From DHP D210:
"Richard Hasss, “Sanctioning Madness?” Foreign Affairs 76 (November/December 1997): "
This should be
"Richard Haass, “Sanctioning Madness?” Foreign Affairs 76 (November/December 1997): 74-85." right?

Dan,

Just so you know IR Theory link is not working. Also may I suggest a piece from Kissinger for the Statecraft course? Perhaps a chapter (or intro/afterword) of Does America Need a Foreign Policy?

The syllabus for DHP D210 begins with the words: "It is easy to develop theories, explanations, or strategies for conducting foreign policy. It is quite another thing to implement them." The syllabus goes on to list far more books, papers and articles from people who have done the first than from people who have done the second.

That's an observation, not a criticism. Dan has taught classes in international relations before, and I have not. I assume as a matter of course that he knows more about how to teach this subject than I do. Outside the academic community, though, I'd insist that a policymaker who had mastered the reading list for this course but had never read Dean Acheson's memoirs, or from George Kennan's papers or anything by Henry Kissinger was unprepared for his job. I would not assume the reverse.

Dan,
In DHP H204, you say that class participation is worth 35%, and later in the syllabus you have CP listed as 30%. Why did this jump out at me? Because I made the exact same $%#&ing mistake on two of my syllabi for the fall, and felt stupid when 18-year olds demonstrated better math skills than I did!

Thanks for posting these--its always helpful to have reading lists outside my field

Dr. Drezner,

Both of these syllabi look excellent. I hope, though, that the students at Fletcher will get the benefit of the courses you taught at Chicago. American Foreign Economic Policy and Globalization and Its Discontents were quite good and the latter was instrumental in forming my (now strongly held) opinions on the topic. Keep up the good work.

Phil
Chicago '04

Always interesting to see a reading list of classic texts. (In Mackinder I don't think the "k" is capitalized.) A few random observations:

In strategic studies Mackinder is usually paired with Mahan. I'm curious to know why you separate them. Modelski is one of the leading scholars writing about long waves but the classic paper is by Kondratieff. There was a NATO seminar in Portugal on these a year ago from which you might find a more recent assessment by Modelski.

Readings on cultural differences and international relations need to go into the cultural side more deeply. I think it would challenge your students to read and debate F.S.C. Northrop's Taming of the Nations (1952, repr. 1987). Or have students read something by a non-Western scholar.

In place of the Communist Manifesto, I wonder if it would be useful to assign a pair of articles for and against dependency theory, which got a great deal of attention a generation or so ago.

The postwar period did see a resurgent realism, but there was a debate between Kennan and the Atlanticists that complicates the question of what to call the late 1940s. I think it would help to include a liberal internationalist thinker from the period.

Altogether, your course should be really interesting to teach as well as to take.

No Stephen Walt's Origins of Alliances?