1
Draft 10/28/15
Brandeis University
Department of Politics
Spring 2016
Pol 127a: Ending Deadly Conflict
Prof. Steven Burg
[Tu-Fri 9:30-10:50]
Contact information for Prof. Burg: Office: Olin-Sang 204, Phone: x 2750
Spring Office Hours: Tu/Fri, 11-12:20; Th, 11-2; and by appointment
email:
Course Description
Examines strategies for ending violent internal (primarily ethnic) conflicts, with emphasis on identifying conditions conducive to negotiated settlements. Case studies are examined in light of analytical literature.
The course begins with selected readings about the factors that make deadly internal conflicts so difficult to bring to a negotiated end. These readings are intended to provide the basis for developing, in class discussions, a framework for analyzing and understanding the mechanisms and processes by which deadly conflicts are brought to an end. We then move to consideration of the institutional and procedural mechanisms that have been adopted as part of such negotiations in an effort to manage the conflict after settlement. These discussions are followed by readings on a series of cases of deadly conflict that have been brought to an end, either through negotiations or by force, and we will consider whether these cases can be considered “successful”.
The course concludes with student presentations of their own case studies of ending deadly conflict. Case selection must be approved by the instructor.
Course Requirements
1. Class attendance and participation
All students are required to attend every class, except in case of illness (especially “flu-like symptoms”!) or a dispensation granted in advance by Prof. Burg. This includes all student presentation sessions.Students must complete the assigned readings in advance of each class. Each session will begin with a student being asked to initiate discussion of the assigned readings. (Multiple readings mean multiple students will be asked to do this.) Well-informed classroom discussion is required of each student (although not necessarily in every class session). It is highly recommended that students annotate personal copies of, or make notes from the readings. The readings may include contending, competing and opposing perspectives and interpretations. One goal of seminar discussions will be to try to sort these out.
2. Two short essays; to be based on the assigned readings for the previous section of the course. These essays are not to exceed three pages in length (12 point font, double-spaced).
Essay 1.“What factors affect the likelihood of a successfully negotiated end to deadly conflict?” Due in class on February 12.
Essay 2.“What lessons does the peace process in Northern Ireland suggest for successfully negotiating an end to deadly conflict?” Due in class March 18.
3. In-class presentation, not more than 15 minutes in length, of the argument and key findings of the research paper/case study. (April 8-21, individual dates TBD by lottery)
4. Term research paper, to consist of a 15-20 page case study of ending deadly conflict. This may focus on either a successful or unsuccessful case, or one that is in process, with outcome as yet unknown. Students who wish to examine a case contained in the syllabus, must go beyond what is contained in the assigned reading, in terms of both empirical content and analysis. A list of potential cases for study will be distributed in class.
Format for the case study will be discussed in class.
Deadlines for stages of the research project:
Definition of topic due in class February 2.
Outline of case study due in class February 26.
Class presentation of case study: April 8-21.
Final Draft of paper due in Prof. Burg’s office (OS108)May 2, 11 am – 2 pm.
Evaluation
Students enjoy complete academic freedom in the classroom, within the limits defined by the standards of mutual respect and responsible discourse.
Evaluation will be based on the two assigned essays (~15 percent each), seminar participation (~20 percent), the research paper(~40 percent), and the presentation (~10 percent). (“~” means grading will take into account improving performance over time.) The presentation will be evaluated in terms of the quality/substance and organization of the presentation. “Style” should be serious and professional. The exercise is intended to give students experience “presenting” in front of peers, fielding questions (aka “being interrogated”), and leading discussion. Nervousness will not affect the evaluation; lack of preparation will. All written work will be evaluated in terms of the technical and stylistic quality of the writing as well as the intellectual substance; i.e., spelling, syntax, word usage, etc. all “count.”
Expected workload for this course:
In addition to three hours of class time per week, success in this class is estimated to require students to spend, on average over the course of the semester, a minimum of 9 hours of study time per week in preparation for class (readings and prep for discussion) and and completion of written assignments (short essays and research papers).
Learning Goals:
This course addresses the learning goals established by the Department of Politics
(see departmental website for full statement). Specifically, it is designed to encourage and enable students
(a) tothink critically about arguments, based on the evaluation of evidence
(b) to articulate reasoned arguments clearly, both orally and in written form
(c) to become familiar with a variety of research methods [“case study” readings, “historical/analytical narrative” readings, and readings based on quantitative statistical analysis]
(d) to use the concepts and methods of political science in research and analysis
Academic Honesty
[The following is a statement of university policy:] Students are expected to be honest in all academic work. All written work for this course must include appropriate citation of the sources used. See section 56c ("Avoid Plagiarism") of the Concise English Handbook for guidance. The university policy on academic honesty is distributed annually as part of the Rights and Responsibilities handbook. Instances of suspected dishonesty will, without exception, be forwarded to the Office of Student Affairs for possible referral to the Student Judicial System. Potential sanctions include failure in the course and suspension from the university. If you have any questions about this, please ask.
Use of cell phones in class is prohibited.
If you use your phone in class (e.g., texting), you will be asked to leave. If you wish to leave your phone on, in “silent” mode, because of an ongoing emergency situation to which you may need to respond, please speak to me at the start of class to let me know. If you need to respond, please leave the class to do so. If your phone goes off because you forgot to turn it off (we all do it), just apologize and turn it off (and try not to let it happen again!).
Use of laptops during class is restricted to class-related activity
This includes, but is not restricted to, note-taking, accessing your annotated version of the assigned reading, source-checking, looking up facts quickly to add to classroom discussion, accessing the latte site in connection with class discussion, etc. Using your laptop for non-class related activities (e.g., surfing the web, using Facebook, checking email) is disrespectful to others, denies us the potentially important contribution you otherwise might make to the discussion were you paying attention, and is potentially distracting to those around you. Please do not disrespect others. You will be asked to leave class for “inappropriate use of a laptop”.
Note on 9:30 am Start Time:
Those of you who, like me, require a strong cup of coffee (or two, or three…) to function at this hour should feel free to bring a coffee to class. Black tea also works. But, no food in class, please.
Books Recommended for Purchase, But also on Reserve
John Darby & Roger Mac Ginty (eds), Contemporary Peace Making: Conflict, Violence, and Peace Processes,Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2002
Cameron Hume, Ending Mozambique’s War: The Role of Mediation and Good Offices USIP, 1994
CLASS MEETING SCHEDULE, TOPICS, AND REQUIRED READINGS
Friday, January 15
Introduction to the course: subject matter, requirements, conduct of the class
Tuesday, January 19
Zartman, Elusive Peace Chapters 1 and 13 (“Dynamics and Constraints” and “Conclusion”), 3-30 and 332-346
Rothstein, “The Timing of Negotiations: Dueling Metaphors” Civil Wars 19, 3 (September 2007), pp.262–281
Friday, January 22
Licklider, Stopping the Killing Chapters 1 and 2 (“How Civil Wars End” and “Negotiating Internal Conflicts”), pp. 3-36
Luttwak, “Give War a Chance”Foreign Affairs 78, 4 (Jul. - Aug., 1999), pp. 36-44
Tuesday, January 26
Licklider, Stopping the Killing, Chapters 11 and 13 (“When War Doesn’t Work” and “What Have We Learned”), pp. 269-292, 303-322.
Friday, January 29
Darby & Mac Ginty, Contemporary Peace Making Part I – Preparing for Peace, pp. 7-50
Ross, “Creating the conditions for peacemaking: theories of practice in ethnic conflict resolution” Ethnic and Racial Studies 23, 6 (November 2000), pp. 1002-1034
Tuesday, February 2 – Students must define case study by today
Greig and Regan, “When do They Say Yes?” International Studies Quarterly 52 (2006), pp. 759-781
O’Kane, “When can conflicts be resolved? A critique of ripeness” Civil Wars 8, 3-4 (September-December 2006), pp. 268-284.
Friday, February 5
Darby & MacGinty, Contemporary Peace MakingPart II – Negotiations, pp. 51-100
Tuesday, February 9
Darby & MacGinty, Contemporary Peace MakingPart III – Violence, plus chapter 18 (on military and police reform), pp. 101-136, 212-223
Friday, February 12– Essay No. 1 due in class today
Darby & MacGinty, Contemporary Peace MakingPart IV – Peace Accords, pp. 137-194
NO CLASSES – FEBRUARY 16, 19 – SPRING BREAK
Tuesday, February 23
Cameron Hume, Ending Mozambique’s War: The Role of Mediation and Good Offices USIP, 1994
Friday, February 26 – Outline of case study due in class today
Msabaha, “Negotiating an end to Mozambique’s murderous rebellion” Zartman, Elusive Peace, chapter 9, pp. 204-230
Moran and Pitcher, “The ‘basket case’ and the ‘poster child’: explaining the end of civil conflicts in Liberia and Mozambique” Third World Quarterly 25, 3 (2004), pp. 501-519.
Tuesday, March 1
Zartman, “Negotiating the South African Conflict,” Zartman, Elusive Peace, chapter 7, pp.147-174.
Friday, March 4
du Toit, South Africa’s Brittle Peace, Chapters 3-5, pp. 53-114
Tuesday, March 8
Darby and MacGinty, “Northern Ireland: Long, Cold Peace,” in Darby & Mac Ginty, Management of Peace Processes, chapter 2, pp. 61-106
David Mitchell, “Sticking to Their Guns? The Politics of Arms Decommissioning in Northern Ireland, 1998-2007” Contemporary British History 24, 3 (September 2010), pp. 341-361.
Friday, March 11
Ruane and Todd, “History, Structure and Action in the Settlement of Complex Conflicts: The Northern Ireland Case,” Irish Political Studies 29, 1 (2014), pp. 15-36.
Dochartaigh, “The Longest Negotiation: British Policy, IRA Strategy and the Making of the Northern Ireland Peace Settlement,” Political Studies 65 (2015), pp. 202-220.
Tuesday, March 15
Paul Dixon, “In Defence of Politics: Interpreting the Peace Process and the Future of Northern Ireland” Political Quarterly 83, 2 (April-June 2012), pp. 265-276.
Frampton, “Disident Irish Republican Violence? A Resurgent Threat?” Political Quarterly 83, 2 (April-June 2012), pp. 227-237.
Report by the UK Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland (19 October 2015)
Friday, March 18 – Essay No. 2 due in class today
Clark, “Negotiations for Basque Self-Determination” Zartman, Elusive Peace, chapter 3, pp. 59-76
Mees, “The Basque Peace Process, Nationalism and Political Violence,” Darby & MacGinty, Management of Peace Processes, chapter 4, pp. 154-194
Mees, “Nationalist Politics at the Crossroads: The Basque Nationalist
Party and the Challenge of Sovereignty (1998–2014),”Nationalism and Ethnic Politics21, 1(2015), pp. 44-62,
Tuesday, March 22
Wriggins, “Sri Lanka: Negotiations in a Secessionist Conflict,” Zartman, Elusive Peace, chapter 2, pp. 35-58
Saravanamuttu, “Sri Lanka – the Intractability of Ethnic Conflict” Darby & Mac Ginty, Management of Peace Processes, chapter 5, pp. 195-227
Höglund, et al., “Damned if you do, and damned if you don’t….”International Negotiation 13 (2008), pp. 341-364
FRIDAY, MARCH 25 NO CLASSES – GOOD FRIDAY
Tuesday, March 29
Shastri, “Ending Ethnic Civil War: The Peace Process in Sri Lanka” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 47, 1 (February 2009), pp. 76-99.
Diaz and Murshed, “ ‘Give war a chance’: All-out war as a means of ending conflict….” Civil Wars 15, 3 (2013), pp. 281-305
Clarke, “Conventionally defeated but not eradicated….” Civil Wars 13, 2 (June 2011), pp. 157-65 and 177-184 only.
Friday, April 1
Eisenstadt and Garcia, “Colombia: Negotiations in a Shifting Pattern of Insurgency,” Zartman, Elusive Peace, chapter 11, pp. 265-298
Hartlyn, “Civil violence and Conflict Resolution: The Case of Colombia,” Licklider, Stopping the Killing, chapter 3, pp. 37-62
Tuesday, April 5
Bercovitch and Simpson, “International Mediation and the
Question of Failed Peace Agreements: Improving Conflict Management and
Implementation” Peace & Change, 35, 1 (January 2010), PP. 68-103.
STUDENT PRESENTATIONS OF CASE STUDIES
Friday, April 8
Tuesday, April 12
Friday, April 15
Tuesday, April 19
Thursday, April 21 – BRANDEIS FRIDAY – Last class session
NO CLASSES – APRIL 22, 26, 29 – PASSOVER BREAK
FINAL DRAFT OF RESEARCH PAPER DUE MAY 2 – HAND IN TO
PROF. BURG, OS 108, BETWEEN 11AM AND 2PM.