POLS 505: Identity, Culture and Norms in World Politics
Wednesday 05:00-07:25 PM
Professor Hisham M. Wahby
Office hours: Wednesdays 3:00-5:00pm and by appointment
Course Description:
Culture and identity matter in world politics. Over the last decade and a half, the discipline of
International Relations (IR) has paid renewed attention to these issues, both in theory and in practice. At the empirical level, in the “real world” of international politics, culture and identity are increasingly considered as key explanatory variables in conflicts and/or community-building. The end of the Cold War has been a watershed on that account by bringing about more complex political dynamics than simple superpower rivalry. At the theoretical level, in the realm of scientific knowledge, the rise of post-positivist approaches in the 1990s, most notably constructivism and postmodernism, has opened thinking space to better conceptualize culture and identity in IR theories.
The course purports to critically assess the simultaneous rise of culture and identity in IR theory as well as in world political practice. Rather than simply make the case that identity matters, the course attempts to take a deeper look at the cultural, ideational, and religious concerns in world politics. The course will address topics such as: “the West” as a political identity; Islam as a civilizational entity and world culture beyond national communities. The course begins and ends with the so-called “clash of civilizations” as a focal point for thinking through symbolic politics on the world scale. Overall, students are expected to learn to critically reflect on the merits and limits of taking culture and identity seriously in the study of world politics.
Course Format
The class meets once a week for 2 hours and 25 minutes. Each class consists of an introductory presentation by the instructor followed by interactive debates and discussions involving students. In terms of substance, most courses start from a theoretical or conceptual problem, which is then applied to empirical cases drawn from contemporary world politics. It is absolutely essential for students to complete all the readings before the lecture in order to fully benefit from discussions. Note that many issues pertaining to culture and identity can be politically sensitive; it is each student’s responsibility to express opinions in a respectful and tolerant way.
Course Materials:
-Katzenstein, Peter. Civilizations in World Politics, Routledge, 2010
-Other articles and book chapters will be made available
Course Requirements:
1) Three critical essays: (3 X 15 = 45 percent)
Over the course of the term, students are required to hand in three critical essays. Each essay deals with one specific reading to be assigned on a voluntary basis and in exclusivity to individual students.
Critical essays, of a maximum length of 1,500 words, should include four parts: 1) a short summary of the argument, including the thesis (max. 250 words); 2) an in-depth, analytical critique of the argument; 3) an analysis of how the reading connects with other readings for that week and the course in general; and 4) a set of critical and thought-provoking questions that the reading sparks.In addition, each student will briefly present her/his essay to the class as a basis for discussion and debate. Please note that because essays are to be discussed in class, late submissions will not be accepted.
2) Research essay (35 percent)
Students are required to provide an in-depth theoretical reflection on an ‘identity’ or ‘culture’-driven international issue of their choice. The maximum length of the essay is 3,000 words, references included. The essay is due on December 5.
3) Attendance and Participation (20 percent)
The participation grade is based on attendance, active and constructive involvement in discussions and debates, as well as preparedness.
Format of submissions
-Work to be handed in should be typed in Times New Roman font, size 12, spaced in 1.5, 1-inch margin each side, on regular 8.5x11 sheets.
-Students should write their name (as it appears in the Registrar), the name of the course and instructor and the date on top of the first page.
-Work should be concise, reflect clarity of thinking, and follow a logical presentation.
Expectations
-Students are required to read the texts thoroughly before coming to class.
-The AUC has a zero-tolerance policy regarding academic integrity.
-Attendance will be taken at the beginning of class; late-comers will count as absent.
-Students are expected to observe general rules of civility (turn off your mobile phone before you come, listen to your colleagues and avoid interrupting them, don’t monopolize the discussion, be considerate of others, etc.).
-Negotiation is a virtue that students will not need in this course in any shape or form.
-If a student feels the urge to negotiate the time of arrival or the grade obtained, s/he should re-visit the rule above.
Communication
-The instructor is available to answer the students’ questions about the academic content of this course. This could happen during the class time and office hours (see above).
-Emails should not be perceived as a notification of absence, delays, or any other change in schedule or course requirements.
-Questions regarding the readings’ availability, deadlines and other details related to the course should be addressed to the teaching assistant.
Schedule
PART 1 – INTRODUCTION: Culture and Identity in International Theory and Practice
Session 1 Course Introduction: Syllabus and Overview (11Sep)
Session 2 The Clash of Civilizations? (18Sept)
Samuel Huntington (1993), “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs 72 (3), 22-49.
(Or, alternatively: Samuel Huntington (1996), The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of
World Order. New York: Simon & Shuster.)
Session 3 & 4 The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory (25 Sept. & 2Oct.)
Historiography of IR theoretical neglect:
Stephanie Lawson (2006), Culture and Context in World Politics. New York: Palgrave, 17-35.
Yosef Lapid (1996), “Culture’s Ship: Returns and Departure in International Relations Theory,” in Friedrich V. Kratochwil and Yosef Lapid, eds., The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 3-20.
Early theorizing in IR and political science:
Ronald L. Jepperson et al. (1996), “Norms, Identity, and Culture in National Security,” in Peter J.Katzenstein, ed., The Culture of National Security. New York: Columbia , 33-52.
Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink (2001), “Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research
Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics,” Annual Review of Political Science4, 391-416.
The post-positivist turn:
Friedrich Kratochwil (2000), “Constructing a New Orthodoxy? Wendt’s ‘Social Theory of
International Politics’ and the Constructivist Challenge,” Millennium 29 (1), 73-101.
Yosef Lapid (1989), “The Third Debate: On the Prospects of International Theory in a Post-
Positivist Era,” International Studies Quarterly 33(3), 235-254.
Richard Price and Christian Reus-Smit (1998), “Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theoryand Constructivism,” European Journal of International Relations 4(3), 259-294.
Session 5 & 6 Understanding Culture and Identity: Methodological Requirements (9 Oct.& 16 Oct.)
On epistemology:
Steve Smith (1996), “Positivism and Beyond,” in Steve Smith, Ken Booth, and Marysia Zalewski,eds., International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. New York: Cambridge , 11–46.
Thomas Risse-Kappen (1994) , Ideas do not Float Freely, International Organization 48(2),
185-214.
Constructivism in IR:
Emanuel Adler (2002), “Constructivism in International Relations,” in Walter Carlsnaes, Thomas Risse and Beth A. Simmons, eds. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 95-118.
Stefano Guzzini (2000), “A Reconstruction of Constructivism in International Relations,”
European Journal of International Relations 6 (2), 147-182.
Jennifer Milliken (1999), “The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of
Research and Methods,” European Journal of International Relations 5 (2), 225-254.
Civilizational Analysis:
Peter Katezenstein (2010) A World of Plural and Pluralist Civilizations in Peter Katezenstein, ed., Civilizations in World Politics, 1-40
Patrick Thaddesus Jackson (2010). How to Think about Civilizations in Peter Katezenstein, ed., Civilizations in World Politics, 176-200
Part 2 – IDENTITY BEYOND THE STATE: The Rise of “the West”
Session 7Conceptualizing Identity ( 23 Oct.)
Identity in world politics:
Iver B. Neumann (1996), “Self and Other in International Relations,” European Journal of
International Relations 2 (2), 139-174.
Session 8Collective Identity Formation (30 Oct):
Alexander Wendt (1994), “Collective Identity Formation and the International State,” American
Political Science Review 88 (2), 384-396.
Cases:
Emanuel Adler (2010), Europe as a civilizational community of Practice.
Thomas Risse (2010), A community of Europeans?: transnational identities and public spheres
Bruce Lawrence (2010), Islam in Afro-Eurasia: a bridge civilization
Peter Mandaville (2001), Transnational Muslim Politics: Reimagining the Umma.
Session 9 The Politics of Identity (6 Nov.): The West and Its Others
Theoretical discussions:
Janice Bially Mattern (2001), “The Power Politics of Identity,” European Journal of International Relations 7 (3), 349-397.
The West and its others:
Iver B. Neumann (1999), “Making Europe: The Turkish Other,” in Uses of the Other: ‘The East’ in European Identity Formation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 39-63.
Michael C. Williams and Iver B. Neumann (2000), “From Alliance to Security Community:
NATO, Russia, and the Power of Identity,” Millennium 29 (2), 357-387.
Session 10 Identity and Foreign Policy ( 13 Nov.): The West and the Rest
Theoretical discussions:
Jennifer Mitzen (2006), “Ontological Security in World Politics: State Identity and the Security Dilemma,” European Journal of International Relations 12(3), 341-370.
Vendulka Kubalkova, ed. (2001), Foreign Policy in a Constructed World. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe.
The West and the rest:
K. M. Fierke (1996), “Multiple Identities, Interfacing Games: The Social Construction of Western Action in Bosnia,” European Journal of International Relations 2(4), 467-497.
Part 3 – CULTURE BEYOND THE STATE: On World Culture(s)
Session 11 Conceptualizing Culture (20 Nov)
Culture in IR and political science:
Lisa Wedeen (2002), “Conceptualizing Culture: Possibilities for Political Science,” American
Political Science Review 96 (4), 713-728.
Jack Snyder (2000), “Anarchy and Culture: Insights from the Anthropology of War,” International Organization 56 (1), 7-40.
Iver B. Neumann (2002), “Returning Practice to the Linguistic Turn: The Case of Diplomacy,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 31 (3), 58-78.
Jeffrey Legro (1996), “Culture and Preferences in the International Cooperation Two-Step,”
American Political Science Review 90 (1).
Thursday November 27: Thanksgiving Holiday
Session 12 Diplomatic Culture (4 Dec.): Mediating Across Cultures
The notion of diplomatic culture:
James Der Derian (1996), “Hedley Bull and the Idea of Diplomatic Culture,” in Rick Fawn and Jeremy Larkins, eds., International Society after the Cold War: Anarchy and Order Reconsidered. New York: St. Martin’s, 84-100.
Geoffrey Wiseman (2005), “Pax Americana: Bumping into Diplomatic Culture,” International Studies Perspectives 6(4), 409-430.
Cultures and communication:
Lars G. Lose (2001), “Communicative action and the World of Diplomacy,” in Karin M. Fierke and Knud E. Jorgensen, eds., Constructing International Relations: the Next Generation. New York: M.E. Sharpe, 179-200.
Karen A. Mingst and Craig P. Warkentin (1996), “What Difference Does Culture Make in
Multilateral Negotiations?” Global Governance 2(2): 169-188.
Raymond Cohen (1991), Negotiating across Cultures: Communication Obstacles in International Diplomacy. Washington: United States Institute of Peace.
Part 4 –CONCLUSION: The Future of Culture and Identity in International Theory and Practice
Session 13 Beyond the Clash of Civilization ( 11 Dec.)
Samuel Huntington (2007), “The Clash of Civilizations Revisited,” New Perspective Quarterly 24(1), to be retrieved from
Kristin M. Bakke (2005), “Clash of Civilizations or Clash of Religions?” International Studies
Review 7(1), 87-89.
Engin I. Erdem (2002), “The ‘Clash of Civilizations’: Revisited after September 11,” Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations 1(2), web edition.
Jonathan Fox (2001), “Religion as an Overlooked Element of International Relations,”
International Studies Review 3 (3), 53-73.
Andreas Hasenclever and Volker Rittberger (2000), “Does Religion Make a Difference?
Theoretical Approaches to the Impact of Faith on Political Conflict,” Millennium 29(3), 641-674.
Andrew Linklater (2005), “Dialogical Politics and the Civilising Process,” Review of International Studies 31, 141-154.
Andrew Linklater (1998), The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era. University of South Carolina Press.
Marc Lynch (2000), “The Dialogue of Civilizations and International Public Spheres,” Millennium 29 (2), 307-330.
James F. Rinehart (2004), “Religion in World Politics: Why the Resurgence?” International Studies Review 6, 271-274.
Fabio Petito (2009), Dialogue of Civilizations: An Alternative Model for World Order.
Future directions of IR theory:
Daniel Philpott (2002), “The Challenge of September 11 to Secularism in International Relations,”World Politics 55 (1), 66-95.
Richard Price (2008), “Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics,” International Organization 62(2), 191-220.
Elizabeth Shakman Hurd (2007), “Theorizing Religious Resurgence,” International Politics 44(6), 647-665.
John G. Ruggie (1993), “Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Modernity in International
Relations,” International Organization 46 (1), 139–174.
Alex Wendt (2003), “Why a World State Is Inevitable,” European Journal of International
Relations 9 (4), 491-542.
1