Core Course MA International Relations Autumn Term 2010 Course Convenor: Justin Rosenberg

University of Sussex Department of International Relations & Politics

Foundations of World Politics

(941M1)

Core Course MA International Relations

Autumn Term 2010 Course Convenor: Justin Rosenberg

Zdenek Kavan Justin Rosenberg

Office C344 Tel: x2029

Office: C346 Tel: x2875

[email protected] [email protected]

Please See Tutors’ Office Doors

for Details of their Weekly Office Hours

See also: www.justinrosenberg.org

2

Course Outline

Week 1

History and International Relations

Origins

Week 2 1492 and the ‘Discoveries’

Week 3 1648 and ‘Westphalia’

Week 4 The 1780s and the ‘Industrial Revolution’

Expansion

Week 5 19th Century European Imperialism

Week 6 The Eastern Question & the Ottoman Empire

Week 7 China and Japan in the 19th Century

Crisis

Week 8 The First World War

Week 9 The Second World War

Week 10 The Cold War

1. Aims and Objectives

Foundations of World Politics is designed to give you a critical historical perspective on the modern international system. It is impossible to cover the whole of modern international history in ten weeks. Instead we shall be reflecting on four key themes, each of which is in its own way central to historicising the world we live in today. First there is the theme of origins: when did the modern international system originate? Was it in 1492 with the European ‘discoveries’ which for the first time linked up all the major civilizations? Was it in 1648, when the Peace of Westphalia, according to many, first established a ‘sovereign states-system’? Or was it in the 1780s, when the coinciding industrial and French revolutions set in train the forces of industrialisation, nationalism, republicanism and total war? The three dates are symbolic – but the choice between them is not: which one you choose determines what you think the most significant characteristics of modern international relations are, and even your view of what modern world history has been about. A second theme considers the expansion of this modern system into the – historically unprecedented – global system of today. Once again, we cannot do this comprehensively. But by looking at 19th century European imperialism – as well as the responses of some countries which escaped direct colonial rule – we can identify some key dynamics of what might be called the modern ‘international historical process’. Third, no attempt to understand international relations today can avoid reflection on the extended crisis of the 20th century – with its world wars, revolutions and global ideological conflicts. Historical controversy continues to rage over all of these: can they be understood primarily at the geopolitical level as a series of great power conflicts over hegemonic succession? Were they the inevitable result of contradictions and dynamics inherent in modern capitalist society? Or is it rather the international unevenness of industrialisation or ‘modernisation’ which explains this extended period of crisis which so recently ended (or did it…)? Finally, as befits a core course in international relations, the readings have also been selected so as to highlight a fourth theme: how far can modern world history be understood by reference to developments occurring within the societies involved? What does a study of the inter-societal dimension of this process add to an understanding of its unfolding over time? Or, to put it another way: what, if anything, is distinctive about international history? Ultimately, of course, we cannot fully understand ‘the present as history’ – if only because the story of the present is still being made. But we can try to think historically about the present, to draw conclusions about the nature of the overall historical process in which our lives are involved. And that is what this course is designed to help you to do. 2. Teaching Arrangements Seminars This course is taught in weekly seminars lasting 1 hour and 50 minutes, which start in Week One of the term. Presentations In each seminar, there will be one Presenter and one ‘Discussant’ who starts the discussion by responding to the presentation. Presenters should give a one-page summary of their presentation to their Discussants a day in advance of the seminar. Discussants should also read

4

at least one additional text of their own choice from that week’s topic, and should use it to broaden their response to the presentation. Presentations will be allocated in the first seminar and should not exceed 20 minutes in total. Written Course Work You are required to submit one essay of 2,000 words (to be handed in to your tutor by the end of Week 5 of the Autumn Term). The essay may be on any of the topics already covered in the course. Essay titles should be taken from the list at the end of this document. Alternatively, you may formulate your own title but (a) this must be in consultation with your seminar tutor, and (b) it must address an existing course topic. The essay does not form part of the formal assessment of the course. 3. Assessment This course is assessed by a 5,000 word Term Paper. Please refer to your Assessment Deadlines timetable in Sussex Direct for the submission date and location. Tutors will schedule extra office hours in the last week of the Autumn Term when they will be available to discuss Term Paper outlines. Titles should be taken from the list at the end of this document, or formulated under the same rules as outlined for course work essays above. Ideally, your 3 pieces of work should be taken from 3 different course topics. 4. Workload The formal workload of the course, (in addition to seminar attendance and background reading), is therefore: 1 essay, 1-2 presentations, 1 Term Paper Outline, 1 Term Paper. 5. Books and Readings Using the Reading List The reading list has been organised as follows. Each topic specifies a number of Required Readings. Collected together in your coursepack, these are the minimum which you must read every week in order to be able to participate fully in the seminar discussions. You can go deeper into the topic using the Additional Readings, and you should certainly do so, especially when you come to prepare your presentations and write your essays. Obtaining Readings The Library cannot be expected to keep as many copies of every text as there are students wanting to borrow them. However, with a bit of careful planning in the Seminar it is possible to overcome the inevitable problems which arise from this. First, if you are giving a presentation, don’t wait until the last minute to obtain the materials you need. Make any copies you require well in advance to avoid the rush. Second, if all presenters do this, they can lend their copies to other seminar members who may be having difficulties obtaining the materials in the Library. Finally, your seminar tutor may also be able to help by lending you their own copy, or directing you to alternative materials. 6. Your Evaluation of the Course Towards the end of the course you will be asked to evaluate the course by filling out an anonymous online ‘Student Evaluation Questionnaire’.

5

Seminars & Presentations

The weekly seminar gives you the opportunity to clarify and develop the results of your own reading and reflection through discussion and debate with others. You should use it, among other things: To clarify anything you have read or heard which you do not understand. (Don’t be afraid to raise questions which seem really basic or simple – they’re often the most important ones, which are helpful for everyone to discuss.) To try out ideas and interpretations that may have occurred to you during your reading. To co-operate with other seminar members in working out the key issues for each week’s topic. Friendly, lively seminar discussions are the most stimulating environment in which to get to grips with the content of the course. It’s natural to feel shy at first in a group of new people. The best way to overcome this is to be as active as possible right from the start. The more you put into seminar discussions, the more you (and everyone else) will get out of them. A good seminar presentation really helps to get the discussion going. What follows is a framework or checklist to help you think about what you might include in your presentation. It is not a compulsory format. Use whatever order of exposition suits the topic - so long as you include the basic ingredients: definitions, overview of your reading, detailed engagement with some argument, and so on. However you organise your presentation, remember: its role is to stimulate discussion by presenting ideas and raising questions. Try especially to avoid just reading out a text. 1. Definitions and Contextualizing ‘What are we discussing this week, and why?’ It always helps to begin by giving a clear statement (where possible) of the main intellectual issue which forms this week’s topic. Say something about its importance for international studies, and its continuing significance in the real world of contemporary international affairs. That way, we start by establishing exactly what we’re talking about, and gain some idea of what is at stake in it. For example: ‘Everybody agrees that ‘history’ is important for understanding contemporary world politics – but they seem to give different answers to the question of how to use it. In fact, they even disagree about what ‘history’ is and how to study it. Since combining theory and history is a big part of this course, we need to try and work out what we think about these questions and why they’re important. In the Required Readings I found several ideas which we could use as a starting point….’ OR: ‘This week we are discussing the relationship between democratization and peace. Whether there is a real link between these is very important because the question of war and what to do

about it is such a central issue for international studies. The idea of a ‘democratic peace’ has been talked about a lot since the end of the Cold War, but we can see from the

Required Readings that actually it goes back a lot further than that. Before we get to the historical evidence for this idea, let’s start by looking at the theoretical arguments for why there should be a link…’ You could also use this introductory part to mention either something you particularly liked or disliked about the readings for this week, or to identify anything you found difficult to understand, so as to flag it for later

discussion. 2. Theories, authors, and so on ‘How has this topic been addressed in the literature?’ Identify two or more leading approaches to the topic, along with the main authors associated with these. Sometimes these can be organized into a Realist/Liberal/Marxist framework - but use other classifications where appropriate. For example: ‘Explanations of Imperialism seem to fall into two main camps. On the one hand…’ 3. Thesis ‘What are the arguments for such and such a position?’ You need at some point to reconstruct the argument of a particular writer or group of writers so that we can ‘get inside’ a particular position or approach, get to grips with it and see how it enables us to make sense of historical events - or not. For example, ‘Now let’s have a closer look at what is meant by the term “US Hegemony”. In the account provided by Keohane, it had four main components…’ 4. Antithesis ‘What are the limitations of (or alternatives to) this argument or position?’ After setting out an intellectual argument in its own terms, we have to assess the criticisms that have been made of it. For example: ‘There are several aspects of the rise of fascism which Polanyi’s account cannot explain…’ Or: ‘Chomsky’s account of US hegemony is very different from Keohane’s…’ 5. Weighing of the Arguments, and General Conclusions ‘What do I/we make of all this?’ Here you might summarize very briefly what the presentation has covered. Alternatively, you might spell out your own assessment of the issues. You might introduce some new element which you think is important but which is not adequately addressed in the literature. Or you could return to any points you found difficult in the readings. Presentations may be up to 20 minutes long in total.

Remember to provide a summary handout on a

6

single sheet for other members of the seminar.

Topics and Readings

Week 1: History and Theory in International Studies As students of International Relations, we need history: to understand how the international system of today came into being; to distinguish the genuinely novel from longer-standing – or even ‘timeless’ – characteristics of relations between societies; and in order to get beyond the ‘short-termism’ of media representations of world politics. (For varying discussion of the importance of history for IR, see the selections (in alphabetical order) by Cox and Ruggie (in Keohane, ed.), Hobden & Hobson, and Rosenberg (1994)) However, when we turn to the discipline of History, we find not a single method but an evolving field of debate, full of controversies over both the means and the purposes of studying the past. In this first week we shall engage directly with some of the key issues involved in historical reflection – though you’ll find that these issues will return, along with many others, throughout the remainder of the course.

Our first reading (Evans) relates the emergence of the modern idea and practice of History – including the seminal contribution of Leopold von Ranke. (For more on this general theme from a variety of angles, see Callinicos, Iggers, Marwick, Tosh and Walsh.) How convincing do you find von Ranke’s prescriptions? Can you think of any fundamental objections – or indeed alternatives – to his approach? Next we read a chapter from E.H. Carr’s famous book, What is History? Arguably, a convincing concept of ‘causality’ is essential to any attempt at historical explanation – but causality is also associated with dangers of its own, such as rigid determinism and historical ‘teleology’. How well do you think Carr deals with these and other dangers which he identifies? Finally, after thinking about the importance of History for IR, we shall consider the other side of the issue: how important is IR for the study of history? This is the basic question raised by the German sociologist F. Tenbruck in the last required reading. It’s useful to compare his argument with the similar arguments variously made by Wolf, Rosenberg (2006), and above all Theda Skocpol (especially 1973 & 1979). (In turn, all these can be compared with the much more conventional ideas of ‘international history’ presented by writers such as Craig and Watt.) Incidentally, though somewhat dated, Barraclough’s argument about the nature and significance of ‘contemporary history’ is still worth reading. How would you update his account of contemporary history today?

Required Readings

Evans, R. In Defense of History, London 1997, 2nd edition, Chapter 1: ‘The History of History’. Carr, E.H What is History?, London 1961, chap.4 ‘Causation in History’. Tenbruck, F. ‘Internal History of Society or Universal History’, Theory, Culture & Society, Vol. 11,

(1994).

Additional Readings Abrams, P. Historical Sociology, London 1982. Barraclough, G

`The Nature of Contemporary History’, chap 1 of An Introduction to Contemporary History, pp.9-43, London, 1967.

Berlin, I. The Hedgehog and the Fox: an Essay on Tolstoy’s View of History, Weidenfeld, 1953. Blaut, J. Eight Eurocentric Historians, New York, London: Guilford, 2000. Braudel, F `Preface to the First Edition’ of The Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II, Vol.I,

London, 1972. Butterfield, H `The Dangers of History’ in History and Human Relations, London, 1951. Callinicos, A. Theories and Narratives: Reflections on the Study of History, Cambridge 1995. Collingwood, R. The Idea of History, London 1946. Craig, G. ‘Political and Diplomatic History’, in F. Gilbert and S. Graubard [eds], Historical Studies

Today, New York 1972. Gardiner, P., ed. Theories of History, Glencoe, 1959. Hall, J. Powers and Liberties: The Causes and Consequences of the Rise of the West,

Harmondsworth 1985, especially Chapter 1: ‘Patterns of History’. Hobden, S. & Hobson, J. (eds.)

Historical Sociology of International Relations, Cambridge 2002.

Hobsbawm, E. `What Can History Tells Us about Contemporary Society?’ in On History, London 1997. Iggers, G. Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the Postmodern

Challenge, London 1997. Keat, R./ Urry, J. Social Theory as Science, London 1982. Keohane, R. (ed.)

Neorealism and its Critics, New York 1986, especially chapters by Ruggie and Cox.

7

Knorr, K. & Rosenau, eds.

Contending Approaches to International Politics, Princeton 1969, chs. by Bull and Kaplan.

Krippendorf, E. International Relations as Social Science, Harvester 1982. Mann, M States, War and capitalism: studies in political sociology, C.U.P., 1988. Marwick, A. The Nature of History, Basingstoke 1970, chapters 2 & 3 Marx, K `The Materialist Conception of History’ in P.Gardiner, Theories of History, pp.126-131. May, E.R. Lessons of the Past: the use and misuse of history in American foreign policy, Oxf. 1973. Mazlish, B. ‘An Introduction to Global History’, in Conceptualizing Global History, edited by B.

Mazlish and R. Buultjens, Oxford 1993. Pomper, P., World History: Ideologies, Structures, Identities, Oxford: Blackwell, 1998 Popper, K. Popper, K.

The Poverty of Historicism, 2nd ed., London 1960. `Prediction and Prophecy in the Social Sciences’, extracts from The Poverty of Historicism, reprinted in P.Gardiner,(ed) Theories of History, London 1959, pp. 275-284.

Popper, K. Objective Knowledge, chpts 1-4, Oxford 1972. Rosenberg, J. The Empire of Civil Society, A Critique of the Realist Theory of International Relations,

London, Verso 1994, chapter 2: ‘Social Structures and Geopolitical Systems’. Rosenberg, J. ‘Why is There no International Historical Sociology?’, European Journal of International

Relations, Vol. 12.3, 2006, pp.307-40. Also available at www.justinrosenberg.org Ruggie, J.G ‘Territoriality and beyond: problematizing modernity in international relations’

International Organization , Vol. 47 no.1, 1993, pp. 139-174. Schroeder, P. The Transformation of European Politics 1763-1848, Oxford 1994, ‘Preface to the First

Edition’. Skocpol, T. ‘A Critical Review of Barrington Moore’s Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy’.

Politics and Society, No. 4: 1. (1973) 1-34 (especially from p.28 onwards). Skocpol, T. States and Social Revolutions, London 1979, especially pp.19-24: ‘International and

World-Historical Contexts’. Skocpol, T. Social Revolutions in the Modern World, C.U.P., 1994. Skocpol, T. ed. Vision and Method in Historical Sociology, C.U.P., 1984. Skocpol, T. & Trimberger, K.

‘Revolutions and the World-Historical Development of Capitalism’, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, Vol. XXII, 1977-78.

Todorov, T. The Morals of History, Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 1995 Tolstoy, L. War and Peace, Epilogue, Part II, Harmondsworth 1957. Tosh, J. The Pursuit of History, 3rd edition New York: Longman, 2000, chapter 7 ‘The Limits of

Historical Knowledge’. Walker, R. ‘History and Structure in the Theory of International Relations’, Millennium: Journal of

International Studies, 18:2, pp. 1989, pp. 163-83. Walsh, P. An Introduction to the Philosophy of History, London 1967. Watson, A. `European International Society and its Expansion’ in The Expansion of International

Society, H.Bull & A.Watson, eds., Oxford 1984. Watt, D.C. et al. ‘What is Diplomatic History’, in J. Gardiner [ed], What is History Today ?, Basingstoke

1988. Wolf, E. Europe and the People Without History, Berkeley 1992, Chapter 1: ‘Introduction’.

Part I: Origins

Week 2: 1492 and the ‘Discoveries’

The European ‘discoveries’ connected all the world’s major civilisations for the first time in history. They marked the first step in a process of European expansion which would later become global. And they created the inter-continental system of trade, conquest and communication within which ‘modern’ societies would later crystallise. Moreover, they accelerated a process of European cultural development which included (in the writings of Vitoria) arguably the first attempt to develop the existing tradition of ‘natural law’ into a secular legal framework for governing the relations among the different cultures which now became connected to each other. No wonder then, that Adam Smith described the ‘Discoveries’ as the ‘greatest and most important events recorded in the history of mankind’. Some writers, such as Robertson, have even traced the origins of contemporary ‘globalisation’ to these events.

Yet the idea that the Discoveries were the defining event of the modern world has also been vigorously contested. Some writers argue that such an idea hides what is radically novel about the capitalist world economy of today – a world economy which, they suggest, is not just greater in size but also fundamentally different in its socio-political character from the intercontinental system which sprang up during ‘the long 16th century’. This is the core of Robert Brenner’s critique of Wallerstein (and of Dependency and World Systems Theory generally). In response,

8

the advocates of 1492 have argued that the beginnings of capitalist development were not unique to Europe, but were visible in many other societies too. In this light, the Discoveries gave the Europeans a ‘head-start’ which they used to subordinate the rest of the world, and which they later (falsely) interpreted as evidence of ‘the uniqueness of the West’ in world history. Thus the debate over 1492 opens up the whole question of Eurocentrism in Western thought (which you can pursue further by looking at Amin, and at the rest of Blaut’s book).

The required readings pick up these themes as follows. Blaut argues that 1492 explains the subsequent rise of the West. (Frank makes a not dissimilar argument.). Rosenberg makes a case for regarding the Age of Discovery as ‘premodern’. (On this see also Wolf and Brenner.) And Jahn examines the cultural challenge posed to Europe itself by the ‘discovery of America’. (See also Elliott, Meek, Pagden and Todorov.) Good historical surveys of the ‘Age of Discovery’ include O’Sullivan, Johnson, (D.), Parry (1981), and

Scammel.

Required Readings Blaut, J. The Colonizer’s Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History,

London 1993, chapter 4: ‘After 1492’. Rosenberg, J. The Empire of Civil Society, London 1994, Chapter 4: ‘Trade and Expansion in Early Modern

Europe’. Jahn, B. The Cultural Construction of International Relations, Palgrave, 2000, chapter 3.

Additional Readings Amin, S. Eurocentrism, London 1989. Anderson, P. Lineages of the Absolutist State, London 1974, Chapter on ‘Spain’. Bartra, R. Wild Men in the Looking Glass: the Mythic Origins of European Otherness. Ann Arbor, MI:

University of Michigan Press, 1994. Bieber, J. (ed.) Plantation Societies in the Era of European Expansion, Aldershot: Variorum, 1997. Bitterli, U. Cultures in Conflict, Encounters Between European and Non-European Cultures, 1492-1800,

Cambridge 1989, especially chapters 1 (‘Types of Cultural Encounter: Contacts, Collisions and Relationships’) and 3 (‘Cultural Collision: The Spaniards on Hispaniola’).

Blackburn, R. The Making of New World Slavery: from the Baroque to the Modern, 1492-1800, London: Verso 1997.

Boucher, D. Political Theories of International Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998, chapter on De Vitoria.

Braudel, F. Civilization and Capitalism 15th-18th Century, 1984, Volume III: ‘The Perspective of the World’.

Brenner, R. ‘The Origins of Capitalist Development: A Critique of Neo-Smithian Marxism, New Left Review 104, July/August 1977.

Brown, C. The Modern Requirement? Reflections on Normative International Theory in a Post-Western World, in: Millennium, vol. 17, no. 2, 1988.

Bull, H. & Watson, A. (ed)

The Expansion of International Society, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984.

Cipolla, C.M. Guns, Sails, and Empires: Technological Innovation and the Early Phases of European Expansion 1400-1700, Pantheon, 1965.

Cocker, M. Rivers of Blood, Rivers of Gold, London 1998. Crosby, A. Ecological Imperialism. The Biological Expansion of Europe 900-1900, Cambridge 1986. Curtin, P. Cross-Cultural Trade in World History, Cambridge, 1984. Davis, R. The Rise of the Atlantic Economies, London 1975. De Sahagun, B. The War of Conquest: How it was Waged Here in Mexico: The Aztec's Own Story, Salt Lake

City: University of Utah Press, 1978. De Vitoria, F.

in Brown, C. et al (eds) International Relations in Political Thought: Texts from the Ancient Greeks to the First World War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002 2002, pp.-231-241.

Diaz, Bernal The Conquest of New Spain, London: Penguin, 1963. Doyle, M. Empires, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986. Elliott, J. The Old World and the New 1492-1650, Cambridge 1970. Emmer, P. & Gaastra, F. eds.

The Organization of Interoceanic Trade in European Expansion, 1450-1800, Aldershot 1996.

Ferguson, Y. & Mansbach, R

Polities. Authority, Identities and Change, Columbia, 1996.

Fox-Genovese, E. & E.

Slavery and Bourgeois Property in the Rise and Expansion of Capitalism, Oxford: OUP 1983, especially the prologue ‘The Janus Face of Merchant Capital’.

9

Frank, A. G. World Accumulation 1492-1789, London 1978, chapter 1: ‘The Sixteenth Century Expansion’.

Furber, H. Rival Empires of Trade in the Orient 1600-1800, Oxford, 1976. Grisel, E.

‘The Beginnings of International Law and the General Public Law Doctrine: Francisco de Vitoria's De Indis Prior’, in: Chiapelli, F. (ed), First Images of America: The Impact of the New World on the Old, 2 Volumes, Berkeley, 1976: 305-325.

Jahn, B. IR and the State of Nature: The Cultural Origins of a Ruling Ideology, in: Review of International Studies, vol. 25, July 1999, pp. 411-434.

Jensen, De Lamar (ed)

The Expansion of Europe: Motives, Methods and Meanings, Boston 1967.

Johnson, D. The Making of the Modern World, Volume One: Europe Discovers the World, London 1971, especially the chapters on ‘The Discoveries’ and ‘Europe and the Wider World to the Fifteenth Century’.

Johnson, J.T. Just War Tradition and the Restraint of War: A Moral and Historical Inquiry, Princeton 1981.Kiple, K. & Beck, S. (eds)

Biological Consequences of the European Expansion, 1450-1800, Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997.

Lang, J. Conquest and Commerce: Spain and England in the Americas, New York 1975. McAlister, L. Spain and Portugal in the New World 1492-1700, Minneapolis, 1984. McFarlane, A. The British in the Americas 1480-1815, London: Longman, 1994. McNeill, W. Plagues and Peoples, New York 1976, chapter V: ‘Transoceanic Exchanges, 1500-1700’. Meek, R. Social Science and the Ignoble Savage, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. O’Brien, P. ‘European Economic Development: The Contribution of the Periphery’, in: Economic History

Review, xxxv, 1, 1982, (reprinted in The Expansion of International Society, edited by H. Bull and A. Watson).

O’Sullivan, D. The Age of Discovery 1400-1450, London 1984. Pagden, A. Lords of All the World. Ideologies of Empire in Spain, Britain and France c.1500-c.1800,

New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995. Pagden, A. European Encounters with the New World, from Renaissance to Romanticism, London 1993,

especially the Introduction. Parry, J. The Age of Reconnaissance: Discovery Exploration and Settlement 1450-1650, Berkeley:

University of California Press, 1981. Parry, J. The Spanish Seaborne Empire, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. Parry, J. The Spanish Theory of Empire in the Sixteenth Century, New York 1974 Parry, J. Europe and a Wider World 1415-1715, London 1966. Parry, J. (ed.) The European Reconnaissance. Selected Documents, London, 1968. Pieterse, J. & Parekh, B. (eds)

The Decolonization of Imagination. Culture, Knowledge and Power, London 1995.

Race & Class The Curse of Columbus, special issue of the journal Race & Class, Vol. 33, No. 3, January – March 1992.

Robertson, R. Scammell, G.V.

Globalization, London: Sage, 1992. The First imperial Age. European Overseas Expansion c1400-1715, London: 1992, pp. 1-50

Schmitt, C. The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum, transl. and annotated by G. L. Ulmen, New York: Telos Press [1950] 2003, parts II and III.

Schwartz, S. ed Implicit Understandings. Observing, Reporting, and Reflecting on the Encounters Between Europeans and Other Peoples in the Early Modern Era, Cambridge 1994.

Seed, P. (ed.) Ceremonies of Possession in Europe’s Conquest of the New World, 1492-1640, Cambridge 1995, especially Chapter 3: ‘The Requirement, A Protocol for Conquest’.

Spicer, E. Cycles of Conquest. The Impact of Spain, Mexico, and the United States on the Indians of the Southwest, 1533-1960, Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1992.

Stannard, D. American Holocaust. The Conquest of the New World, New York 1992. Todorov, T. The Conquest of America. The Question of the Other, Norman 1999. Tracy, J. (ed.), The Rise of Merchant Empires: Long-Distance Trade in the EarlyModern World, 1350-1750,

Cambridge: CUP 1990. Tracy, J. (ed.), The Political Economy of Merchant Empires: State Power and World Trade, 1350-1750,

Cambridge: CUP 1991. Wallerstein, I. The Modern World System. Volume I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European

World Economy in the Sixteenth Century, New York, 1974. Wesseling, H. Imperialism and Colonialism: Essays on the History of European Expansion, Westport:

Greenwood Press, 1997. Williams, R. The American Indian in Western Legal Thought. The Discourses of Conquest, New York

1992. Wolf, E. Europe and the People Without History, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982.

10

Week 3 : 1648 and ‘Westphalia’

Many analyses of the modern international system still regard the existence of ‘sovereign’ states as its most distinctive characteristic – a characteristic which is often dated back to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. Even writers on ‘globalization’ argue that it is only now, after the end of the Cold War, that we are finally moving beyond the ‘Westphalian system’ in which sovereign states were the ultimate authorities and sources of power. But what actually is ‘sovereignty’? How important is it for understanding contemporary international relations? Why is it associated with Westphalia? In this topic we shall try to throw light on these questions by relating the present-day debates in IR to the historical context in which the modern concept of sovereignty was formulated.

The two chapters by Miller provide a compelling case for understanding the course of modern international history as the history of ‘the Westphalian System’. Meanwhile, the association of Westphalia with the origin of modern international relations has been fiercely criticised from very different positions by Stephen Krasner and Benno Teschke. Finally, we shall also look at an extract from a celebrated history of the Thirty Year’s War, to see what light a historical analysis of Europe in 1618 can throw on the debate over Westphalia. For analyses of the Thirty Years’ War itself, see Limm, Rab (ed.) and of course Wedgewood.

For an argument about how the idea of a ‘Westphalian system’ may have led to fatal confusions in the present-day debate on ‘globalization’, see Rosenberg 2000. Finally, by putting together the readings below by B. Anderson, Bozeman, Embree, Fairbank, Ganshof, Holzgrefe, Mattingly, Khadduri, Larus, Numelin, Smith, and Watson, you can review a range of premodern and non-European ‘international systems’, and assess the question of the distinctiveness of the ‘Westphalian system’ in historical and cross-cultural perspective.

Required Readings Miller, L. Krasner, S.

Global Order: Values and Power in International Politics, Boulder 1994, Chapters 2-3: ‘The Growth of the Westphalian System’, `Westphalia and all that', Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, J.Goldstein & R.Keohane [eds], Cornell 1993

Teschke, B. ‘Theorising the Westphalian Systsem of States: International Relations from Absolutism to Capitalism’, European Journal of International Relations, vol. 8, no. 1, 2002.

Wedgwood, C. ‘The Futile and Meaningless War’, in The Thirty Years’ War, Problems of Motive, Extent and Effect, Boston 1964.

Additional Readings

Anderson, B. Language and Power Cornell 1990, chap. 1: ‘The Idea of Power in Javanese Culture’. Anderson, P. Lineages of the Absolutist State, London 1974, Chapter 4: ‘The Absolutist State in the West’. Aston, T. [ed] Crisis in Europe 1560-1660, London 1965, especially ‘The Crisis of the Seventeenth

Century’, by E. Hobsbawm. Bartelson, A Genealogy of Sovereignty, Cambridge 1995. Baylis, J. & Smith, S. (eds.)

The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to World Politics, Oxford 1997, Chapter 2: ‘The Evolution of International Society’.

Biersteker, T. & Weber, C. [eds]

State Sovereignty as Social Construct, Cambridge 1996.

Black, J. War and the World: Military Power and the Fate of Continents: 1450-2000, Yale 1998, Chapter 4: ‘The Seventeenth Century’.

Boucher, D. Political Theories of International Relations, Oxford 1998. Bozeman, A. Politics and Culture in International History, Princeton 1960. Cipolla, C. The Fontana Economic History of Europe: The Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, Glasgow

1974. De Vries, J. The Economy of Europe in an Age of Crisis, 1600-1750, Cambridge: CUP 1976. Dobb, M. Studies in the Development of Capitalism, New York, revised edition 1963. Embree, A. ‘Frontiers into Boundaries: the evolution of the modern State-system’, in Imagining India:

Essays on Indian History, reprinted in Realm and Region in Traditional India, ed. Fox. Fairbank, J. [ed] The Chinese World Order: Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, Cambridge Mass. 1968. Ganshof, F. The Middle Ages, a History of International Relations, New York 1970. Gross, L. ‘The Peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948’, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 53, 1959. Hall, J. International Orders, Cambridge 1996, chapter 2: ‘The European System’. Hall, J. Powers and Liberties: The Causes and Consequences of the Rise of the West, Harmondsworth

1986, especially chapters 2-3. Held, D. et al

Global Transformations, Cambridge 1999, Chapter 1: ‘The Territorial State and Global Politics’.

Hilton, R. [ed] The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism, London 1976. Hinsley, F. Sovereignty, London 1966.

11

Hintze, O. ‘The Formation of States and Constitutional Development: A Study in History and Politics’, in Felix Gilbert, ed., The Historical Essays of Otto Hintze, New York: OUP 1975 [1902], pp. 159-77.

Hintze, O. ‘Military Organization and the Organization of the State’, in Felix Gilbert, ed.,The Historical Essays of Otto Hintze, New York: OUP 1975 [1906], pp. 180-215.

Holsti, K. Peace and War: Armed Conflicts and International Order, 1648-1989, Cambridge 1991. Holzgrefe, J.L. ‘The origins of modern international relations theory’, Review on International Studies, Vol.

15, 1989. James, A. `Sovereignty: Groundrule or Gibberish?, Review of International Studies, Vol. 10, 1984, pp.1-

18 James, A. Sovereign Statehood: The Basis of International Society, London 1986. Khadduri, M. The Islamic Law of Nations: Shaybani’s Siyar, Introduction. Knutsen, T. A History of International Relations Theory, Manchester 1992, chapters 3-4. Krasner, S. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy, Princeton University press, 1999. Larus, J. [ed] Comparative World Politics: Readings in Western and Premodern Non-Western International

Relations. Belmont 1964. Limm, P. The Thirty Years War, Harlow 1984. Mattingly, G. Renaissance Diplomacy, London 1955. Mayer, A. Why Did the Heavens not Darken? London 1990, ‘Prologue’. McNeill, W. The Pursuit of Power, Oxford 1983, chapter 4: ‘Advances in Europe’s Art of War, 1600-1750. Numelin, R. The Beginnings of Diplomacy: A Sociological Study of Inter-tribal and International

Relations, Oxford 1950. Osiander, A. The States System of Europe 1640-1990: Peacemaking and the Conditions of International

Stability, Oxford, Clarendon Press 1994, chapter 2 and 3. Osiander, A. ‘Sovereignty, International Relations and the Westphalian Myth’ International Organization,

No. 55, 2001. Parker, G & Smith, L. ed

The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century, Second Edition, London 1997.

Parker, G. The Military Revolution: Military Innovation and the Rise of the West, 1500-1800, 2nd edition, Cambridge 1996.

Parkinson, The Philosophy of International Relations, A Study in the History of Thought, London 1977, chapter 2: ‘Renaissance and Reformation: the Rise of the Prince’.

Philpot, D. Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press 2001

Polisensky, J. War and Society in Europe 1618-1648, Cambridge 1978. D258 Pol Rabb, T. The Struggle for Stability in Early Modern Europe, New York: OUP 1975. Rabb, T. [ed] The Thirty Years’ War, Problems of Motive, Extent and Effect, Boston 1964. Roelofsen, C. ‘Grotius and the International Politics of the Seventeenth Century’, in H. Bull et al [eds],

Hugo Grotius and International Relations, Oxford 1990 Rosenberg, J. ‘When Was the Westphalian System?’ in The Follies of Globalisation Theory, London: Verso

2000, pp.27-43. Ruggie, J. ‘Territoriality and Beyond: problematizing modernity in IR’, International Organization, Vol.

47 No.1, Winter 1993. [Reprinted as Chapter 7 of Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International Institutionalization, London 1998].

Smith, R. Warfare and Diplomacy in Pre-Colonial West Africa, 2nd edition, London 1989. Special Issue ‘Empires, Systems and States’ Review of International Studies Vol. 27, No.4, 2001 Spruyt, H. The Sovereign State and its Competitors: An Analysis of Systems Change, Princeton:

Princeton University Press 1994. Teschke, B., The Myth of 1648: Class, Geopolitics and the Making of Modern International Relations,

London: Verso 2003, chapters 1 & 7. Tilly, Ch. Coercion, Capital, and European States: AD 990-1992, Cambridge: CUP 1992. Tilly, Ch. ‘War-Making and State-Making as Organised Crime’, in P.Evans et al (eds.), Bringing the

State Back In, Cambridge 1985, pp. 169-91. Tilly, Ch. (ed.) The Formation of National States in Western Europe, Princeton, NJ, 1975 Tuck, R. New Rights of Peace and War: Political Thought and the International Order from Grotius to

Kant, Oxford 1999. Walker, R. Inside/Outside: international relations as political theory, Cambridge 1993. Wallerstein, I. The Modern World-System II, Mercantilism and the Consolidation of the European World-

Economy 1600-1750, London 1980. Watson, A. The Evolution of International Society, London 1992, chapter 17: ‘Westphalia’. Wedgewood, C. The Thirty Years War, London 1938 and subsequent editions. Wood, E. ‘The separation of the ‘economic’ and the ‘political’ in capitalism’, in Democracy Against

Capitalism, Cambridge 1995. Wood, Ellen, The Origins of Capitalism: A Longer View, London: Verso 2002.

12

Week 4: 1780s – the Industrial Revolution

‘The Industrial Revolution’, wrote Eric Hobsbawm, ‘marks the most fundamental transformation of human life in the history of the world recorded in written documents.’ (Industry and Empire). Its ‘take-off’ is conventionally dated to the England of the 1780s, but in global terms it remains an ongoing (if also very uneven) event – currently dominated by its delayed arrival in China. For international studies, its importance lies not just in the emergence of new technologies for war and communications, nor in the fact that it was from the start an international event (see Wolf), but also in the profound and often traumatic social changes which industrialisation brings – and whose (domestic and international) management forms in many ways a crucial subtext of the modern history of world politics.

In the required readings for this week we shall examine the phenomenon of industrialisation from three different but interrelated angles. First, Eric Hobsbawm provides a classic exposition of the first industrial revolution (in England), emphasising the social transformations involved. Next, Paul Kennedy summarizes how the industrial revolution and its knock-on effects transformed the global balance of power between industrialising Western societies and the non-European world. Meanwhile, Andrew Janos examines the socio-economic consequences of its geopolitical unevenness – both within and between European societies. And finally, we shall read the first chapter of Leon Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution. This last reading might appear to be of dubious relevance. But what Trotsky is describing is the way in which so-called ‘backward’ societies experienced the geopolitical pressure of industrialisation taking place elsewhere, and why this meant that the global spread of that process would not, and in fact could not, produce a world of liberal capitalist societies patterned on those countries which industrialised first.

For accounts of the different experiences of industrialisation in various European countries, see Trebilcock, Teich & Porter, and Milward & Saul. For analyses of some of the resultant socio-political struggles and outcomes see Skocpol, Barrington Moore and Mooers. Finally, Rosenberg (1996) considers the implications of Trotsky’s idea of uneven and combined development for understanding the course of 20th century international relations.

Required Readings

Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Revolution 1789-1848, London 1962, Chapter 2: ‘The Industrial Revolution’. Kennedy, P. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, London 1988. ‘Industrialization and the Shifting

Global Balances, 1815-1885, pp.143-177. Janos, A. ‘The Politics of Backwardness in Continental Europe, 1780-1945’, World Politics, Volume

41, Issue 3, 1989, 325-358. Trotsky, L. The History of the Russian Revolution, New York 1961 (1932), chapter 1: ‘Peculiarities of

Russian Development’.

Additional Readings Arblaster, A. The Rise and Decline of Western Liberalism, Oxford 1984, especially chapter 9. Davis, R. The Rise of the Atlantic Economies, London 1973, chapter 18. Gat, A. The Origins of Military Thought: from the Enlightenment to Clausewitz, Oxford 1989, chaps.

5-7. Gellner, E. Nations and Nationalism Oxford: Blackwell, 1983 Gershenkron, A. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective, Cambridge, Mass. 1962. Gildea, R. Barricades and Borders: Europe 1800-1914, 3rd edition, Oxford [1987] 2003, chapter 2. Greenfeld, L. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity, Cambridge, MA: Harvard U.P., 1992 Halliday, F. Revolution in World Politics: the rise and fall of the sixth great power, London 1999. Heilbron, J. et al, (eds.)

The Rise of the Social Sciences and the Formation of Modernity: Conceptual Change in Context, 1750-1850, Dordrecht: Kluwer 1998, especially chapters 1 and 2

Hobsbawm, E. Industry and Empire, Harmondworth 1969, Introduction & chapters 1-3. Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Revolution, London 1962. Hobsbawm, E. Nations and Nationalism Since 1780 : Programme, Myth, Reality, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press,1992 Kandal, T. ‘Marx and Engels on International Relations, Revolution, and Counterrevolution’, in

Michael T. Martin and Terry R. Kandal (eds.), Studies of Development and Change in the Modern World, New York/Oxford: OUP 1989, pp. 25-76.

Kenwood, A. & Lougheed, A.

The Growth of the International Economy 1820-1980, London 1983.

Knutsen, T. A History of International Relations Theory, Manchester 1992, Chapter 5: ‘Enlightenment Politics: the Eighteenth Century and the Rise of Popular Sovereignty’.

McNeill, W. The Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed Force and Society since A.D. 1000, Oxford 1983, cha‘The Military Impact of the French Political and British Industrial Revolutions’.

Milward, A. & Saul, S.

The Economic Development of Continental Europe 1780-1870, London 1973.

13

Mooers, C. The Making of Bourgeois Europe, London 1991 Moore, B. Social Origins of Dictatorship & Democracy, Harmondsworth 1967, chapter 2. Palmer, R. The Age of Democratic Revolution, London 1959. Palmer, R. The World of the French Revolution, New York 1970. Parkinson, F. ‘The Age of Enlightenment: The Idea of Progress’, in The Philosophy of International

Relations, London 1977. Pollard, S. ‘The Century of the Enlightenment’ in The Idea of Progress: History and Society, London

1968. Porter, R. & Teich, M. eds.

The Enlightenment in National Context, Cambridge 1981.

Rosenberg, J. ‘Isaac Deutscher and the Lost History of International Relations’, New Left Review, Jan/Feb 1996.

Skocpol, T. States and Social Revolutions: a Comparative Analysis of France, Russia and China, Cambridge 1979.

Skocpol, T. ‘France, Russia China: A Structural Analysis of Social Revolutions’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 18, Issue 2, April 1976. JSTOR

Teich, M. & Porter, R.

The Industrial Revolution in National Context, Cambridge 1996.

Thompson, D. Europe Since Napoleon, London 1957, Part I. Trebilcock, C. The Industrialization of the Continental Powers 1780-1914, Harlow 1981. Wolf, E. Europe and the People Without History, Berkeley 1982, chapter 9.

Part II: Expansion

Week 5: 19th Century European Imperialism In today’s international system, ‘imperialism’ is a term of condemnation – or at least it was until the ‘neo-conservative’ revival of the idea of ‘American empire’ seemed briefly to make it acceptable again. Nonetheless, we take it for granted that the doctrine that some peoples have the right to interfere in – or even to control – the affairs of other peoples has given way to a universal acceptance of the rights of national self-determination as enshrined in the UN Charter.

In the classical ‘Age of Imperialism’ no such universal right was recognised, (though John Stuart Mill managed to use the idea of self-determination to justify the British Empire…) Still, that fact does not by itself explain why it was that the last quarter of the nineteenth century witnessed a frenzy of overseas territorial expansion by the European powers. This week’s required readings try to provide the beginnings of such an explanation.

Eric Hobsbawm describes the broad sequence of events, and relates in – in classic Marxist style – to a particular phase in the history of capitalist world development. Meanwhile, D.K. Fieldhouse seeks to disprove, inter alia, that the colonies were disproportionately exploited by their foreign rulers. And finally, Gallagher and Robinson’s famous article of 1953 (which sparked a major debate among economic historians) challenges the restriction of the term ‘imperialism’ to formal colonial annexations, and seeks to explain the latter in the wider context of ‘informal empire’.

Required Readings

Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Empire 1875-1914, London 1987, Chapters 1-3. Fieldhouse, D. The Colonial Empires, 2nd edition, Basingstoke 1982, chapter 16: ‘Myths and Realities of the

Modern Colonial Empires’. Gallagher, T. & Robinson, R

‘The Imperialism of Free Trade’, in Great Britain and the Colonies 1815-1865, edited by A. L. Shaw, London 1970 (originally published in Economic History Review, August 1953).

Additional Readings

Amin, S. Eurocentrism, Zed 1988. Anderson, P. Lineages of the Absolutist State, London 1974, pp..397-401. Bairoch, P. Economics and World History: Myths and Paradoxes, Chicago 1993, especially Part III:

‘Major Myths on the Role of the Third World in Western Development’. Barrett Brown, M.

The Economics of Imperialism, Harmondsworth 1974.

Blaut, J. The colonizer’s model of the world: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History, London 1993.

Bodley, J. Victims of Progress, Mountain View 1982.

14

Bolt, C. ‘Race and the Victorians’, in Eldridge, C. (ed.) British Imperialism in the Nineteenth Century, London 1984.

Brantlinger, P. ‘”Dying Races”: Rationalizing Genocide in the the 19th Century’ in The Decolonization of Imagination, edited by J. Nederveen Pieterse and B. Parekh, London 1995.

Brewer, A. Marxist Theories of Imperialism: a Critical Survey, London 1980. Cain, P. & Hopkins, A.

British Imperialism: Innovation and Expansion 1688-1914, London 1993.

Chilcote, R.H. (ed)

Imperialism: Theoretical Directions, New York: Humanity Books, 2000

Chilcote, R.H. (ed)

The Political Economy of Imperialism: Critical Appraisals, Oxford: OUP, 2000.

Clarence-Smith, W.

‘The Modern Colonial State and Global Economic Integration, 1815-1945’, in States and Sovereignty in the Global Economy, edited by D. Smith et al., London 1999.

Cocker, M. Rivers of Blood, Rivers of Gold: Europe’s Conflict with Tribal Peoples, London 1999. Curtin, P. (ed.) Imperialism, New York 1971. Darby, P. Three Faces of Imperialism, London 1987. Davis, M. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World, London:

Verso 2001. Fieldhouse, D. The Colonial Empires, 2nd edition, Basingstoke 1982. Frederici S. ed.

Enduring Western Civilization: The Construction of the Concept of Western Civilization and its ‘Others’, 1995

Gollwitzer, H. Europe in the Age of Imperialism, London 1969. Halliday, F. ‘The Pertinence of Imperialism’ in Rupert, M. and Smith, H. Historical Materialism and

Globalization, London: Routledge, 2002. Hobsbawm, E. Industry and Empire, Harmondsworth 1969, chapter 7: ‘Britain in the World Economy’. Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Empire 1875-1914, London 1987, Chapters 12-13. Huttenback, R. Racism and Empire, Cornell 1976. Hyman, R. Britain’s Imperial Century 1815-1914, 2nd edition, Basingstoke 1993. Johnson, D. ed The World of Empires, London 1973. Joll, J. Europe Since 1870, An International History, London 1990, chapters 4 & 7. Kiernan, V. Imperialism and its Contradictions, London 1995. Kiernan, V. 'Marx and India', Socialist Register 1967. Kiernan, V. The Lords of Humankind: European Attitudes to Other Cultures in the Imperial Age, London

1969. Koch, H.W. ‘Social Darwinism as a Factor in the ‘New Imperialism’, in The Origins of the First World

War: Great Power Rivalry and German War Aims, Basingstoke 1972. Lenin, V. Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, [1917], various editions. Lowe, C.J. The Reluctuant Imperialists, British Foreign Policy 1878-1902, 2 volumes, London 1967. Lowe, J. The Great Powers, Imperialism and the German Problem 1865-1925, London 1994. Mason, P. Patterns of Dominance, Oxford 1970, chapter 6. Mill, J.S. ‘Considerations on Representative Government’, in On Liberty and Other Essays, Oxford

1991, pages 232-4, 257-65, 447-461. Mommsen, W. Theories of Imperialism, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson 1980 Mommsen, W. and Osterham-mel, J. (eds.),

Imperialism and after: Continuities and Discontinuities, London: The German Historical Institute 1986

O’Brien, P. ‘Europe in the World Economy’, in The Expansion of International Society, edited by H. Bull and A. Watson, Oxford 1984.

O’Brien, P. ‘The Costs and Benefits of British Imperialism, 1846-1914’, Past and Present, August 1988. Owen. R./ Sut-cliffe, R. (eds)

Studies in the Theory of Imperialism, Longman, London 1972.

Parekh, B. ‘Liberalism and colonialism: a critique of Locke and Mill’, in The Decolonization of Imagination, edited by J. Nederveen Pieterse & B. Parekh, London 1995.

Potts, L. The World Labour Market: a History of Migration, London 1990. Smith, A. The Pattern of Imperialism: The United States, Great Britain and the late-industrializing

world since 1815¸ Cambridge 1981, chapters 1-2. Stedman Jones, G.

‘A History of US Imperialism’, in Ideology in Social Science, edited by R. Blackburn, London 1971.

Thompson, D. Europe Since Napoleon, London 1957, Parts V & VI. Vandervort, B. Wars of Imperial Conquest in Africa, 1830-1914, Bloomington 1998. Wolf, E. Europe and the People Without History, Berekeley 1982, chapters 11-12.

15

Wolfe, P. ‘History and Imperialism: A Century of Theory, from Marx to Postcolonialism’, American Historical Review, 1997, 102:2, pp. 388-420.

Wright, H. ed. The ‘New Imperialism’ – Analysis of Late 19th Century Expansion, Boston 1966.

Week 6: The Eastern Question & the Ottoman Empire Geopolitically, the Middle East of today emerged from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. During the nineteenth century, Ottoman decline intersected historically with the expansion of European power into the region to produce ‘the Eastern Question’. Ottoman attempts at self-reform, strategic competition between the European powers, and periodic unrest among both Moslem and non-Moslem subjects of the Empire combined in a volatile mix which would eventually play into the causes of the First World War itself. Is there – as Brown argues – a long term continuity in the nature of the region’s politics and geopolitics (antedating both the Israeli-Palestinian question and the strategic significance of the region’s oil reserves)? If so, has this principally been shaped by indigenous or external factors? And what role, if any, should the socio-cultural inheritance of Islam play in explaining the modern history of the region? The required readings this week begin with a selection by Samuel Huntington in which he introduces the significance of civilizations for explaining world politics, and then argues controversially for understanding present-day relations between ‘the West’ and ‘Islam’ as the continuation of a longer-standing ‘clash of civilizations’. This is rejected by Karsh and Karsh, whose alternative approach is illustrated by their analysis of the nineteenth century saga of Mohammed Ali Pasha. (For an equally vigorous rejection of the ‘clash of civilizations’ idea in relation to Islam today, see Halliday’s writings.) A different perspective again is introduced by Lustick, who traces some of the problems of Middle Eastern state-formation to the historical timing of that region’s incorporation into the emerging international system in the nineteenth century. Meanwhile, Cleveland recounts how European pressure during the same period produced a variety of reformist and radical Islamic movements. A basic knowledge of the Eastern Question is vital for this topic. The best short introduction is Macfie, though all the general histories of the region (e.g. Cleveland, Goldschmidt, Hourani, Kirk, Yapp etc.) provide their own accounts. For more detailed treatment see the works by M.S. Anderson. If you want to examine the question of ‘Orientalism’, the key works below are those by Said, Ahmad, Lewis and Halliday. Finally, Bozeman, Larus and Watson include discussion of the ‘Islamic system’ of international relations.

Required Readings Huntington, S The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York 1996, Chapter2, & chapter

9, pp.209-218. Karsh, E. & Karsh I.

Empires of the sand: the struggle for mastery in the Middle East 1789-1923, Cambridge, Mass. 1999, ‘Introduction’ & Chapter 3.

Lustick, I ‘The Absence of Middle Eastern Great Powers: Political Backwardness in Historical Perspective’, International Organization, Vol. 51, Issue 4, Autumn 1997.

Cleveland, W A History of the Modern Middle East, Boulder 2004, chapter 7: ‘The Response of Islamic Society’.

Additional Readings Ahmad, A. In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literature, London 1992, see especially ‘Orientalism and

after: Ambivalence and Metropolitan Location in the Work of Edward Said’. Anderson, M.S. The Eastern Question, 1774-1923, Basingstoke 1966. Anderson, M.S. The Great Powers and the Near East, 1774-1923, London 1970. Anderson, P. Lineages of the Absolutist State, London 1974, especially ‘The House of Islam’. Armajani, Y. Middle East, Past and Present, Englewood Cliffs NJ, 1970, Part III: Imperialism and

Awakening. Bromley, S. Rethinking Middle East Politics, Cambridge 1994, especially Chapter 2. Bozeman, A. Politics and Culture in International History: from the Ancient Near East to the Opening

of the Modern Age, Second Edition, London 1994, Chapter 10: ‘The Muslim Realm’. Brown, L. International Politics and the Middle East, Old Rules, Dangerous Game, Princeton 1984. Choueiri, Y. Modern Arab Historiography, London 1999 & 2003, Chapter 4: ‘Muhammad ‘Ali and the

Sphinx: Shafiq Churbal’s Histories of Egypt’. Cleveland, A History of the Modern Middle East, Boulder 2003, especially Part Two: ‘The

16

Beginnings of the Era of Transformation’. Daniel, N. Islam, Europe and Empire, Edinburgh 1966. Davison, R. Reform in the Ottoman Empire, 1856-1876, Princeton 1963. Davison, R. ‘The Westernization of Ottoman Diplomacy in the Nineteenth Century’, in National and

International Politics in the Middle East, edited by E. Ingram, London 1986. Fahmy, K. ‘The Era of Muhammad ‘Ali Pasha, 1805-1848’, in The Cambridge History of Egypt,

volume 2, edited by M.W. Daly, Cambridge 1998. Goldschmidt, A. A Concise History of the Middle East, various editions, including Boulder 2002. Halliday, F. Islam and the Myth of Confrontation, London 1996 and 2003, especially:

Chapter 1: ‘The Middle East and International Politics’ Chapter4: ‘Islam and the West: ‘Threat of Islam’ or ‘Threat to Islam’? Chapter 7: ‘Conclusion: Orientalism and its Critics’

Henderson, G.B. ‘German Economic Penetration of the Near East, 1870-1914’, Economic History Review, xviii, 1948.

Holt, P.M. Egypt and the Fertile Crescent 1516-1922, London 1966. Hourani, A. The Emergence of the Modern Middle East, London 1981, chapter I: ‘The Ottoman

Background of the Modern Middle East’. Hourani, A. Europe and the Middle East, Berkeley 1986. Hourani, A. et al. ed.

The Modern Middle East: a Reader, London 1993.

Johnson, D. [ed] The World of Empires, London 1973 – chapter on the Middle East. Kent, M. The great Powers and the End of the Ottoman Empire, London 1984. Kirk, G. A Short History of the Middle East, London 1964, chapters IV ‘The Growth of Western

Imperialism’ (1770-1914) and V ‘The Growth of Nationalism’ (1800-1917). Landen, R. (ed.) The Emergence of the Modern Middle East, Selected Readings, New York 1970. Larus, J. (ed.) Comparative World Politics: Readings in Western and Non-Western International

Relations, edited by J. Larus, Belmont 1964 – chapter on Islam. Lewis, B. The Muslim Discovery of Europe, London 1982. Lewis, B. Islam and the West, Oxford 1993, especially chapter 8, ‘The Return of Islam’, and 6, ‘The

Question of Orientalism’. Lewis, B. The Shaping of the Modern Middle East, Oxford 1994. Lowe, C.J. The Reluctant Imperialists, British Foreign Policy 1878-1902, 2 volumes, London 1967. Lowe, J. The Great Powers, Imperialism and the German Problem 1865-1925, London 1994. Macfie, A. The Eastern Question 1774-1923, Revised edition, Harlow 1989. McNeill, W. A World History, Oxford 1979, chapter 27: ‘Asian Reactions to Industrialism and

Democracy 1850-1945’. Owen, R. The Middle East in the World Economy 1800-1914, London 1981 & 1993. Owen. R and Sutcliffe, R. eds.

Studies in the Theory of Imperialism, Longman, London 1972, chapter VIII: ‘Egypt and Europe: from French expedition to British occupation’.

Polk, W. & Chambers, R. eds.

Beginnings of Modernization in the Middle East, Chicago 1968, especially chapter 1, ‘Some Aspects of the Aims and Achievements of the Nineteenth Century Ottoman Reformers’, and chapter 12, ‘Stratford Canning and the Tanzimat’.

Richmond, J.L.B. Egypt 1798-1952, London 1977. Said, E. Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient, various editions. Vatikiotis, P. The Modern History of Egypt, London 1969, Part I: ‘The Social and Political Foundations

of Modern Egypt 1805-1882’. Watson, A. The Evolution of International Society: a Comparative Historical Analysis, London 1992,

Chapter 11: ‘The Islamic System’. Yapp, M. The Making of the Modern Near East 1792-1923, London 1987.

Week 7: China and Japan in the 19th Century During the mid-nineteenth century, China and Japan both came under intense military pressure to open their societies to Western trade. Both initially attempted to resist this pressure. Both were unsuccessful, and both were subjected to unequal treaties. Yet as the century wore on, the Chinese Empire staggered from one disaster to the next, and eventually collapsed, while Japan carried out a drastic internal transformation which enabled it to become (until very recently) the only case of a successful ‘Third World’ industrialisation. What explains this extraordinary contrast? Did the feudal structure of Japanese society give it an advantage over the centralised bureaucracy of the Chinese state? Was it the cultural legacy of Chinese regional dominance which made it unable to respond to the challenge of externally-induced change? Or was there also – as Moulder argues at length - and

17

despite the geographical proximity of the two countries, a fundamental difference in the way in which they were incorporated into the expanding ‘international society’ of the 19th century? This week’s minimum readings begin with the famous response by the Chinese Emperor to a British delegation which sought in the mid-1790s to open up diplomatic and trading relations with the Chinese Empire. Next, the reading by Harrison recounts the process by which, despite the Emperor’s dismissal of the British delegation, China was ‘opened up’/incorporated into the international system in the decades which followed. The text by Reischauer and Craig then illustrates the contrast with the reaction of Japan to equivalent external pressures. Next, however, Moulder argues that these pressures were actually quite different, and that it was this external difference – rather than any contrast in the nature of Chinese and Japanese societies – which holds the key to the diverging fate of these two countries in the 19th century. And finally, Immanuel Hsu describes why the idea of ‘diplomatic recognition’ was so alien to nineteenth century Chinese thought, and the difficulties involved in adjusting to what we perhaps regard as a self-evident norm of international relations. Explanations of the contrast between the Chinese and Japanese experiences in terms of their prior history and internal social structure can be sampled in Levy and Lockwood. Moulder’s book, mentioned above, provides the major counter-argument to ‘internalist’ accounts. Once again, Bozeman, Larus and Watson provide introductory discussions of ‘traditional Chinese foreign relations – though see also Fairbank’s ‘A Preliminary Framework’.

Required Readings Schurmann, F. & Schell, O. eds.

‘The Emperor’s Decree to the Outer Barbarians’, in Imperial China, The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Harmondsworth 1967.

Harrison, J. China since 1800, New York 1967, chapter 1: ‘The Great Vise (1796-1870)’. Reischauer, E. & Craig, A.

Japan: Tradition and Transformation, Boston 1978, chapter 4: ‘Japan’s Response to the West

Moulder, F. Japan, China, and the Modern World Economy. Toward a Reinterpretation of East Asian Development ca. 1600 to ca. 1918. Cambridge: CUP 1977. Chapters 4-5 + Conclusion.

Hsu, I. ‘Diplomatic Representation vs. T’i-chih’ and ‘The Imperial Chinese Tradition in the Modern World’, both in Readings in Modern Chinese History, edited by I. Hsu, London 1971.

Additional Readings

Borton, H. Japan’s Modern Century: From Perry to 1970, New York 1970. Boyle, J. Modern Japan: The American Nexus, Fort Worth 1993, Chapters 3-4: ‘The Meiji

Restoration’ and ‘Imperialism’. Bozeman, A. Politics and Culture in International History: from the Ancient Near East to the Opening of

the Modern Age, Second Edition, London 1994, Chapter 4: ‘The Place of the Chinese State in Asia’.

Chesneaux, J. et al China From the Opium Wars to the 1911 Revolution, Hassocks 1977. Cohen, P.A. ‘Chi’ing China: Confrontation with the West, 1850-1900’, in Modern East Asia: Essays in

Interpretation, edited by J.B. Crowley, New York, Davis, M. Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World, London:

Verso 2001, chapter 11: ‘China: Mandates Revoked’. Fairbank, J. The United States and China, Cambridge Mass., 1971, Chapter 6, ‘The Western Impact’. Fairbank, J. The Chinese World Order, Traditional China’s Foreign Relations, see especially ‘A

Preliminary Framework’ and ‘The Ch’ing Tribute System: an Interpretive Essay’. Fairbank, J. & Reischauer, E.

China: Tradition and Transformation, London 1973, Ch. 11: China’s Response to the West.

Franke, W. China and the West, Oxford 1967, Pt. VI China’s Response to the Challenge of the West, Chapters 1-2.

Gray, J. Rebellions and Revolutions: China from the 1800s to the 1980s, Oxford 1990, Chapters 2-4. Hall, J. Japan from Prehistory to Modern Times, London 1970, Chapters 12-15. Hourani, A. The Emergence of the Modern Middle East, London 1981, chapter I: ‘The Ottoman

Background of the Modern Middle East’. Hsu, I. (ed.) Readings in Modern Chinese History, London 1971. Jansen, M. ‘The Meiji State: 1868-1912’, in Modern East Asia: Essays in Interpretation, edited by J.

Crowley, New York 1970. Johnson, D. [ed] The World of Empires, London 1973 – chapter on China and Japan. Keene, D. The Japanese Discovery of Europe 1720-1830, Stanford 1969. Larus, J. (ed.) Comparative World Politics: Readings in Western and Non-Western International

Relations, edited by J. Larus, Belmont 1964 – chapter on China. Lauer, R., ‘Temporality and Social change: the case of 19th century China and Japan’, The Sociological

18

Quarterly, Vol.14, No.4, Autumn 1973. Levy, M. ‘Contrasting Factors in the Modernization of China and Japan’, in Economic Development

and Cultural Change, vol. 10, 1962. Lippit, V., ‘The Development of Underdevelopment in China’, Modern China, Vol.4, no.3, July 1978. Lockwood, W. ‘Japan’s Response to the West, the Contrast with China’, World Politics, Vol.9, No.1, 1956. Lowe, C.J. The Reluctant Imperialists, British Foreign Policy 1878-1902, 2 volumes, London 1967. Luard, E. (ed.) Basic Texts in International Relations, Basingstoke 1992, Chapter 1 (on ancient China). MacFarlane, A. ‘”Japan” in an English Mirror’, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 31, No.4, (October 1997) McNeill, W. A World History, Oxford 1979, chapter 27: ‘Asian Reactions to Industrialism and

Democracy 1850-1945’. Moore, B. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, Harmondsworth 1967, chapter IV: ‘The

Decay of Imperial China and the Origins of the Communist Variant’, and chapter V: ‘Asian Fascism: Japan’.

Moulder, F. Japan, China and the Modern World Economy, London 1977. Owen. R and Sutcliffe, R. [eds]

Studies in the Theory of Imperialism, Longman, London 1972.

Pye, L. Asian Power and Politics: The Cultural dimension of authority., Cambridge, Mass. 1985. Rozman, G, [ed.] The Modernization of China, New York 1981.

Storry, R. A History of Modern Japan, Harmondsworth 1961, Chapters 3-4: ‘Intrusion by the West’

and ‘Modernization’. Swisher, E., ‘Chinese intellectuals and the Western impact, 1838-1900’, Comparative studies in society

and history, vol.1, no.1, Oct. 1958. Teng, S. & Fairbank, J.

China’s Response to the West: a Documentary Survey 1839-1923, Cambridge, Mass. 1965.

Tsiang, T.F. ‘China and European Expansion’ in Readings in Modern Chinese History, edited by I. Hsu, London 1971.

Watson, A. The Evolution of International Society: a Comparative Historical Analysis, London 1992, Chapter 8: ‘China’.

Part III: Crisis

Week 8: The First World War For decades after the First World War, historians debated whether the arms race, or the balance of power, or secret diplomacy, or imperialism, or militarism, or nationalism or the strains of uneven industrialisation had formed the chief cause. In all these debates, however, it seemed that one thing was broadly agreed upon – namely that all the great powers were collectively responsible for the conflict. This consensus was shattered in 1961 when the German historian Fritz Fischer published his Griff nach der Weltmacht’ (later translated as Germany’s Aims in the First World War). Fischer’s claim that the German government had for several years been planning to launch a war, and used the ‘July crisis’ of 1914 to bring that war about, is now widely accepted. But does this changed consensus actually settle the question of the underlying causes of the war? In this week’s required readings, Immanuel Geiss, (a supporter of Fischer), sets out the case against the German government. M. Gordon compares the different experiences of industrialisation in Germany and Britain as a key to their differing foreign policies. And Eric Hobsbawm locates the causes of the conflict in the accumulating consequences of capitalist industrialisation, both within Europe and via its destabilizing impact on the world outside. For alternative narratives of the events leading to the war, see the accounts by Martel, Joll, Thomson and McDonaugh – the last of whom also provides a review of the historians’ debates. Useful anthologies of key writings include Herwig and Koch. See also the review articles by Ferguson, and Strachan – both available on JSTORE.

Required Readings Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Empire, London 1987, chapters 12-13, & Epilogue. Geiss, I. ‘The Outbreak of the First World War and German War Aims’, Journal of Contemporary

History, Vol. 1. No. 3, July 1966. Gordon, M. ‘Domestic Conflict and the Origins of the First World War: The British and German Cases’,

The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 46, No. 2, June 1974.

Additional Readings Berghan, Volker (1973) Germany and the Approach of War in 1914. New York: St Martin’s Press.

19

Berghan, Volker (1994) Imperial Germany, 1871-1914. Economy, Society, Culture, and Politics. Providence and Oxford: Berghan Books.

Blackbourn, D. & Eley, G.

The Peculiarities of German History, Bourgeois Society and Politics in Nineteenth-Century Germany, Oxford 1984.

Calleo, David (1978) The German Problem Reconsidered. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cassels, A. Ideology and International Relations in the Modern World, London 1996, chapter 6: ‘Ideology and the Great War’.

Copeland, Dale (2000) The Origins of Major War. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Crowe, E. German Foreign Policy Before the War. The 1907 Memorandum of Sir Eyre Crowe. Issued by Friends of Europe, London.

Evans, R. J. ‘From Hitler to Bismarck: Third Reich and Kaiserreich in recent historiography, Part II’, Historical Journal, vol. 26 (1984).

Evans, Richard et al. (eds.)

The Coming of the First World War, Oxford: Clarendon 1988.

Ferguson, N. ‘Germany and the origins of the First World War: new perspectives’, Historical Journal, vol. 35 (1992).

Fischer, F. Germany’s Aims in the First World War, London 1966. Geiss, I, German Foreign Policy 1871-1914, London 1976. Henig, R. The Origins of the First World War, 2nd ed., London 1993.

Herwig, H. (ed) The Outbreak of World War I, Causes and Responsibilities, Lexington, various editions. Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991, London 1994, especially ch. 1Howard, M. War in European History, Oxford 1976, chapters 6-7. Joll, J. Europe Since 1870, An International History, London 1990. Joll, James and Martel, Gordon

(2007) The Origins of the First World War. Third Edition. London: Longman.

Kahler, Miles (1979/80) ‘Rumours of War: the 1914 Analogy’. Foreign Affairs xxx: 374-396.

Kaiser, David (1983) ‘Germany and the Origins of the First World War’. The Journal of Modern History 55(3): 442-474.

Kennedy, P. The Realities Behind Diplomacy, Background Influences on British External Policy 1865-1980, London 1981, chapters 1-2.

Koch, H.W. (ed.) The Origins of the First World War: Great Power Rivalry and German War Aims, London 1972 & 1984.

Langdon, J. July 1914: the long debate, 1918-90, Oxford 1991.

Lieber, Keir (2007) ‘The New History of World War I and What it Means for International Relations Theory’, International Security, Vol. 32, No. 2, 155-191.

Lorenz, Chris (1995) ‘Beyond Good and Evil? The German Empire of 1871 and Modern German Historiography’. Journal of Contemporary History 30(4): 729-765.

Lowe, John (1994) The Great Powers, Imperialism and the German Problem, 1865-1925. London: Routledge.

Mann, M. The Sources of Social Power, Volume II, Cambridge 1993. Martel, G. The Origins of the First World War, Harlow 1987. Mayer, A. ‘Internal Crisis and War Since 1870’, in C. Bertrand (ed.), Revolutionary Situations in Europe

1917-1922, Montreal 1977. Mayer, A. ‘Domestic Origins of the First World War’, in L. Krieger and F. Stern (eds.), The

Responsibilities of Power, New York 1967. Mayer, A. The Persistence of the Old Regime: Europe to the Great War, London 1981.

McDonough, F. The Origins of the First and Second World Wars, Cambridge 1997, Chapters 1-2. McNeill, W. The Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed Force and Society since A.D. 1000, Oxford 1983,

Chapter 8: ‘Intensified Military-Industrial Interaction, 1884-1914’. Mombauer, A. The Origins of the First World War, Controversies and Consensus, London 2002.

Mommsen, Wolfgang

(1973) ‘Domestic Factors in German Foreign Policy before 1914’. Central European History, pp. 3-43.

Röhl, J. 1914: Delusion or Design?, London 1973. Schöllgen, Gregor (1990) Escape into War? The Foreign Policy of Imperial Germany. Oxford: Berg.

Schroeder, Paul (1972) ‘World War I as Galloping Gertie: a Reply to Joachim Remak’. The Journal of Modern History 44(3): 319-345.

Seligman, M. & McLean, R.

Germany from Reich to Republic, 1871-1918. Politics, Hierarchy and Elites. New York: St Martin’s Press 2000.

Snyder, Jack (1991) Myths of Empire. Domestic Politics and International Ambition. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

20

Steiner, Zara Britain and the Origins of the First World War. New York: St Martin’s Press 1977.

Stern, Fritz (1967) ‘Bethmann Hollweg and the War: The Limits of Responsibility’, in The Responsibilities of Power. Historical Essays in Honor of Hajo Holborn, edited by Leonard Krieger and Fritz Stern, 252-285. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.

Stone, N. Europe Transformed 1878-1919, London 1983. Strachen, H. ‘The First World War: causes and course’, Historical Journal, vol. 29, (1986).

Taylor, A.J.P. The Struggle for Mastery in Europe 1848-1918, Oxford 1954. Taylor, A.J.P. The Course of German History. A Survey of the Development of Germany Since 1815.

London: Hamish Hamilton 1945. Thomson, D. ‘The System of Alliances’, in Thomson, Europe since Napoleon, London 1966, Chapter 21. Van Evera, S. ‘Why co-operation failed in 1914’, World Politics, vol. 38 (1985).

Veblen, Thorstein 2003 (1915). Imperial Germany and the Industrial Revolution. Kitchener, Ontario: Batoche Books.

Wehler, Hans-Ulrich

The German Empire 1871-1918. Oxford: Berg 1985.

Williamson, Samuel

(1991) Austria-Hungary and the Origins of the First World War. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wilson, K. (ed.) Decisions for War, 1914, London 1995.

Week 9: The Second World War

No consideration of the causes of the Second World War can avoid engaging with the famous – or infamous – ‘Taylor thesis’: that Nazi foreign policy did not differ fundamentally from that which any German government of the time would have pursued; that Hitler did not plan a world war; and that the war which in fact occurred was produced not by ‘appeasement’, but rather by the blundering way in which that policy was eventually abandoned.

Nearly half a century after it began, the Taylor controversy still rumbles on today. But does it also obscure other more fundamental questions which ‘diplomatic history’ does not seek to answer? What, for example, was fascism as a historical phenomenon? Why did it spread so dramatically across parts of Europe in the interwar period? And what was the relationship between the conflict in Europe and the near-simultaneous conflagration in the Far East? This week’s required readings introduce some of these themes. Thomson’s chilling account of the diplomatic prelude to the war reflects in many ways the ‘orthodox’ interpretation of these events. A flavour of Taylor’s critique is provided by a series of extracts from his work, The Origins of the Second World War. Meanwhile, the piece by Martel briefly describes the impact of Taylor’s ‘revisionist’ thesis and provides some assessment of its fate over the subsequent decades. Finally, Allardyce summarises a range of attempts to explain the emergence of fascism in the early to mid-twentieth century, while Eley deploys some of these while also arguing for the importance of the geopolitical context. To gain a rounded view of this topic, you will need to explore each of these themes further. Brief overviews of the events leading to war can be found in the two volumes by Overy, as well as in McDonough, Henig (1994) and elsewhere. For the Taylor debate, there’s no substitute for reading more of Taylor in the original. The volume from which the extract in your coursepack is taken also contains an angry review by Trevor-Roper. (See Robertson (ed.) for other discussions of Taylor, plus Taylor’s extremely provocative reply to Trevor-Roper. This volume also contains three articles relating to revisionist interpretations of Japan’s ‘road to war’.) Taylor’s revisionist approach to appeasement is also supported by Kennedy – see (in addition to the texts listed under his name below) his chapter in Martel (ed) 1986. For recent work on appeasement, see also the volume edited by Mommsen & Kettenacker. You can find (a translation of) the Hossbach Memorandum at www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/hossback.htm On the analysis of fascism, the anthologies edited by Laquer, Allardyce and Turner remain very useful. Supplement these with the relevant parts of Kershaw’s Nazi Dictatorship, which probably provides the best English-language coverage anywhere on the many aspects of the debate on Nazism.

Required Readings Thomson, D. ‘The Demolition of Peace, 1935-9’, in Thomson, Europe since Napoleon, London 1966, pp. 731-

59. Taylor, A.J.P. ‘A Challenge to Nuremberg and Postwar History’, in The Outbreak of the Second World War.

Design or Blunder?, edited by J. Snell, DC Heath & Co., Lexington, Mass., 1962. Martell, G. ‘The Revisionist as Moralist’, in The Origins of the Second World War Reconsidered: A.J.P.

Taylor and the Historians, London 1999 Allardyce, G. ed. The Place of Fascism in European History, Engelwood Cliffs 1971. Eley, G. ‘What Produces Fascism: Preindustrial Traditions or a Crisis of a Capitalist State’, Politics &

Society 12, no.2, (1983): 53-82.

21

Additional Readings

Adams, R. British Politics and Foreign Policy in the Age of Appeasement, 1935-39, Basingstoke 1993 Bell, P. The Origins of the Second World War in Europe, 2nd ed., London 1997 Brailey, N. J. ‘Southeast Asia and Japan’s road to war’, Historical Journal, vol. 30 (1987). Browning, C.R. The path to genocide: essays on launching the final solution, Cambridge 1992 Bruce, M. From Peace to War: Europe 1918-1939, London 1967, Chapters 1-2. Calvacoressi, P. and Wint, G.

Total War: Causes and Courses of the Second World War, Harmondsworth 1974.

Caputi, R. Neville Chamberlain and Appeasement, Selinsgrove 2000 Dray, W. ‘Concepts of Causation in AJP Taylor’s Account of the Origins of the Second World War,

History and theory, Vol 17, issue 1, 1978, 149-172. Eubank, K. (ed.)

World War II: Roots and Causes, Lexington 1992.

Evans, R. J. ‘From Hitler to Bismarck: Third Reich and Kaiserreich in recent historiography’, Historical Journal, vol. 26 (1984).

Gailbraith, J. The Great Crash, London 1955. Henig, R. The Origins of the Second World War 1933-1939, London 1994 Hett, B. ‘Goak here: AJP Taylor and the Origins of the Second World War’, Canadian Jounal of History,

Vol. 32, issue 2, 1996, pp. 257-280. Hobsbawm, E. The Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991, London 1994, chapters 3 and 4. Holsti, K.J. Peace and War: armed conflicts and international order 1648-1989, Cambridge 1991. Horowitz, D. Empire and Revolution, New York 1969, chapter 9: ‘World War and Cold War’. NB. This book

was also published under the title Imperialism and Revolution. Howard, M. War in European History, Oxford 1976, chapters 6-7. Iriye, A. The Origins of the Second World War in Asia and the Pacific, Harlow 1987. James, H. The End of Globalization: Lessons from the Great Depression Cambridge, MA: Harvard 2001 Joll, J. Europe Since 1870, An International History, London 1990. Kaiser, D. Politics & War: European Conflict from Philip II to Hitler, Cambridge, Mass. 1990, pp. 354-92. Kennedy, P. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: economic change and military conflict, London 1988. Kennedy, P. The Realities Behind Diplomacy, Background Influences on British External Policy 1865-1980,

London 1981, Part III: ‘The Politics of Appeasement’. Kennedy, P. ‘The Tradition of Appeasement in British Foreign Policy, 1865-1939’, in Kennedy, Strategy and

Diplomacy, 1870-1945, London 1983, pp. 15-39. Kershaw, I. The Nazi Dictatorship: problems and perspectives of interpretation, London, 4th edition, 2000. Keylor, W. The Twentieth Century, An International History, Oxford 1992, Part I. Keylor, W. (ed.) The Legacy of the Great War, Peacemaking, 1919, Boston 1998. Keynes, J.M. The Economic Consequences of the Peace, London 1919. NB. Keynes summarized his argument

in a short article which is reprinted in Keylor (ed.) and also in Lederer (ed.) Kimmich, Ch Germany and the League of Nations, Chicago 1976 Kindleberger, C.

The World In Depression, Harmondsworth, 1987.

Laqueur, W. (ed.)

Fascism: a reader’s guide, London 1979.

Lederer, I. (ed.) The Versailles Settlement, Was it Foredoomed to Failure?, Lexington 1960. Mandel, M. The Meaning of the Second World War, London 1986. Martel, G. (ed.) The Origins of the Second World War Reconsidered: the A.J.P. Taylor Debate After 25 Years,

London 1986. Martel, G. (ed.) The Origins of the Second World War Reconsidered: A.J.P. Taylor and the Historians, London

1999 Mayer, A. Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?, London 1990. McDonough, F. The Origins of the First and Second World Wars, Cambridge 1997, Chapters 3-5. Mommsen, W. and Kettenacker , L. (eds.)

The Fascist Challenge and the Policy of Appeasement, London 1983

Neumann, F. Behemoth: The Theory and Practice of German Fascism, NY 1967 Newton, S. Profits of Peace: The Political Economy of Anglo-German Appeasement, Oxford 1996 Nish, I. Japan's Struggle with Internationalism: Japan, China and the League of Nations, 1931-3,

London 1993 Northedge, F The League of Nations: Its Life and Times, 1920-1946, Leicester 1986 Overy, R. The Origins of the Second World War, London 1987. Overy, R. The Inter-war Crisis 1919-1939, London 1994

22

Parker, C. Chamberlain and Appeasement: British Policy and the Coming of the Second World War, Basingstoke 1993

Polanyi, K. The Great Transformation, Boston 1957, especially chapters 17-20. Robbins, K. Appeasement, 2nd. ed., London 1997 Roberts, G. The Soviet Union and the origins of the Second World War: Russo-German Relations and the

Road to War, 1933-41, London 1995, pp. 1-8. Robertson, E. (ed.)

The Origins of the Second World War, London 1971 & 1987.

Rock, W. Appeasement on Trial : British Foreign Policy and its Critics, 1938-1939, New York 1966 Schmidt, G. The Politics and Economics of Appeasement: British Foreign Policy in the 1930's, Leamington Sp

1985 Shepherd, R. A Class Divided: Appeasement and the Road to Munich, 1938, London 1988 Snell, J. (ed.) The Outbreak of the Second World War, Design or Blunder?, Lexington 1962. Taylor, A.J.P. The Origins of the Second World War, London 1962. Taylor, A.J.P. The Course of German History, London 1945 and subsequent editions. Thomas, M. Britain, France and Appeasement : Anglo-French Relations in the Popular Front Era, Oxford

1996 Thorne, C. The Far Eastern War: States and Societies 1941-45, London 1986.

Trachtenberg, M.

‘Versailles after sixty years’, Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 16 (1982).

Turner, H. (ed.) Reappraisals of Fascism, New York 1975.

Week 10: The Cold War As Hunter (1998) has pointed out, one might have expected that the passing of the Cold War at the end of the 1980s would have stimulated a fresh debate about that conflict’s historical meaning. Yet this does not seem to have occurred. The opening of the Soviet archives has largely been used by specialists to reinforce their existing positions. What are these positions? Beyond what was classically known as the ‘orthodox’ approach, (e.g. Schlessinger 1967), three main approaches can be distinguished.

First there was the realist analysis (e.g. Gaddis, Thompson) (sometimes misleadingly named as ‘post-revisionist’) which saw the Cold War as a great power rivalry, triggered by the power-vacuum left by the collapse of Germany in 1945. Then there were the ‘revisionist’ interpretations (Williams, LaFeber, Kolko etc.) which found the conflict’s driving force in the economic expansionism of the United States (relegating the Soviet role to a mainly reactive, defensive one). A third approach (variously reflected in Horowitz, Gershenkron and von Laue) viewed the USSR as an extreme instance of a much broader phenomenon in which ‘late industrialising’ societies were drawn by international conditions to mobilise centralised state power in ‘catch-up’ strategies of forced industrialisation. In these different accounts, anarchy, capitalism and the pressures of uneven development were respectively the ‘ultimate’ cause. And in the continuing contestation of these interpretations, the fundamental question remains: what was the Cold War about? For accounts of the materials released from the Soviet archives in the 1990s, see volume 21 of Diplomatic History, (Spring 1997) – and the article by D. Macdonald who argues that these revelations challenge both the realist and the revisionist understandings of the conflict. See also the accumulating virtual archive of the Cold War International History Project: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=1409&fuseaction=topics.home The archive includes a section on Cold War Origins. NB. Because the Cold War is such an enormous topic, this week’s readings are largely focussed on the question of its origins – chosen because that leads most directly to the larger question of the historical meaning of the conflict. That said, the reading list below also includes materials on the spread of the conflict to the ‘Third World’ should you wish to explore that dimension.

Required Readings Gaddis, J.L. We Know Now: Rethinking Cold War History, Oxford, 1997, pp. 1-25, 281-295 Kolko, J. & G.

The Limits of Power: The World and the United States Foreign Policy, New York, 1972, chapter 1, pp. 11-28

Thompson, K.W. Cold War Theories, Vol.1: World Polarization, 1943-1953, Louisiana State University Press, London, 1981, pp.1-9, 23-56

Saull, R. ‘Locating the Global South in the Theorisation of the Cold War: capitalist development, social revolution and geopolitical conflict.’ Third World Quarterly, Vol.26, No.2, (2005), 253-280.

Additional Readings

23

Allison, G. The Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis, 2nd ed. New York: Longman,1999

Alperowitz, G. Atomic Diplomacy, 2nd ed., London 1994. Ambrose, S. Rise to Globalism, New York 1993. Aronson, R. The Dialectics of Disaster, London 1983, Chapter 4. Betts, R.F. Decolonization, London 1998 Brzezinski, Z. The Soviet Bloc: Unity and Conflict, Cambridge, Mass. 1967. Calvocoressi, P. World Politics since 1945, London 1991 Carr, EH The Russian Revolution from Lenin to Stalin1917-1929, London 1979. Cohen, W. ‘America’s Longest War’, in The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations,

Volume IV: America in the Age of Soviet Power, Cambridge 1993. Cox, R. Production, Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History, New York

1987, Chapter 7: ‘Pax Americana’. Cronin, J. The World the Cold War Made, London 1996. Cummings, B. & Halliday, J.

Korea: The Forgotten War, London 1988

DePorte, A. Europe Between the Superpowers, New Haven 1986. Deutscher, I. The Unfinished Revolution, Oxford 1967 Dibbs, P. The Soviet Union: The Incomplete Superpower, 2nd edition, Basingstoke 1988. Dockrill, M. The Cold War 1945-63, Basingstoke 1988. Fitzpatrick, S. The Russian Revolution, 1917-1932, Oxford 1982. Foot, R. The Wrong War: American Policy and the Dimensions of the Korean Conflict, Ithaca 1985 Gaddis, J. The US and the Origins of the Cold War New York 1972.

The Long Peace: Enquiries into the History of the Cold War New York 1987. Gaddis, J. The United States and the Origins of the Cold War, 1941-1947, New York 1972 Gaddis, J. Strategies of Containment: a Critical Appraisal of Postwar American National Security

Policy, New York 1982. Gaddis, J. ‘The emerging post-revisionist synthesis on the origins of the Cold War’, Diplomatic

History, 7, Summer 1983. NB. This is held in the Res/Fac section of the Library. Garthoff, R.L. Détente and Confrontation, Washington 1985. Gati, C. (ed.) Caging the Bear: Containment and the Cold War, Indianapolis, 1974 Gerschenkron, A. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective, New York 1965. Gill, S. American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission, Cambridge 1990. Graebner, N. The Cold War, a Conflict of Ideology and Power, 2nd edition, Boston1976. Halliday, F. The Making of the Second Cold War, London 1983. Halliday, F. Revolution in World Politics, Basingstoke 1999. Herring, G. America’s Longest War: The United States and Vietnam 1950-1975, 2nd edition, New York

1986. Herring, G. (ed) The Pentagon Papers, abridged edition, New York 1993. Hogan, M. The Marshall Plan, Cambridge 1987. Hopkins, M. ‘Continuing Debate and New Approaches in Cold War History’, The Historical Journal,

50.4, (2007), pp.913-934. Horowitz, D. Imperialism and Revolution, New York 1969. Hunt, M. Ideology and US Foreign Policy, New Haven 1987. Hunter, A. ed. Re-thinking the Cold War, Philadelphia 1998. Huntington, S. 'The Bases of Accommodation' Foreign Affairs, July 1968. Kaldor, M. The Imaginary War: Understanding the East-West Conflict, Oxford 1990. Keylor, W, The Twentieth Century World: An International History, Oxford 1992, chapters 8-11 Kolko, G. The Politics of War: the World and United States Foreign policy, 1943-1945, New York

1968. Kolko, G. Vietnam: Anatomy of War, London 1986 Kolko, G. Confronting the Third World: United States Foreign Policy 1945-1980, New York 1988. LaFeber, W. America, Russia and the Cold War 1945-1992, 7th ed., New York 1993 LaFeber, W. The American Age: US Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad, 1750 to the Present, New

York 1994. Leffler, M. ‘The Cold War: What Do “We Now Know”?’, The American Historical Review, Vol. 104,

No.2, (April 1999). JSTORE Leffler, M.& D. Painter (eds.)

The Origins of the Cold War, London 1995

Light, M. The Soviet Theory of International Relations, Brighton 1988 Lomax, B. Hungary 1956, London 1976 Maddox, R. The New Left and the Origins of the Cold War, New York 1974. Macdonald, D. ‘Communist Bloc Expansion in the Early Cold War: Challenging Realism, Refuting

Revisionism’, International Security, Vol. 20, No.3, Winter 1995/6.

24

Melanson, R. Writing History and Making Policy: The Cold War, Vietnam, and Revisionism, London 1983

Morgenthau, H. ‘We are deluding ourselves in Vietnam’, in The Viet-Nam Reader, edited by M. Raskin, New York 1965.

Nagai, Y. & A. Iriye

The Origins of the Cold War in Asia, Tokyo 1977.

Paterson, T. and Merrill, D. (ed)

Major Problems in American Foreign Relations, Volume 2: Since 1914, Fourth Edition, Lexington 1995, Chapter 11: ‘The Vietnam War’.

Paterson, T. ed. Major Problems in American Foreign Policy, Volume I: to 1914, third edition, Lexington 1989, Chapter 1: ‘Explaining American Foreign Policy’.

Paterson, TG Cold War Critics: Alternatives to American Foreign Policy in the Truman Years, Chicago 1971

Patterson, T. & McMahon (eds)

The Origins of the Cold War, Third Edition, Boston 1991.

Pollard, R.J. Economic Security and the Origins of the Cold War, New York 1985. Rostow, W. ‘Guerrilla Warfare in Underdeveloped Areas’, in The Viet-Nam Reader, edited by M.

Raskin, New York 1965. Schafer, M. Deadly Paradigms. The failure of US Counterinsurgency, 1988. Schlesinger, J. "The Origins of the Cold War" Foreign Affairs, October 1967. Shawcross, W. Sideshow: Kissinger, Nixon and the Destruction of Cambodia, London 1979. Sherwin, M. A World Destroyed: The Atomic Bomb and the Grand Alliance, New York 1975. Sklar, H. [ed] Trilateralism, South End Press 1980, especially, ‘Building a New World Order’, by Shoup

& Mintner. Skocpol, T. 'What Makes Peasants Revolutionary?' Comparative Politics, 14, (1982) pp.351-375. Slater, D. and Taylor, P. (eds)

The American Century: Consensus and Coercion in the Projection of American Power, Oxford 1999.

Smith, J. The Cold War 1945-1991, 2nd ed., Oxford 1998. Stevenson, R.W. The Rise and Fall of Détente, London 1985. Thompson, E. P. ‘Notes on Exterminism, the Last Stage of Civilization’, and ‘Europe, the Weak Link in the

Cold War’, both in Exterminism and Cold War, edited by New Left Review, London 1982. Thompson, K. Cold War Theories: Introductory Readings, Baton Rouge 1981. Ulam, A. Expansion and Coexistence, New York 1974 Vadney, T. The World Since 1945, Harmondsworth 1987, chapters 2 & 8. Von Laue, T. Why Lenin? Why Stalin? New York 1971, Conclusion. Westad, O. (ed) Reviewing the Cold War: Approaches, Interpretations, Theory, Abingdon: 2000. Williams, P. Superpower Détente – a Reappraisal, London 1988. Williams, W. The Tragedy of American Diplomacy, New York 1959 & 1972. Wohlstetter, A. `The Delicate Balance of Terror’ Foreign Affairs, vol.37. Wolf, E. Peasant Wars of the Twentieth Century , New York 1969. Yergin, D. The Shattered Peace, New York 1978 Zeman, Z. The Making and Breaking of Communist Europe, revised ed., Oxford 1991

25

Seminar Presentations

Topic Presenter Discussant Week 01: History and International Relations

Week 02: 1492 and the ‘Discoveries’

Week 03: 1648 and ‘Westphalia’

Week 04: 1780s and the Industrial Revolution

Week 05: 19th Century European Imperialism

Week 06: The Eastern Question and the Ottoman Empire

Week 07: China and Japan in the 19th Century

Week 08: The First World War

Week 09: The Second World War

Week 10: The Cold War

Warning: Plagiarism Essays must be entirely your own work, though of course they will be based upon what you have read, heard and discussed. It is very important that you avoid plagiarism, the presentation of another person’s thoughts or words as though they were your own.

What is plagiarism? The Sussex University definition is as follows: “…plagiarism is the use, without acknowledgment, of the intellectual work of other people and the act of representing the ideas or discoveries of another as one’s own in written work submitted for assessment. To copy sentences, phrases or even striking expressions without acknowledgment of the source (either by inadequate citation or failure to indicate verbatim quotations) is plagiarism; to paraphrase without acknowledgment is likewise plagiarism.” (BA and LLB Examinations: Handbook for Examiners and Examination Board,p.45).

When you submit your written work, you will be asked to sign a statement that the work submitted is your own. Course Tutors and examiners check submitted work for plagiarism. Suspicious cases are submitted to an Academic Misconduct Panel which may impose severe penalties.

Sometimes students commit plagiarism unintentionally. This can happen either because they have not mastered the normal practice of academic citation, or because they are not clear about where legitimate use of other people’s ideas ends and plagiarism begins. If you are unclear about the definition of plagiarism, consult your Course Tutor. In addition, a very useful guide to this issue – including a quiz to help you identify the difference between legitimate and illegitimate use of others’ ideas – can be found on the web pages of the University of Indiana. Go to: http://education.indiana.edu/~frick/plagiarism/index2.html Plagiarism is a serious examination offence. To avoid plagiarism, intentional or unintentional, be careful to record who said or wrote what in your notes, and always provide accurate references in your essays.

26

Essay/Term Paper Questions NB: Essay and Term Paper titles should be selected from those listed below

– unless specifically authorised by your Tutor. --PLEASE READ THE WARNING ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE ABOUT PLAGIARISM NOW--

1. What is meant by ‘contemporary history’ [Barraclough], and how is it relevant to the study of International Relations today?

2. Explain the idea that ‘all history is international history’ – do you agree with this idea? 3. If all history is based on ‘the facts’, why do historians disagree? 4. How far can the study of History be regarded as a ‘science’? 5. What is the problem of ‘Eurocentrism’ – and how, if at all, can it be overcome in thinking about modern

world history? 6. On what grounds does Brenner criticise ‘neo-Smithian Marxist’ accounts of ‘the long sixteenth

century’, and how is this significant for understanding international relations today? 7. Assess the significance of the ‘Discovery of America’ for modern international history. 8. What is at stake in the debate over the Westphalian origins of the modern international system? 9. What is meant by ‘the Westphalian system’ – and has it ever existed? 10. In what ways does the ‘sovereign states system’ differ from geopolitical orders in other historical

periods – and other civilisations and cultures? 11. How far – and with what consequences – must the industrial revolution be regarded as an international

event? 12. ‘Theda Skocpol solved the riddle of modern revolutions by reconstructing the international dimension

of the industrial revolution.’ Do you agree? 13. Assess the significance for international history of the idea of ‘uneven and combined development’. 14. What were the different factors which caused the ‘new imperialism’ of the late Nineteenth Century –

and which do you regard as the most significant in explaining this phenomenon? 15. Is the study of 19th century imperialism relevant for understanding international relations today? 16. Assess the utility of EITHER ‘the clash of civilisations’ OR ‘Orientalism’ for explaining the course of

relations between Europe and the Middle East during the 19th century. 17. What was ‘the Eastern Question’ – and what explains the way in which it was eventually ‘answered’? 18. How would you explain the contrasting fates of China and Japan during the 19th century? 19. Can the idea of a ‘clash of civilisations’ help explain the 19th century interaction of Europe and China? 20. ‘No single country was responsible for the outbreak of WWI: its causes lie rather in the international

relations of Europe as a whole.’ Do you agree? 21. Can international and domestic factors be convincingly combined in order to explain the causes of the

First World War? 22. How far can a study of ‘decisions for war’ explain the outbreak of the First World War? 23. Can the British interwar policy of ‘appeasement’ really be defended? 24. ‘What Produces Fascism…?’ [Eley] Compare any two or more answers to this question. 25. Did the ‘twenty years’ crisis’ prove Realism right? 26. ‘The foreign policy of National Socialism merely restated the German problem.’ [Taylor] Discuss. 27. Critically assess ‘the Taylor thesis’. 28. How far does the idea of a ‘general crisis’ (Mayer) help to explain the world wars of the 20th

Century? 29. Compare and contrast the ‘orthodox’ and ‘revisionists’ accounts of the causes of the Pacific War.

Which do you find most convincing? 30. How far can the Cold War be explained by analysing the events of the 1940s? 31. ‘We Know Now’ (Gaddis). Has the end of the Cold War resolved the debate about its causes

and nature? 32. Was the Cold War inevitable? 33. What is meant by ‘The Tragedy of American Diplomacy’ – and how convincing do you find

the argument associated with this term? ---oo0oo---