PSIR 552 | Course Introduction and Application Information - Political Science and International Relations (With Thesis)

Course Name

Conventional Security in International Relations

Code	Semester	Theory (hour/week)	Application/Lab (hour/week)	Local Credits	ECTS
PSIR 552	Fall/Spring	3	0	3	7.5

Prerequisites	None
Course Language	English
Course Type	Elective
Course Level	Second Cycle
Mode of Delivery	-
Teaching Methods and Techniques of the Course	-
National Occupation Classification	-
Course Coordinator	-
Course Lecturer(s)	Doç. Dr. SITKI EGELİ
Assistant(s)	Araş. Gör. Nil DİKMENGİL

Course Objectives

This course aims at over-viewing and analyzing through enquiring lenses the more important issues and theoretical approaches pertaining to international security’s conventional dimension, which is also known by the names military security, strategic studies and national security studies.

Learning Outcomes

The students who succeeded in this course;

Identify various theoretical and conceptual approaches pertaining to conventional security,
Discuss principal issues and challenges of conventional security in international relations;
Analyze conventional security’s issues and challenges using critical lenses;
Compare and contrast the security perspectives and policies of leading international actors;
Identify the impact and reflections of technological progress on international security;
Make projections on new security challenges and risks likely to be encountered by the international community in coming years.

Course Description

The introduction to the course would be made through a brief overview of the conceptual foundations of international relations and the notion of security. Since the students are presumed to have already acquainted themselves with the theoretical assumptions and theoretical aspects during previous phases of their education, the focus of the course would rapidly shift toward some of the contemporary issues of international and conventional security.

Course Category	Core Courses
	Major Area Courses	X
	Supportive Courses
	Media and Management Skills Courses
	Transferable Skill Courses

Week	Subjects	Related Preparation	Learning Outcome
1	Introduction: Course objectives, content, methodology	Presentation and overview of the course.
2	Theoretical Precepts-I: Security, Realism, Deterrence	Stephen M. Walt, “The World Wants You to Think Like a Realist”, Foreign Policy, 30 May 2018; Andrew F. Krepinevich Jr., “The Eroding Balance of Terror,” Foreign Affairs, 11 December 2018; Doug Bandow, “America’s Language of Mass Destruction Convinces Nobody,” Foreign Policy, 22 October 202; John J. Mearsheimer, “The Inevitable Rivalry,” Foreign Affairs, November/December 2021; Stephen W. Walt, “An International Relations Theory Guide to the War in Ukraine,” Foreign Policy, 8 March 2022; Paul Poast, “A World of Power and Fear,“ Foreign Affairs,15 June 2022; Stephen M. Walt, “Why Do People Hate Realism So Much” Foreign Policy, 13 June 2022.
3	Theoretical Precepts-II: Liberalism, Constructivism, Levels of Analysis	Stephen M. Walt, “How to Get B.A. in International Relations in 5 Minutes”, Foreign Policy, 19 May 2014; Graham Allison, “The Myth of the Liberal Order”, Foreign Affairs, 14 June 2018; Daniel Duedney and G. John Ikenberry, “Liberal World,” Foreign Affairs, 14 June 2018; G. John Ikenberry, “The Next Liberal Order,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2020; Walter Russel Mead, “The End of the Wilsonian Era,” Foreign Affairs, January/February 2021; Robbie Gramer and Anusha Rathi, “A Crisis of Faith Shakes the United Nations in Its Big Week,” Foreign Policy, 19 September 2022.
4	Weapons of Mass Destruction-1 and Proliferation	Melissa Gillis, Disarmament – A Basic Guide (3rd ed.), United Nations: 2012; Gregory D. Koblentz, “The myth of biological weapons as the poor man’s atomic bomb”, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 10 October 2015; Amy E. Smithson, “London attack: Saddle Moscow with chemical weapons inspections,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 22 March 2018; Rebecca Brown, “Bioterrorism: Fear accidents more than attacks,” The Bulletin, 29 August 2018; Jeffrey Lewis, “Point and Nuke,” Foreign Policy, 12 September 2018; Nikolai Sokov, “Russian military doctrine calls a limited nuclear strike de-escalation. Here’s why.” The Bulletin, 8 March 2022; Scott D. Sagan, “The World’s Most Dangerous Man,” Foreign Affairs, 16 March 2022; Andrew F. Krepinewich, Jr., “The New Nuclear Age,” Foreign Affairs, May/June 2022; Jeffrey Lewis and Aaron Stein, “Who Is Deterring Whom? The Place of Nuclear Weapons in Modern War,” War on the Rocks, 16 June 2022; “Could the war in Ukraine go nuclear?” The Economist, 29 September 2022.
5	Weapons of Mass Destruction-2: Nuclear Balance of Terror, Arms Control, Non-proliferation	Doug Bandow, “Let Them Make Nukes,” Foreign Affairs, 26 July 2016; Eugene Rumer, “A Farewell to Arms … Control,” Carnegie US-Russia Insight, 17 April 2018; Nina Tannenwald, “The Vanishing Nuclear Taboo?” Foreign Affairs, 15 October 2018; Jeffrey Lewis, “Nuclear Deals and Double Standards,” Foreign Affairs, 2 October 2018; Emanuelle Maitre and Lauriane Héau, The HCOC: A Small Yet Key Tool Against Missile Proliferation, HCOC Issue Brief, October 2020; George Perkovich, “Reinventing Nuclear Arms Control,” Carnegie, October 2020; Ernest J. Moniz and Sam Nunn, “Sleepwalking Towards the Nuclear Precipice,” Foreign Affairs, 15 December 2020; Ray Takeyh, “The Bomb Will Backfire on Iran,” Foreign Affairs, 18 October 2021; Julian Borger, “15 minutes to save the world,” The Guardian, 14 December 2021; Daniel Immerwahr, “Forgetting the apocalypse,” The Guardian, 12 May 2022; William Aberque, “The new NATO Strategic Concept and the end of arms control,” IISS Analysis, 30 June 2022; The Economist, “Vladimir Putin pulls Russia out of its last arms control treaty,” 21 February 2023; Ward Hayes Wilson, “Yes, nuclear weapons are immoral. They’re also, practically speaking, useless.” The Bulletin, 19 September 2023.
6	Arms Trade, Export Controls	Lawrence Marzouk (et.al.), “Making a Killing”, BalkanInsight.com, 27 July 2016; Adam Rawnsley et.al., “The Messaging App Fueling Syria’s Insurgency,” Foreign Policy, 6 November 2017; The Economist, “For Gulf states, diplomacy involves buying weapons they don’t need,” 1 March 2018; Michael LaForgia and Walt Bogdanich, “Why Bombs Made in America Have Been Killing Civilians in Yemen,” The New York Times, 16 May 2020; Jordan Smith et.al., “Arms transfers to conflict zones: The case of Nagorno-Karabakh,” Sipri Backgrounders, 30 April 2021; Alper Coşkun, “Strengthening Turkish Policy on Drone Exports,” Carnegie Article, 18 January 2022; Stephen Biddle, “Arming Ukraine Is Worth the Risk,” Foreign Affairs, 11 March 2022; Ruchi Kumar, “Afghan Guns Are Rearming Regional Insurgents,” Foreign Policy, 8 July 2022; ; Cullen Hendrix, “Russia Boom Business Goes Bust.” Foreign Policy, 3 May 2023.
7	Technology and Transformation of Warfare	Mike Pietrucha and Mike Benitez, “Seductive Allure of Precision Weapons,“ War on the Rocks, 30 November 2016; Amos Fox, “Precision Fires Hindered by Urban Jungle”, AUSA, 16 April 2018; Tanisha M. Fazal and Sarah Kreps, “The United States’ Perpetual War in Afghanistan”, Foreign Affairs, 20 August 2018; The Economist, “The war in Ukraine shows how technology is changing the battlefield,” 3 July 2023; Stephen Biddle, “Back in the Trenches,” Foreign Affairs, 10 August 2023; Edward Luttwak, “Why Ukraine’s offensive has stalled,” Unherd, 10 August 2023.
8	Midterm Exam
9	Cyber Security	Martin Belam “We’re living through the first world cyberwar,” The Guardian, 30 December 2016; Alper Başaran, “Turkey Under Cyber Fire”, Turkish Policy Quarterly, Spring 2017; Page Stoutland, “Growing threat: Cyber and nuclear weapon systems,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 18 October 2017; Tarah Wheeler, “In Cyberwar, There Are No Rules,” Foreign Policy, 12 September 2018; Sydney J. Freedberg and Theresa Hitchens, “Calling SolarWinds Hack Act of War Just Makes It Worse,” Breaking Defense, 21 December 2020; Bruce Schneider, “Why NSA Makes Us Vulnerable to Cyberattacks”, Foreign Affairs, 30 May 2017; John Mueller, “The Cyber-Delusion,” Foreign Affairs, 22 March 2022; Thomas Rid, “Why You Haven’t Heard About the Secret Cyberwar in Ukraine,” The New York Times, 18 March 2022; The Economist, “Why Russia’s cyber-attacks have fallen flat,” 1 December 2022; Elizabeth Dwoskin, “”Sy vs. spy: How Israelis tried to stop Russia’s information war in Africa,” The Washington Post, 21 October 2023.
10	Russian Factor	Akın Ünver, “Russia Has Won the Information War in Turkey,” Foreign Policy, 21 April 2019; John J. Mearsheimer, “Why the West is principally responsible for the Ukrainian crisis,” The Economist, 11 March 2022; Dominic Lieven, “Empires eventually end amid blood and dishonour,” The Economist, 16 April 2022; Paul Sonne, “How Vladimir Putin gıt Ukraine wrong,” The Washington Post, 11 April 2022; Natalia Antonova, “Putin’s War Was Never About NATO,” Foreign Policy, 7 May 2022; Bobby Ghosh, “An unarmed Putin wants to Fight a Culture War With the West,” Bloomberg, 14 September 2022; Andrei Kolesnikov, “Putin’s Stalin Phase,” Foreign Affairs, 8 November 2022; Dara Massicot, “What Russ Got Wrong?” Foreign Affairs, March/April 2023; Fareed Zakaria, “Russia’s biggest problem isnt’t the war,” The Washington Post, 30 June 2023; “Tatiana Stanovaya, “Putin’s Age of Chaos,” Foreign Affairs, 8 August 2023.
11	United States and Global Reign	Zachary Karabell, “The Anti-American Century,” Foreign Policy, 13 July 2020; John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart, “America the Humble,” Foreign Affairs, 30 September 2021; James Hershberg, “Putin Is Repeating the USSR’s Mistakes,” Foreign Affairs, 24 February 2022; Liana Fix and Michael Kimmage, “What If Russia Loses?” Foreign Affairs, 4 March 2022; Daniel W. Drezner, “Bracing for Trump 2.0,” Foreign Affairs, 5 September 2023; Chung-in Moon, “America: The Biggest Danger to the Security of the World,” Hankyoreh, 5 September 2023.
12	Security of the West: NATO and Europe	Max Bergmann and Benjamin Haddad, “Europe Needs to Step Up on Defense,” Foreign Affairs, November 2021; Ivo Daalder, “NATO enlargement didn’t go far enough,” The Economist, 9 April 2022; Micheal Bimbaum and Emily Rauhaia, “The 300,000 high-readiness NATO troops? ‘Concept,’ not reality,” The Washington Post, 29 June 2022; Ivo Daalder, “Daalder says NATO enlargement didn’t go far enough,” The Economist, 9 April 2022; Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Michael Kofman, “Russia’s Dangerous Decline,” Foreign Affairs, November/December 2022; The Economist, “Russia’s war on Ukraine is changing Europe,” 7 June 2023.
13	Security in Asia-I	Elizabeth C. Economy, “History With Chinese Characteristics,” Foreign Affairs, 13 June 2017; Kevin Rudd, “How Xi Jinping Views the World,” Foreign Affairs, 10 May 2018; Yan Xuentong, “Becoming Strong,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2021; Hal Brands, “China Is a Declining Power,” Foreign Policy, 24 September 2021; John J. Mearsheimer, “The Inevitable Rivalry,” Foreign Affairs, November/December 2021; Elizabeth Economy, “Xi Jinping’s New World Order,” Foreign Affairs, January/February 2022; Jonathan Tepperman, “China’s Dangerous Decline,” Foreign Affairs, 19 December 2022; Stephen M. Walt, “Can China Pull Off Its Charm Offensive?” Foreign Policy, 23 January 2023.
14	Security in Asia - II	The Economist, “”North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons,” 28 May 2016; Scott D. Sagan, “The Korean Missile Crisis,” Foreign Affairs, 10 September 2017; Joshua Shifrinson, “Learning to Love Kim’s Bomb,” Foreign Affairs, 3 October 2018; Claudia Westwood, “Ambivalent Partners: The complex Russia-China relationship,” ELN Commentary, 28 April 2021; Alexander Gabuev, “China’s New Vassal,” Foreign Affairs, 9 August 2022; Jennifer Lind, “Japan Steps Up,” Foreign Affairs, 23 December 2022; Sushant Singh, “India and China’s Latest Border Clash Is Not a One-Off,” Foreign Policy, 23 December 2022; Andrew D. Taffer and David Wallsh, “China’s Indo-Pacific Folly,” Foreign Affairs, 31 January 2023; Michael J. Green, “Never Say Never to an Asian NATO,” Foreign Policy, 6 September 2023.
15	Review of the semester
16	Final Exam

Course Notes/Textbooks	This course does not have specific course book.
Suggested Readings/Materials	Instead of a specific course book, there will be weekly reading assignments comprising book chapters, articles, manuscripts, reports and news stories drawn from a large variety of books, journals, periodicals, magazines and newspapers. Assigned readings for each week would be available on the course’s Blackboard page few days before lectures.

Semester Activities	Number	Weigthing
Participation	1	30
Laboratory / Application
Field Work
Quizzes / Studio Critiques
Portfolio
Homework / Assignments
Presentation / Jury
Project
Seminar / Workshop
Oral Exams
Midterm	1	30
Final Exam	1	40
Total

Weighting of Semester Activities on the Final Grade	2	60
Weighting of End-of-Semester Activities on the Final Grade	1	40
Total

Semester Activities	Number	Duration (Hours)	Workload
Theoretical Course Hours (Including exam week: 16 x total hours)	16	3	48
Laboratory / Application Hours (Including exam week: '.16.' x total hours)	16		0
Study Hours Out of Class	16	7	112
Field Work			0
Quizzes / Studio Critiques			0
Portfolio			0
Homework / Assignments			0
Presentation / Jury			0
Project			0
Seminar / Workshop			0
Oral Exam			0
Midterms	1	27	27
Final Exam	1	27	27
		Total	214

#	PC Sub	Program Competencies/Outcomes	* Contribution Level
#	PC Sub	Program Competencies/Outcomes	1	2	3	4	5
1	To be able to improve theoretical and conceptual proficiencies on Political Science and International Relations and use them competently.		-	X	-	-	-
2	To be able to evaluate critically the relationships between various factors in the field of Political Science and International Relations such as structures, actors, institutions and culture.		-	-	X	-	-
3	To be able to determine and question the theoretical and empirical gaps in Political Science and International Relations literature.		X	-	-	-	-
4	To be able to identify the political and cultural conditions that generate discrimination mechanisms based on race, ethnicity, gender and religion at national and international levels.		-	-	-	-	-
5	To be able to gather and analyze data by using scientific research methods.		-	X	-	-	-
6	To be able to analyze and evaluate the historical continuity and changes observed in the relations between the actors and institutions of national and international politics.		-	-	X	-	-
7	To be able to present individual research and contemporary developments in Political Science and International Relations in written, oral, and visual forms.		-	-	-	X	-
8	To be able to take responsibility in generating solutions to the problems that arise in relation to the politics in daily life.		-	-	-	-	-
9	To be able to determine the institutional and political instruments for conflict resolution in domestic and international politics.		X	-	-	-	-
10	To be able to prepare a thesis/term project about Political Science and International Relations based on scientific criteria.		-	X	-	-	-
11	To be able to follow new research and developments in Political Science and International Relations and participate the debates in academic meetings through a foreign language.		-	-	-	-	-
12	To be able to have ethical, social and scientific values in the stages throughout the processes of gathering, interpreting, disseminating and implementing data relevant to Political Science and International Relations.		X	-	-	-	-

PSIR 552 | Course Introduction and Application Information

WEEKLY SUBJECTS AND RELATED PREPARATION STUDIES

EVALUATION SYSTEM

ECTS / WORKLOAD TABLE

COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES AND PROGRAM QUALIFICATIONS RELATIONSHIP

NEW GÜZELBAHÇE CAMPUS

GLOBAL CAREER

CONTRIBUTION TO SCIENCE

VALUING PEOPLE

BENEFIT TO SOCIETY