” in Jennifer Milliken, ed., State Failure, Collapse and Reconstruction, 25-44.
• William Reno, “Congo: From State Collapse to ‘Absolutism’ to State Failure,” Third World Quarterly, 27:1 (2006), 43-56.

• Gary King and Langche Zeng, “Improving Forecasts of State Failure,” World Politics, 53 (July 2001), 623-658.

   

  Discussion Questions:

  What are the key indicators for state collapse (with real-world examples)?

  What are the causes of state collapse?

  What (if any) are the implications for the international community?

   

• Paul Collier, “Economic Causes of Civil Conflict and their Implications for Policy,” World Bank Working Paper, 15 June 2000.
• Peter Andreas, “The Clandestine Political Economy of War and Peace in Bosnia,” International Studies Quarterly, 48 (2004), 29-51.
• Philippe Le Billon, Fuelling War: Natural Resources and Armed Conflict, Adelphi Paper 373 (March 2005), 7-49.
• Benedikt Korf, “Rethinking the Greed-Grievance Nexus: Property Rights and the Political Economy of War in Sri Lanka,” Journal of Peace Research, 42:2 (2005), 201-217.
• Sabrina Grosse-Kettler, External Actors in Stateless Somalia, BICC paper 39 (2004).
• Christopher Cramer, “Does Inequality Cause Conflict,” Journal of International Development, 15 (2003), 397-412
   

• Roland Paris, “International Peacebuilding and the ‘mission civilisatrice’,” Review of International Studies, 28 (2003), 637-656.
• Marina Ottaway, “Rebuilding State Institutions in Collapsed States,” in Jennifer Milliken, ed., State Failure, Collapse and Reconstruction, 245-266.
• Béatrice Pouligny, “Civil Society and Post-Conflict Peace Building: Ambiguities of International Programs Aimed at Building ‘New Societies’,” Security Dialogue, 36:4 (December 2005), 495-510.
• Christopher Cramer and Jonathan Goodhand, “Try Again, Fail Again, Fail Better? War, the State and the ‘Post-Conflict’ Challenge in Afghanistan,” in Jennifer Milliken, ed., State Failure, Collapse and Reconstruction, 131-155.
• Christoph Zuercher, “Is More Better? Evaluating External-Led State-Building after 1989,” CDDRL Working Papers, no. 54 (April 2006).
• Toby Dodge, “Iraq: the Contradictions of Exogenous State-building in Historical Perspective, Third World Quarterly, 27:1 (2006), 187-200.

• Joshua Goldstein, War and Gender, 1-58.
• Eric Blanchard, “Gender, International Relations, and the Development of Feminist Security Theory,” Signs, 28:4 (2003), 1289-1312.
• Lene Hansen, “Gender, Nation, Rape,” International Feminist Journal of Politics, 3:1 (April 2001), 55-75.
• Mary Caprioli, “Primed for Violence: The Role of Gender Inequality in Predicting Internal Conflict,” International Studies Quarterly, 49 (2005), 161-178.
• Lori Handrahan, “Conflict, Gender, Ethnicity and Post-Conflict Reconstruction,” Security Dialogue, 35:4 (2004), 429-445.
• Sherill Whittington, “Gender and Peacekeeping: The United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor,” Signs, 28:4 (2003), 1283-1288
• Miranda Alison, “Women as Agents of Political Violence: Gendering Security,” Security Dialogue, 35:4 (2004), 447-463.

• Gary King and Christopher Murray, “Rethinking Human Security,” Political Science Quarterly, 116:4 (2001-02), 585-610.
• Fen Hampson et al, Madness in the Multitude: Human Security and World Disorder, 1-61.
• Taylor Owen, “Human Security – Conflict, Critique and Consensus: Colloquium Remarks and a Proposal for a Threshold-Based Definition,” Security Dialogue, 35:3 (2004), 373-387.
• Richard Price, “Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines,” International Organization, 52:3 (Summer 1998), 613-644.
• David Roberts, “Human Security or Human Insecurity? Moving the Debate Forward,” Security Dialogue, 37:2 (2006), 249-261.
• Ronald Behringer, “Middle Power Leadership on the Human Security Agenda,” Cooperation and Conflict, 40:3 (2005), 305-342.
• Gunhild Hoogensen and Svein Vigeland Rottem, “Gender Identity and the Subject of Security,” Security Dialogue, 35:2 (2004), 155-171.
• Tara McCormack, “Power and Agency in the Human Security Framework,” Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21:1 (March 2008), 113-128.