United States Foreign Policy

Political Science 223

Spring Semester 2008

Dr. Jeffrey Lantis Office Hours:

Kauke 107, #2408 MW 3:30-5:00 pm

Course Description

The United States of America became the most powerful country in the world in the 20^th century. But this “rise to globalism” did not occur without challenges and debates regarding America’s proper role in the world. The September 11 attacks and the war on terror have again forced us to consider the threats, opportunities, and responsibilities that accompany global power. This course will analyze the political struggles behind the development of U.S. foreign policy from World War II to the present. Three sections of the course focus on different dimensions of foreign policy. First, we explore theories of foreign policy decision-making and key actors and institutions involved in the policy process. Second, we will focus on the historical development of U.S. foreign policy, including case studies of World War II, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Middle East peace process, and the Iraq War. The third section of the course will focus on foreign policy in the 21^st century—and will include student presentations on contemporary challenges and possible solutions. Overall, this course will encourage critical and creative analysis of the past, present, and future of U.S. foreign policy.

Course Requirements

This is an advanced course. Students will complete a contemporary foreign policy controversy paper, two examinations, a theory paper, and a group foreign policy briefing paper. Assignments are weighted in the following manner:

Course Participation 15% Theory Paper 15%

Controversy Paper 10% Foreign Policy Briefing 20%

Midterm Examination 20% Take-Home Final Exam 20%

Required Texts

1. Jerel A. Rosati and James M. Scott, The Politics of United States Foreign Policy,

Fourth Edition, 2007

2. Ralph G. Carter, ed., Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy: From Terrorism to

Trade, Third Edition, 2008

3. Stephen E. Ambrose and Douglas G. Brinkley, Rise to Globalism, Eighth Revised Edition, 1997

Participation

It is essential that students attend class, prepare assignments in advance, and participate regularly in class discussions and debates. Students who are actively engaged in the course will receive high marks for this portion (15%) of the total grade. Simply attending the course without active participation, or missing classes, will result in a loss of participation points.

One key to participation is keeping up with current events and developments in United States foreign policy. We will discuss these issues regularly in class. Students are expected to monitor the news through one or more outlets, including:

The New York Times: www.nytimes.com

British Broadcasting Corporation: www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/index.shtml

Time Magazine: www.time.com/time

Newsweek Magazine: www.msnbc.com/news/NW-front_Front.asp

U.S. News and World Report: www.usnews.com/usnews

Kidon World News Service: www.kidon.com/media-link/index.shtml

Writing Assignments

Contemporary Foreign Policy Controversy Paper: The first step of this assignment is to choose a controversial issue in contemporary U.S. foreign policy. Students may choose either a single decision or a pattern of decision-making that has been clearly controversial in the past decade. Examples of controversial issues for study include: intervention in Afghanistan, trade with China, U.S. challenges to the International Criminal Court, Cuban relations, declining foreign assistance to developing nations, relations with Europe, support for the United Nations, arms exports, international environmental treaties, the Iraq War, U.S. relations with Pakistan or India, national missile defense (NMD), etc... One caveat: you may not select an issue that overlaps with your foreign policy briefing group theme.

The next step of the assignment is to conduct research and develop a paper on the selected contemporary controversy. The paper should clearly identify the nature of the foreign policy debate, the actors or institutions involved in the debate, their different perspectives, and an actual description of the foreign policy decision-making process on the issue. Overall, the paper should provide an informed analysis of the contemporary controversy, with detailed references to actors and process.

The paper should be 4-5, typed, double-spaced pages in length, and should include careful source citation using the Chicago Style (endnotes and bibliography). More information about this assignment will be presented in class.

Theory Paper: In this assignment, students should apply a major theory of the foreign policy decision-making process to explain a U.S. decision outlined in our readings. The first step is to review interesting case studies in Ralph Carter, ed., Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy: From Terrorism to Trade. Students should then consider which major theory of the foreign policy process—the rational actor model, bureaucratic politics, small group decision making, or organizational process—best explains decisions taken in one of these cases. The paper itself should begin with a review of the theory you have chosen to apply and then make a strong case for its applicability through a series of references from the case study. You may focus on the details of a single phase of decision, or the broader policy-making process leading to U.S. action.

Theory papers should be 5-6 typed, double-spaced pages in length, and should include careful source citations using the Chicago Style (endnotes and bibliography). You may conduct additional research on the case study, and critical and creative applications of theory to case are encouraged.

Foreign Policy Briefing Group Paper: This group project focuses on contemporary policy debates and the complexity of foreign policy choices. The first step of this project is to identify, from the following list, what you believe to be the most significant and interesting foreign policy area facing the United States in 2008: Relations with China, Energy and Environmental Policy, Treatment of Detainees in War on Terror, Immigration Policy, Iraq, or Middle East Peace (Israel and Neighbors).

Students will join with others who share the same concerns and work as an elite group of advisers for any viable candidate for the presidency in 2008. The goal of the group effort is to produce a foreign policy briefing report and paper recommending policy changes/solutions that will help to define your candidate’s foreign policy platform. This is likely to include a measured critique of the foreign policy of past administrations and recommended policy changes to achieve key objectives. While the group should be optimistic regarding the potential for the new president to effect changes in foreign policy, you must also consider various dimensions of the policy struggle with regard to constraints discussed in this class, such as the role of Congress, bureaucratic resistance, budgetary considerations, interest groups, and pressure from the international community. In other words, after charting out a preferred course of action, be sure to highlight what obstacles and policy realities you may have to overcome.

Briefing group presentations will be held for the entire class period on the assigned dates throughout the semester—with 35 minutes devoted to presentation and the remaining period to questions and discussion. Groups should review the arguments, background information, and recommendations that they have prepared, and students should then be ready to answer questions and to lead discussion on the issues.

All briefing group papers are due on Friday, May 2, by 4 pm. They must be 14-15, typed, double-spaced pages in length. The papers should include a statement of the problem, relevant background information, a detailed discussion of various policy options (including the merits and demerits of each), and a final summary recommendation to the president. The paper should include careful source citation using the Chicago Style (endnotes and bibliography). Finally, the entire project will be graded based on the coherency of the written and oral arguments, the quality of the group presentation, the written briefing paper, and peer reviews within the group.

Academic Integrity

This class will operate on a set of expectations consistent with the College’s Code of Academic Integrity and Code of Social Responsibility, outlined in The Scot’s Key (www.wooster.edu/policies/scotskey.pdf) and the Handbook of Selected College Policies (www.wooster.edu/policies/policies.pdf). The Codes and guidelines form an essential part of the intellectual contract between the student and the College.

Cheating in any of your academic work is a serious breach of the Code of Academic Integrity and is grounds for an ‘F’ for the entire course. Such violations include turning in another person’s work as your own, copying or paraphrasing from any source without proper citation, or fabricating excuses and lying in connection with your academic work. You will be held responsible for your own actions. If you are unsure as to what is permissible, always consult with your course instructor.

Grading Scale

As stated in The College of Wooster Catalogue, letter grades are defined as:

“A range” indicates an outstanding performance in which there has been

distinguished achievement in all phases of the course;

“B range” indicates a good performance in which there has been a high level of

achievement in some phases of the course;

“C range” indicates an adequate performance in which a basic understanding of

the subject has been demonstrated;

“D range” indicates a minimal performance in which despite recognizable

deficiencies there is enough to merit credit;

“F or NC” indicates unsatisfactory performance.

General Guidelines

1. Please read the assigned materials before class meeting; they provide the basis for

class discussions.

2. Papers should be submitted in hard copy. I will not accept e-mail versions of student papers.

3. Late papers lose half a grade level for each day they are late.

Course Outline

1. Introduction to the Politics of U.S. Foreign Policy: America the Exceptional? (Week of January 14)

Jerel A. Rosati and James M. Scott, The Politics of United States Foreign Policy, 2007, Chapters 1 and 2, pp.1-39

Thomas Preston and Michael P. Infraco, “The Nuclear Standoff Between the United States and Iran,” in Ralph G. Carter, ed., Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy, 2008, pp.91-120

Selected Readings from the Debate: “Should the United States Seek Global Hegemony?” Robert Kagan from “The Benevolent Empire,” and Charles William Maynes, from “The Perils of (and for) an Imperial America,” in John T. Rourke, ed., Taking Sides: American Foreign Policy, 2002, pp.16-35 (handout)

Transcript of Speech by General George S. Patton, from “Patton,” Twentieth Century Fox, 1969 (handout)

* Foreign Policy Crisis Simulation

2. Decision Theory and the Executive Branch (Week of January 21)

Rosati and Scott, Chapters 4 and 5, pp.68-139

Ryan C. Hendrickson and Frédérick Gagnon, “The United States versus Terrorism: Clinton, Bush, and Osama Bin Laden,” Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy, pp.1-24

Jeffrey S. Lantis and Eric Moskowitz, “The Return of the Imperial Presidency? The Bush Doctrine and U.S. Intervention in Iraq,” Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy, pp.25-58

Fred I. Greenstein, “The Changing Leadership of George W. Bush: A Pre- and Post-9/11 Comparison,” in Eugene R. Wittkopf and James M. McCormick, eds., The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy, 2004, pp.353-362 (handout)

Evan Thomas and Richard Wolffe, “Bush in the Bubble,” Newsweek, December 19, 2005, pp.31-40 (handout)

3. World War II, Containment, and the Cold War (Week of January 28)

Stephen E. Ambrose and Douglas G. Brinkley, Rise to Globalism, Chapters 1-9, pp.1-170.

Louis Morton, “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb,” in Robert Art and Kenneth Waltz, eds., The Use of Force, 2004,

pp.198-219 (handout)

President Harry S. Truman, “Speech to Congress on Greece and Turkey: The Truman Doctrine,” March 12, 1947, online url: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=12846

George F. Kennan, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,” 1947, online url: http://www.historyguide.org/europe/kennan.html

* Structured Debate: Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb

4. Congress and Interbranch Politics (Week of February 4)

Rosati and Scott, Chapter 11, pp.306-348

Jennifer S. Holmes, “Coca, Human Rights, and Violence: U.S. Foreign Policy toward Colombia,” Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy, pp.59-90

Joint Resolution Concerning the War Powers of Congress and the President, Public Law 93-148, H.J. Resolution #542, 93^rd Congress, November 7, 1973 (handout)

William G. Howell and Jon C. Pevehouse, “When Congress Stops Wars,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2007, pp.95-107 (handout)

* Briefing Group Presentation: Treatment of Detainees, Wednesday, February 6

* Contemporary Controversy Paper Due

5. Bureaucratic Politics: The State Department, Defense, and Intelligence Agencies (Weeks of February 11 and 18)

Rosati and Scott, Chapters 6-8, pp.140-246

Louis Fisher, “NSA Eavesdropping: Unchecked or Limited Presidential Power?” Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy,

pp.185-215

* Briefing Group Presentation: Immigration Policy, Wednesday, February 13

* Exercise: What Kind of Foreign Service Officer Would You Be?

6. Analyzing Key Decisions of the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Vietnam War (Weeks of February 25 and March 3)

Rosati and Scott, Chapter 10, pp.276-305

Ambrose and Brinkley, Chapters 10 and 11, pp.171-223

President John F. Kennedy, “Inaugural Address,” January 20, 1961, in Jerel A. Rosati, ed., Readings in the Politics of United States Foreign Policy, 1998 (handout)

Graham T. Allison, “Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” inPaul R. Viotti and Mark V. Kauppi, eds.,

International Relations Theory, 1999, pp.280-297 (handout)

Irving L. Janis, “Groupthink: The Desperate Drive for Consensus at Any Cost,”

in Jay M. Shafritz, J. Steven Ott, and Yong Suk Jang, eds., Classics of

Organization Theory, 2004, pp.185-193 (handout)

President Johnson’s Message to Congress, Joint Resolution of Congress H.J. Res #1145: The Tonkin Gulf Resolution,

August 5, 1964 (handout)

Kenneth D. Rose, One Nation Underground: The Fallout Shelter in American Culture, 2001, Introduction and Chapter 1,

pp.1-37 (handout)

* Briefing Group Presentation: Middle East Peace (Israel and Neighbors),

Wednesday, February 27

* Midterm Examination

7. Detente, Arms Control, and Human Rights (Week of March 24)

Ambrose and Brinkley, Chapters 12-14, pp.224-302

Stephen J. Solarz and Michael E. O’Hanlon, “Humanitarian Intervention:When Is Force Justified?”

The Washington Quarterly, Autumn 1997, pp.3-14 (handout)

* Structured Debate: When is Humanitarian Intervention Justified?

8. Public Opinion, Interest Groups, and the Media (Weeks of March 31 and April 7)

Rosati and Scott, Chapters 12, pp.350-388; Chapters 15-16, pp.434-512

Steven W. Hook and Franklin Barr Lebo, “U.S.-China Trade Relations: Privatizing Foreign Policy,” Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy,

pp.305-333

Michael Roskin, “From Pearl Harbor to Vietnam: Shifting Generational Paradigms and Foreign Policy,” in G. John Ikenberry, ed., American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays, 2002, pp.298-319 (handout)

John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby,” in Eugene R. Wittkopf and James M. McCormick, eds., The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy, 2008, pp.81-95 (handout)

* Briefing Group Presentation: Iraq, Wednesday, April 2

* Theory Paper Due

9. The End of the Cold War (Week of April 14)

Ambrose and Brinkley, Chapters 15-17, pp.303-397

Ronald Reagan, “Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Evangelicals,” Orlando, Florida, March 8, 1983, online url: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=41023&st=&st1=

* Fifth Briefing Group Presentation: Energy Policy, Wednesday, April 16

10. A New National Security Strategy for the United States? (Week of April 21)

Ambrose and Brinkley, Chapter 18, pp.398-428

Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay, “Bush’s Revolution,” Current History, November 2003, pp.83-90 (handout)

Andrew Bacevich, “Requiem for the Bush Doctrine,” in Annual Editions: World Politics 2007/2008, pp.65-70 (handout)

* Sixth Briefing Group Presentation: China Policy, Wednesday, April 23

11. United States Foreign Policy in the 21st Century (Week of April 28)

Rosati and Scott, Chapter 17, pp.514-532

George W. Bush, “The New Way Forward in Iraq,” President’s Address to the Nation, January 10, 2007, online url: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070110-7.html

Selected Readings from the Debates: “Is Preemptive War an Unacceptable Doctrine?” Yes, High Level Panel On Threats, Challenges, and Change, and No, Steven L. Kenny, from “The National Security Strategy Under the United Nations and International Law,” and Issue 13: “Does the United States Have a Sound Strategy for the War on Terrorism?” Yes, George W. Bush from “President Discusses War on Global Terror,” and No, Bruce Hoffman, “Combating Al Qaeda and the Militant Islamic Threat,” in Rourke, ed., Taking Sides: World Politics, 13^th Edition, 2008, pp.204-253 (handout)

Marc R. Rosenblum, “Immigration Policy: U.S.-Mexican Relations Confront U.S. Political Realities,” Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy, pp.217-248

Rodger A. Payne and Sean Payne, “The Kyoto Protocol and Beyond: The Politics of Climate Change,” Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy, pp.357-390

* Final Briefing Group Papers Due on Friday, May 2, by 4:00 pm

* Take-Home Final Examination