PLIR 2030: International Relations of East Asia (Spring 2012)

http://people.virginia.edu/~ljs2k/ir2030.html
MW 9:00-9:50 in Wilson 301

Prof. Len Schoppa
Office: Gibson 461 (tel: 924-3211)
Hrs: Tuesday and Thursday 3:30 – 4:30 (or appt)
e-mail: schoppa@virginia.edu

This course is designed to introduce students who are new to the field of international relations (IR) to the leading theories and debates of this field while simultaneously introducing students who are new to East Asia to the history of diplomacy, war, and economic relations of the region. No prerequisites are required.

Most classes that introduce IR theories and debates to undergraduates do so by focusing on Europe, where the modern state system first took shape. Though theories about how states interact in the international arena were developed largely on the basis of European diplomatic history, they purport to explain the behavior of states around the world and across time: states inevitably balance and ally against threats to their security; peace is most likely when there is a balance of power (a bi-polar balance is even better); multi-polar conflict among great powers is unstable and likely to lead to war; power transitions are inevitably marked by major war; and international cooperation is likely to be fleeting and opportunistic and will rarely persist in the face of incentives to free ride or turn against a former ally.

Not surprisingly, the history of Europe provides numerous examples that fit the theories that grew up to explain its frustrating tendency to relapse into war. Instead of focusing on this predictable fit between theory and cases, this course looks to another important region of the world—East Asia—and asks whether Euro-centric theories of international relations “travel” to this region. Do they describe the relations among Asian nations in the period before colonialism; in the period after the arrival of European powers in the region; during the Cold War; or today?

The question of whether pessimistic realist IR theories accurately describe what is going on in contemporary East Asia is particularly critical to understanding how international relations will evolve in this new century. East Asia is home to the nation that is most likely to challenge the United States’ currently unrivaled position of dominance in the world: China. It is prone to multi-polar power competition between China, India, Japan, Russia, and the United States. Unlike Europe, which has NATO and the European Union, Asia has few international institutions. The right of certain states to exist is contested (Taiwan, the two Koreas). Historical memories of the Pacific War leave many nations extremely suspicious of Japan. And the region is home to a “rogue” state, North Korea, which has shown it has little regard for international norms. If IR theories are correct, this region is likely to descend into war unless it can find some way to address these circumstances.

For the purposes of this course, East Asia is defined as the region encompassing the Russian Far East, China, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Southeast Asia. Since it has been extensively involved in the region since the 1850s, we will also focus on the role of the United States in the region. We may make occasional reference to India, but the subcontinent and Central Asia are not a primary focus of this class.

The course introduces all four major schools of thought in the field of international relations: realism, liberalism, constructivism, and domestic politics. Students will read classic works in each of these schools (typically NOT focused on Asia) as well as works that apply insights from these schools of thought to East Asian history and contemporary events. To help students follow this four-way debate about how power, institutions, culture, and domestic politics shape international relations, the on-line version of this syllabus is color-coded to identify readings with a clear theoretical orientation: blue for realists, red for liberals, pink for constructivists, and green for those emphasizing the role of domestic politics.

Requirements:

The class is a lecture course with discussion sections. Students’ grades will be based on their level of participation in discussion sections (20 percent); the in-class, closed-book midterm (30); a take-home essay exam of 6-7 pages due near the end of the term (30); and an in-class short-answer final (20). The final will cover material only from the second half of the term.

Readings:

Kenneth B. Pyle, Japan Rising: The Resurgence of Japanese Power and Purpose (New York: Century Foundation, 2007).

Jonathan Fenby, Modern China: The Fall and Rise of a Great Power (New York: Harper Collins, 2008).

In addition to large portions of these two books, we will be reading journal articles and book chapters. All of these items, marked with a *, are available in the form of a course packet for sale at the Copy Shop on Elliewood.

SCHEDULE AND ASSIGNMENTS

1. Introduction (1/18)

2. Intro to IR Theory: Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism (1/23 and 1/25)

*John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001): 29-54.

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 18-65.

3. Before Colonialism: A Hierarchical World Order Centered on China (1/30 and 2/1)

*David Kang, “Hierarchy and Stability in Asian International Relations,” in G. John Ikenberry and Michael Mastunduno, eds., International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), pp. 163-189.

*Yuan-kang Wang, Harmony and War: Confucian Culture and Chinese Power Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010): 145-180.

4. Organized Hypocrisy: East Meets West in the Nineteenth Century (2/6)

Fenby, Modern China, pp. 3-118.

*Stephen D. Krasner, “Organized Hypocrisy in Nineteenth-Century East Asia,” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 1 (2001): 173-197.

5. A Darwinian Competition: Japan Joins the Ranks of the “Great Powers” While China Fractures (2/8 and 2/13)

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 66-97.

Fenby, Modern China, pp. 119-216.

*Jeffrey Legro, “Overhaul of Orthodoxy in Tokugawa Japan and the Soviet Union,” in his Rethinking the World: Great Power Strategies and International Order (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005), pp. 122-142.

6. An Idealist Experiment: The Washington System (2/15)

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 137-169.

7. Japan’s Imperial Over-stretch (2/20)

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 170-209.

*Jack Snyder, Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991): 1-20, 112-152.

8. Cold War Alignments (2/22 and 2/27)

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 210-240.

Fenby, Modern China, pp. 353-395.

*Tom Christensen, “A Lost Chance for What? Rethinking the Origins of US-PRC Confrontation,” The Journal of American-East Asian Relations 4:3 (Fall 1995): 249-278.

9. Cold War Alliances: Why Does the U.S.-Japan Alliance Take the Form It Does? (2/29 and 3/12)

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 241-277.

*Christopher Hemmer and Peter J. Katzenstein, “Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism,” International Organization 56:3 (Summer 2002): 575-607.

MIDTERM: 3/14

10. The Cold War in Korea and Vietnam (3/19 and 3/21)

*Jonathan Mercer, Reputation and International Politics (New York: Cornell University Press, 1996): 14-48.

*Victor Cha, “Abandonment, Entrapment, and Neoclassical Realism in Asia: The United States, Japan, and Korea,” International Studies Quarterly 44:2 (June 2000): 261-291.

*Yuen Foong Khong, Analogies at War: Korea, Munich, Dien Bien Phu, and the Vietnam Decisions of 1965 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992): 72-96, 174-205.

11. The Nixon Shocks and China’s Realignment in the 1970s (3/26)

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 310-327.

Fenby, Modern China, pp. 496-507.

12. Economic Cooperation and the Emergence of the Asian Economic Miracle (3/28)

*Robert Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984): 85-109.

*Joseph M. Grieco, “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism,” International Organization 42:3 (Summer 1988): 485-507.

13. U.S.-Asia Economic Cooperation Under Challenge in the Post-Cold War World (4/2 and 4/4)

*Michael Mastanduno, “Do Relative Gains Matter? America’s Response to Japanese Industrial Policy,” International Security 16:1 (Summer 1991): 73-113.

*Christina Davis, “International Institutions and Issue Linkage: Building Support for Agricultural Liberalization,” American Political Science Review 98:1 (February 2004): 1-17.

*Arthur Kroeber, “The Renminbi: The Political Economy of a Currency,” Foreign Policy (September 2011)—10 page printout of internet version.

14. The Democratic Peace in Asia (4/9)

*Bruce Russet, Grasping the Democratic Peace (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993): 3-42.

*Robert M. Uriu, “Export-Led Development and the Transformation of State Preferences in Industrialized Asia,” in Daizaburo Yui and Yasuo Endo, eds., Framing the Pacific in the 21^st Century: Coexistence and Friction (Tokyo: Center for Pacific and American Studies, 2001): 144-160.

15. Contemporary Challenges: Creating Regional Economic and Security Institutions (4/11 and 4/16)

*David P. Rapkin, “The United States, Japan, and the power to block: the APEC and AMF cases,” The Pacific Review 14:3 (2001): 373-410.

*Gregory P. Corning, “Trade Regionalism in a Realist East Asia: Rival Visions and Competitive Bilateralism,” Asian Perspective 35:2 (April-June 2011): 259-286.

16. Contemporary Challenges: Engineering a Soft Landing in North Korea (4/18 and 4/23)

*Sebastian Harnisch and David J. Roesch, “The International Community and the North Korean Nuclear Programme,” in Rudiger Frank, et al, eds., Korea 2011: Politics, Economics and Society (Brill, 2011), 28 pages.

17. Contemporary Challenges: Avoiding Conflict Over Taiwan and Dealing with the Rise of China (4/25)

*Thomas Christensen, “Fostering Stability or Creating a Monster?: The Rise of China and U.S. Policy Toward East Asia,” International Security 31:1 (Summer 2006), pp. 81-126.

TAKE-HOME ESSAY WILL BE HANDED OUT 4/25 IN CLASS

18. Contemporary Challenges: Nudging Japan Toward a “Normal” Role (4/30)

Pyle, Japan Rising, pp. 363-374.

TAKE-HOME ESSAY EXAM DUE (Monday, April 30th, at the end of class)

FINAL EXAM: SHORT ANSWER ONLY (Friday, May 4, from 1400 to 1530)

PROF. SCHOPPA'S CLASS RULES

1. MISSED TESTS: You should notify me before the midterm if, for some reason, you will not be able to make it on that date. Permission will only be given in exceptional cases, and make-ups will be scheduled either before or after the regularly scheduled date--at my convenience.

2. LATE PAPERS: The final grade on the paper will be docked one letter (e.g. a B+ would be marked down to a C+) for every day it is late unless the delay has been approved by me, based on a very good reason, at least a week before the due date. Last minute computer problems are not an excuse!!! Back-up your work on disks to avoid losing it, and leave time for you to deal with last minute hitches (like a broken printer, a line in the computer lab) by aiming to finish well before the deadline.

3. SLEEPING THROUGH FINALS: Finals can only be rescheduled under the strict conditions established by the College of Arts and Sciences (three exams in 24 hours). These arrangements need to be made by the deadline set by the College for this purpose with the appropriate paperwork signed by Professor Schoppa. Students who sleep through finals should not expect to be able to take a make-up exam and will have to deal with the consequences of a "0" for the final. One way to avoid sleeping through the exam is to get plenty of sleep the night before the test rather than planning to catch a "quick nap" at 8:00 am before a morning exam.

4. PLAGIARISM AND CHEATING: Taking the words and ideas of another and presenting them as your own (without proper use of quotation marks and citation) constitutes “plagiarism” and is considered grounds for trial and expulsion from the university through the Honor process. In the past year, I have seen one of my students expelled for this reason and another failed for attempting to cheat on a final exam. I take all cases of this type seriously and urge students to uphold the honor code.