USF or Pol Syllabus Spring2010 by nh0o4N

VIEWS: 2 PAGES: 9

									                             POLITICAL SCIENCE 128
                             United States Foreign Policy
                             Spring 2010
             Tuesdays, Thursdays, 10:50-12:05, Carpenter Academic Hall room 410

Instructors:
GORDON L. BOWEN, Ph.D.                                         KATHARINE R. NEWMAN
Professor of Political Science and International Relations     Teaching Assistant
Office: Carpenter Academic Hall 314                            Phone: 540-908-2177
Office Hours: 11:00 – 12:00 MW                                 Email: newmankr4538@mbc.edu
Phone: (OFFICE) 540-887-7070
Email: gbowen@mbc.edu

Course Website: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/PolS128.htm
Daily course assignments and notes: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/daily128.2009.htm



I. Course Description
  This course studies the institutions, individuals, political processes, and events that have shaped, and which
  continue to shape, the relations of the United States with the rest of the world. Diplomatic activities, covert actions
  by intelligence agencies, military deployments, wars, and other techniques to maximize U.S. goals and national
  interests will be described and analyzed. Primarily, we will be examining U.S. foreign policy from the 1940s to the
  present. Substantial attention will be paid to U.S. foreign policy since the end of the Cold War, and to the ongoing
  War on Terrorism.

  Who should take the course? The course has no prerequisites. All students with an interest in the role the
  United States has played and still plays in the world, regardless of their major or class level, will benefit from the
  class. Additionally, the needs of two distinct student communities specifically are met by the course: PolS is a
  foundation course for students contemplating pursuit of a major in international relations. It provides substantial
  background needed for success in the course PolS 221 International Relations, a required course in that major, for
  which this course is a prerequisite. PolS 128 also is of significant value for majors in political science. PolS 128
  fulfills the international relations sub-field requirement within the Political Science major.

II. Course Readings:
         o    Steven W. Hook and John Spanier, American Foreign Policy Since World War II eighteenth edition
              (Washington: CQ Press, 2010). This entire book will be read as the core text of the course.
         o    Glen Hastedt, ed., Annual Editions: American Foreign Policy 09/10 fourteenth edition (New York: McGraw
              Hill, 2009). Very substantial amounts of this book are assigned in the course.

  Additional readings: Other items included in the daily readings in the daily assignments (below) are
  required readings unless specified otherwise. Supplemental readings that are not required are marked as
  “optional” or as “recommended.” For example, one of these optional readings is: Richard Grimmitt, "Instances of
  Use of United States Forces Abroad, 1798-2008;" at:
  http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/U.S.UsesOfArmedForce,1798to2004.htm ) All students would benefit from briefly
  looking over this official study to disabuse themselves of the erroneous notion that the U.S. ever has followed a
  policy of “isolationism,” but no one is required to read it.

  Current Events Readings. Please follow news stories and editorial opinion writing on U.S. foreign policy and
  world affairs on a regular basis. Listen carefully to television news as well. Being well informed on all matters
  concerning US foreign policy is the goal in requiring students to pay attention to current events.

            All students are required to read on a daily basis the Washington Post or New York Times (online or print
             versions); and a news weekly on a regular basis; Time is preferred. U.S. News and World Report is also
             acceptable.
                                                        2

        It is also recommended (optional) that students read regularly concerning US foreign policy in a weekly
         journal of opinion they find congenial, e.g.: New Republic (centrist, Democratic), National Review
         (conservative, Republican), Weekly Standard (moderate, Republican), or Nation (left wing, Democratic).
         All are to be found at the current periodicals section in our library basement, or are linked online at:
         http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/research.htm#opinion

        For ease of following current events and to inform term papers, it also is highly recommended (optional)
         that a student consult other reliable news sources on the web. Many are linked to:
         http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/research.htm Others are linked to:
         http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/warLinks.htm#news%20sources

        Professor Bowen also maintains for his students two sets of general research links that may prove of value
         to students writing their term paper (see below):
              o http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/research.htm ;
              o and a set of web links specifically devoted to issues concerning the current war:
                  http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/warLinks.htm .

III. Instructor's Expectations and their relation to Evaluation of Students' Work:
      In class guidelines: This course meets but two times weekly. Our sessions may contain films,
      lecture, discussion components, or all of these. Barring serious illness requiring complete bed rest or
      hospitalization, all students are expected to attend all class meetings. Please notify the instructor
      by email when absences are unavoidable. These guidelines, including those both above and below,
      include any ADP enrollees as well as all students in the RCW, PEG, and VWIL programs, as well as
      any special student or auditing attendee. Regardless of the formula that appears elsewhere in this
      syllabus about course evaluation, this separate criterion will be enforced: non-attendance by enrolled
      students will produce a substantially lower course grade. Be prepared and punctual when you attend.
      Tardiness not only is disrespectful: late arrival at any class session disrupts the instruction that is
      taking place and therefore improperly interferes in others' education. Avoid tardiness. Be in your
      seat, ready for discussion or to take notes at the time class begins: 10:50 PM. Plan to remain for the
      full 1 hour 15 minutes of class. It is disruptive and rude to get up and leave to get a drink, take a
      phone call, or for any other purpose other than a medical emergency. Do not schedule medical
      appointments, meetings with other teachers, job interviews, or any other appointment during class
      time: this is your primary responsibility during the scheduled instructional hours. With the exception
      of laptop computers for taking notes, electronic devices of all types should be turned off during class
      meetings. Additionally, computers must be made to not be accessible for viewing during quizzes,
      tests, and other students’ oral reports: close them during these activities. Disregard of any of these
      guidelines may have serious consequences in the area of your course grade.

   Outside class meetings, students should expect to spend at least six hours per week reading
   textbook materials, other readings, contemporary news, and editorial analyses related to the concerns
   of this course. Many class lectures will expand upon insights treated more fully in readings. Please
   complete assigned readings prior to the course meeting time on the date on which they have
   been assigned; this includes current events materials. Some videotape presentations may also
   occur in class. These will add to our base of information and to the range of analytic perspectives in
   the course: observe, listen attentively, and take notes just as you should during any other course
   meeting.

   Final course grades will be computed according to the following formula:
                                       Classroom Performance: Attendance, Oral participation...10%
                                      Unannounced quizzes…………………………….…………..15%
                                        Midterm Examination (Feb. 23).........................................25%
                                        Final Examination (comprehensive)..................................30%
                    Term Paper (10 numbered page maximum, excluding documentation) .............20%

Detail on course requirements:
    Ten percent (10%) of each student's grade will be derived from classroom oral participation.
        Remember that in preparing for class, assignments include both specifically assigned readings
                                                     3

       and daily/weekly current events materials. Class discussions may occur on any course date,
       often at the start of class.

      Fifteen percent (15%) of each student’s grade will be computed from their performance on
       unannounced Quizzes, which may occur on any course date and are not likely to be announced
       in advance. They will be developed from assigned readings, and/or content of recent class
       meetings, and/or from current news accounts. Ordinarily, these will be multiple choice quizzes
       consisting of 5 to 10 items, administered promptly at the start of class. Late arriving students will
       not be permitted to take a quiz if the quiz already is in progress.

      Two examinations (midterm 25%; final 30%) will count very substantially toward the course
       evaluation: 55% in all. Exams are likely to include multiple choice sections, short essays of
       identification, and/or longer essays. Tests in PolS 128 are to be written in Blue Book / Green
       Book test taking booklets, sold at the College Bookstore. Purchase at least two early in the
       semester. Bring at least one to each exam. Write your name on their cover, only: no
       identification of the student should appear on any inside part of the Blue Book / Green Book.

      Term Paper (20%): A 10 page (maximum) documented research paper concerning a problem of
       contemporary U.S. foreign policy will be written by each student. Due date: start of class on
       Tuesday April 6. The specific topic is for each student to define; a list of potential topics is found
       at the bottom of this syllabus. Topic and bibliography for all term papers must be approved in
       advance by the instructor. Submit a typed proposal package consisting of (1) proposed title, (2)
       one paragraph statement of the central question under investigation, along with (3) an
       alphabetical (i.e., by authors’ last names) bibliography composed of complete bibliographic
       citations of at least six reputable sources, including at least two academic sources, at the start of
       any class, but in no case later than Thursday Feb. 18. If a proposal is not approved, modify the
       proposal in response to suggestions from the instructor and re-submit the modified, entire
       proposal package within one week of having received back a proposal marked “resubmit.”
       Subsequent substantial modification of topic or bibliography also must be submitted in the form of
       an amended proposal package, which also must be approved. Failure to comply with these
       guidelines and/or due dates will result in penalties. A paper that has not been proposed or
       approved will not be graded. For a late paper on an approved topic, the final grade recorded will
       fall one grade per day late, tabulated from the start time of the class plus 24 hours. Late papers
       must be submitted as Word files attached to an email to Prof. Bowen: gbowen@mbc.edu. This
       will allow firm evidence of when the late paper was submitted. Aim to get your paper in on time:
       after four days late, the grade for an A paper on its merits will be recorded as F.

       Criteria used in evaluating Term Papers. In all cases of term papers submitted on time, the
       overall quality of the paper will be of greatest influence in determining the grade earned. Among
       the elements contributing to high overall quality: significance of the topic chosen; responsiveness
       of the paper to the directions and feedback given on the assignment; quality of sources used in
       the paper; thoroughness in the use of sources, including additional sources to which the student
       is directed by the instructor; care displayed in appropriately documenting sources used; and logic
       of argument in the written presentation. When choosing to use internet sources, use only high
       quality sources.
             Guidance about how properly to cite sources is found here:
                http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/term128.htm#form

              Guidance about preferred sources to be used in term papers for PolS 128 is found here:
               http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/term128.htm#guide

Honor Code Warning About Plagiarism:                       Students must do their own work and must
make their own analysis. Documentary citation must be given to authors of ideas that are borrowed or
persons whose words are quoted. Any substantial act of academic dishonesty or plagiarism on the
term paper or any other PolS 128 assignment, will cause the student to fail the course.
                                              4


V. Course Outline and Reading Assignments. Current events discussions may occur as part of
   any class meeting. Come prepared to contribute to discussions of readings, including current
   events.

   1. Unit One: Defining the objectives of U.S. Foreign Policy .

        Tues. Jan. 12: Course Overview, requirements and personal introductions.

        Thurs. Jan. 14: The American Experience and its impact on our relations with others. Read:
                      Hook and Spanier, Preface and part of Chap. 1, pp. xv-11; and Hastedt
                      articles:
                    o No. 5: Charles A. Kupchan and Peter L. Trubowitz, “Grand Strategy for a
                        Divided America,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2007.
                    o No. 7: Graham E. Fuller, “Strategic Fatigue,” The National Interest, Spring
                        2006.

        Tues. Jan. 19: Foundations of the American role in the contemporary world: American Style,
                      American institutions. Discussion of concepts of hegemony and empire.
                      Read:
                    o Hook and Spanier, pp. 11-20.
                    o Hastedt article No. 3: Colin Dueck, “Hegemony on the Cheap,” World Policy
                        Journal, Winter 2003/2004.

        Thurs. Jan. 21: Presidency and Congress: Core Institutions of foreign policy. Read Hastedt
                        articles:
                   o No. 20: Donald R. Wolfensberger, “The Return of the Imperial Presidency?”
                        The Wilson Quarterly, Spring 2002.
                   o No. 26: William G. Howell and Jon C. Pevehouse, “When Congress Stops
                        Wars,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2007.

   2. Unit Two: The Cold War, foundation of the modern U.S. global role.

        Tues. Jan. 26: The Origins and early phases of the Cold War. Read: Hook and Spanier, pp.
                       21-72; and Hastedt article No. 21: Derek Chollet and James Goldgeier, “The
                       Truman Standard,” The American Interest (Summer 2006). Recommended
                       (optional) essay on U.S.-Soviet/Russian relations available:
                       http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/ussoviet.htm

        Thurs. Jan. 28: Globalizing the Cold War: A "Life and Death Struggle." Read: Hook and
                        Spanier, pp. 73-91. Recommended (optional) essay on U.S.-Cuban
                        relations available: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/cuba.htm

        Tues. Feb. 2: Vietnam, Indochina and the U.S.: Getting In, Escalation. Read: Hook and
                        Spanier, pp. 91-104. Recommended (optional) essay on U.S.-Vietnam
                        relations available: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/vietnam.htm

        Thurs. Feb. 4: Vietnam, Indochina and the U.S.: Getting Out. Review notes on: Hook and
                        Spanier, pp. 91-104. Recommended (optional) essay on U.S.-Vietnam
                        relations available: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/vietnam.htm
                                                    5

            Tues. Feb. 9: The Superpowers' Relations: detente and the Congressional Reaction. Read:
                    o Hook and Spanier, pp. 105-116.
                    o Gordon Bowen, "Foreign Policy of the United States," The Seventies in America
                         (Pasadena CA: Salem Press, 2006): 395-399:
                         http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/BowenUS1970s.pdf

            Thurs. Feb. 11: Carter and the Congressional Reassertion in Foreign Policy. Read: Hook
                            and Spanier, pp. 116-130. Supplemental (optional) essay on U.S.-Chile
                            relations available: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/chile.htm ;
                            Recommended (optional) timeline on U.S. Guatemalan policy available:
                            http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/guatemala.htm

            Tues. Feb. 16: Reagan and the revival of Superpower Confrontation. Read: Hook and
                           Spanier, pp. 131-156; and Gordon Bowen, "Foreign Policy of the United
                           States," The Eighties in America (Pasadena CA: Salem Press, 2008): 387-
                           390: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/BowenUS1980s.pdf. Recommended
                           (optional) essay on U.S.-El Salvador relations available:
                           http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/salvador.htm ; Recommended (optional)
                           timeline on U.S. Afghanistan policy also is available:
                           http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/afghanistan.htm

** Bibliography / Proposal for Term Paper due at Start of Class Feb. 18 (see p 3 above for details)

            Thurs. Feb. 18: George H. W. Bush and the End of the Cold War. Read: Hook and Spanier,
                            pp. 157-182.

Tues. Feb. 23: Midterm Exam. Bring a Blue Book / Green Book test-taking booklet to class; put your
                             name on its cover, only.

       3. Unit Three: U.S. Foreign Policies after the Cold War

            Thurs. Feb. 25: Background: The U.S. in the Middle East. Read:
                       o Hastedt article No. 42: Henry Munson, “Lifting the Veil: Understanding the
                           Roots of Islamic Militancy,” Harvard International Review, Winter 2004
                       o Recommended (optional): Gordon Bowen, “Roots of the Arab – Israeli
                           Conflict” at: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/IsraelRoots.htm

       Tues/Thurs. March 2 and March 4: No Class. Spring Break.

            Tues. March 9: The U.S. and Israel. Read: Hook/Spanier, pp. 183-233 (only those parts
                           having to do with Israel and the Middle East peace process), and read:
                           Bowen, "Israel and the United States," The Nineties in America, (Pasadena
                           CA: Salem Press, 2009): 463-465
                           http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/Bowen2009.IsraelU.S.1990s.pdf .

            Thurs. March 11: America’s Unipolar Moment? Read: Hook and Spanier, pp. 183-233. The
                           focus today will be on the first Iraq War and the liberation of Kuwait. Parts of
                           a film on key decisions in 1990-91 will be shown.

            Tues. March 16: The 1990s: Disorder, not “new world order”. Review notes on
                           Hook/Spanier, pp. 183-233, and read: Hook and Spanier, pp. 234-259; and
                           Bowen, “Foreign Policy of the United States,” The Nineties in America
                           (Pasadena CA: Salem Press, 2009): 346-349:
                           http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/Bowen.2009ForeignPolicyOfTheUSin1990
                           s.pdf .
                                                  6

      4. Unit Four: The U.S. at War, 2001-2010
            Thurs. March 18: A new enemy: Al Qaeda and the road to Sept. 11, 2001. Read:
                        o Hook and Spanier, pp. 260-275
                        o Hastedt article No. 30: John Prados, “The Pros from Dover,” Bulletin of the
                            Atomic Scientists, January/February 2004.
                        o Bernard Lewis, “License to Kill,” Foreign Affairs November/ December 1998:
                            online at: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/Lewis.htm

            Tues. March 23: The attacks of 9/11. Read:
                       o Hook and Spanier, pp. 275-284

            Thurs. March 25: The G. W. Bush strategy of pre-emption: Afghanistan and Pakistan. Read
                       o Hook and Spanier, pp. 284-299, and
                       o Ajai Sahni , “The Stupidity in Afghanistan,” South Asian Intelligence Review
                           5, 15 (October 23, 2006): online at:
                           http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/StupidityOfU.S.PolicyInAfghanistan.htm ,
                           and
                       o Hastedt article No. 37: Steven Metz, “New Challenges and Old Concepts,”
                           Parameters, Winter 2007/2008.

            Tues. March 30: The G. W. Bush strategy of pre-emption: Iraq. Read:
                       o Hook and Spanier, pp. 299-319
                       o No. 25: Paul R. Pillar, “The Right Stuff,” The National Interest,
                            September/October 2007.
                       o No. 34: Andrew Bacevich, “Requium for the Bush Doctrine,” Current History,
                            December 2005.
                       o No. 29: Anatol Lieven and John C. Hulsman, “Neo-Conservatives, Liberal
                            Hawks, and the War on Terror,” World Policy Journal, Fall 2006
                       o Jeffrey Goldberg, “Breaking Ranks,” New Yorker (Oct. 31, 2005): 55-64:
                            http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/10/31/051031fa_fact2

            Thurs. April 1: Issues in Waging a Global War on Terrorism. Read Hook and Spanier, pp.
                              314-328; and Hastedt articles:
                        o No. 47: Marc Sageman, “The Next Generation of Terror,” Foreign Policy,
                             March/April 2008.
                        o No. 17: Alasdair Roberts, “The War We Deserve,” Foreign Policy Nov./Dec.
                             2007.
                        o No. 22: Aziz Z. Huq, “Extraordinary Rendition and the Wages of Hypocrisy,”
                             World Policy Journal, Spring 2006.
                        o No. 27: Anne-Marie Slaughter and Jeremy Rabkin, “Law, Liberty and War,”
                             The American Interest, Summer 2006.

           Tues. April 6: Challenges deferred: the legacy of George W. Bush to Barack Obama. Read:
                        o Hook and Spanier, pp. 320-345

** Term Papers are due at the start of class on April 6 **

           Thurs. April 8: Guest lecture: U.S. Policy toward Saudi Arabia. Read:
                         Michael Ottaway, “The King and Us,” Foreign Affairs (May/June 2009), online
                            at: http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/kingandus.doc
                                                  7

       Tues. April 13: American Challenges in East Asia. Read Hook and Spanier, pp. 346-364, and
                        Hastedt articles:
                         o No. 10: William T. Tow, “America’s Asia-Pacific Strategy Is out of Kilter,”
                            Current History, September 2007.
                         o No. 11: Christopher Layne, “China’s Challenge to U.S. Hegemony,” Current
                            History, January 2008.
                         o No. 12: Jacques E. C. Hymans, “North Korea’s Nuclear Neurosis,” Bulletin
                            of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2007.
                         o No. 32: Flynt Leverett and Pierre Noël, “The New Axis of Oil,” The National
                            Interest, Summer 2006.

       Thurs. April 15: Conclusions: Alternative Directions for the U.S. Read: Hastedt articles:
                        o No. 31: Walter Russell Mead, “America’s Sticky Power,” Foreign Policy,
                           March/April 2004.
                        o No. 4: Immanuel Wallerstein, “The Eagle Has Crash Landed,” Foreign
                           Policy, July/August 2002.
                        o No. 33: Nouriel Roubini, “The Coming Financial Pandemic,” Foreign Policy,
                           March/April 2008.

            Purchase a Blue Book Test Taking booklet. Bring to Final Exam. Write name on
            cover, only.

FINAL EXAM: the 3 hour, comprehensive, multiple choice and essay-type test may be taken during any
       scheduled MBC exam session between Monday April 19 and Friday April 23, 2010, only.

                        Suggested topics for PolS 128 Term Papers in 2010

Complete instructions about the term paper assignment are to be found here:
       http://academic.mbc.edu/gbowen/term128.htm

U.S. policy toward Pakistan:

          "Trends in Pakistani public attitudes toward the U.S., toward terrorism, and toward U.S.
           counter-terrorism policies"
          "Evaluating the impact on Pakistani-American relations of the 2010 foreign aid bill"
          "Evaluating the impact of U.S. uses of unmanned drone attack aircraft in Pakistan"
          "A. Q. Khan, Pakistan's nuclear weapons policies, and their impact on U.S.-Pakistani
           relations"
          "Making peace agreements with militant Islamists in Pakistan: does the experience in the the
           2000's point to a model for the U.S. to emulate?"

U.S. policy toward Afghanistan:

          "Obama's decision making process on U.S. Afghanistan policy during 2009-10: did he follow
           a 'rational actor' or a 'bureaucratic politics' model?"
          "Assessing the status of U.S. policy toward the promotion of democracy in Afghanistan: Has
           pursuit of this goal advanced U.S. national interests?"
          "Assessing the status of U.S. policy toward the promotion of human rights for women and
           children in Afghanistan: Has pursuit of this goal advanced U.S. national interests?"
          "Foreign fighters on behalf of militant Islamist organizations in Pakistan and Afghanistan in
           the 2000's: who are they, where do they come from, and what can the U.S. and its allies do to
           stop them?"
          "Assessing N.A.T.O. allies' contributions to the war in Afghanistan"
                                                     8

U.S. policy toward India:

          "Evaluating the status of U.S.-Indian relations in regard to security challenges central to each
           nation"
          "Why have India and the U.S. never concluded a mutual defense treaty?"
          "Indian - U.S. cooperation on counter-terrorism policies: the Mumbai bombings of November
           2008 and beyond"

U.S. policy toward states in Southeast Asia and East Asia:

          "Countering Muslim insurgents in Thailand: has the U.S. constructively assisted Thailand's
           efforts?"
          "The problem of radical Islam in Indonesia: trends in Indonesian public opinion"
          "U.S. military training missions in the Philippines: to what extent do they advance U.S.
           objectives in the war against Muslim extremists?"
          "What impact have U.S. disaster relief missions in Indonesia had on the achievement of U.S.
           security objectives there?"
          "Inducements and threats: evaluating the effectiveness of the tools used in attempting to end
           North Korea's nuclear weapons program"
          "Have U.S. arms sales to Taiwan advanced U.S. national security interests?"

U.S. allies and U.S. national security objectives:

          “U.S. Relations with Saudi Arabia: is it a reliable ally in the War on Terrorism?”
          “U.S. Relations with Turkey: Has Turkish policy toward Iraq, the Kurds, and Syria/Iran
           undermined our alliance?”
          “U.S. and its European Allies: Is there a Common Policy toward State Sponsors of Terrorism”
          "Evaluating the impact of the Guantanamo Bay Prison and "extraordinary rendition": have
           ugly features of the war against Muslim extremists obstructed full cooperation by allied
           Governments in Europe?"
          "To what extent have trends in European public opinion toward the U.S. in the 2000's
           strengthened or jeopardized our alliances?"
          "To what extent have trends in Egyptian public opinion toward the U.S. in the 2000's
           strengthened or jeopardized our alliance?"
          "Do human rights standards barring transfer of European Union prisoners to states with that
           practice capital punishment impede bringing Muslim extremists to justice in the United
           States?"

U.S. policy in the Middle East:

          “U.S. Relations with Saudi Arabia: is it a reliable ally in the War on Terrorism?”
          “U.S. Relations with Turkey: Has Turkish policy toward Iraq, the Kurds, and Syria/Iran
           undermined our alliance?”
          "Do trends in Egyptian public opinion toward the U.S. in the 2000's jeopardize our alliance?"
          "Has the Obama Administration abandoned U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 and long
           established U.S. policy on the matter of 'territories occupied' by Israel?"
          "Setting a high priority on Middle East Peace: evaluating U.S. efforts during the 1990's with
           an eye on the Obama era"
          "U.S. policy toward the Israeli nuclear program: does it support or undermine U.S. non-
           proliferation goals in the region?"
          "U.S. policy toward Lebanon: do U.S. laws block the U.S. from improving its influence so long
           as Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese Government?"
                                                       9

U.S. policy in the Middle East (continued):

            “The U.S. as peace broker between Syria and Israel: Did the Israeli attack on the Syrian
            nuclear facility in Sept. 2007 advance U.S. interests?”
           "Has pre-emption policy continued under Obama: evaluating U.S. military actions inside
            Pakistan and Somalia during the Obama Administration"
           "Evaluating 'the surge' phase of U.S. policy in Iraq, 2007-2009: are key elements of
            successful counterinsurgency found in this era of U.S. Iraq policy?"
           "What's up in Djibouti: to what extent do the activities of the U.S. Task Force for the Horn of
            Africa advance U.S. national security?"
           “U.S. Policy Toward Iran Since September 11, 2001: does working with NATO allies magnify
            or reduce achievement of U.S. goals?”
           "U.S. - Libyan relations: to what extent has the leopard changed its spots regarding the
            priority objectives of U.S. foreign policy?"
           "Evaluating the impact of Israeli efforts to win the release of Jonathan Pollard"

Domestic features of U.S. foreign policy:

           "Did the significant influence of neo-conservative ideology on the priorities pursued by U.S.
            Policy after September 11, 2001 advance or obstruct achievement of U.S. goals?"
           "Sail or anchor: Has Public Opinion of he U.S. population been an asset or a liability
            regarding U.S. policy in the global war on Muslim extremists?"
           "Partisan changes in party affiliation among U.S. military officers: Assessing the impact on
            U.S. foreign policy"
           "U.S. policy on the assassination of foreign individuals: do legal standards or does
            presidential discretion shape policy?"

NOTE: I want explicitly to discourage students from researching and writing papers for this class
that examine entirely historic cases. We have a History Department and a good course on Diplomatic
History taught by Prof. Keller there is the appropriate place to pursue a topic of U.S. foreign policy that is
largely historical in nature.

								
To top