|
嗯,最近在仔细研究这个,就把国际政治相关的几个专业的内容贴上来大家共享一下啦。[s:2]
世界经济与政治系
国际政治专业博士研究生培养方案
一、培养目标
1、 能较好地掌握马列主义、毛**思想和邓小平理论,拥护党的基本路线,热爱祖国,遵纪守法,品德良好,学风严谨,具有较强的事业心和献身精神,积极为社会主义现代化建设事业服务。
2、 全面系统地掌握本专业的基本理论和专业知识,尤其要充分了解国内外国际政治理论研究的前沿课题和信息。写作能力较强,外语水平较高,必须掌握两门外国语。毕业后能够独立承担国际政治领域的重大研究项目,研究水平在国内外处于比较领先的位置。
3、 身体健康。
二、培养方式
根据学生的特点,制定个人培养计划,合理安排学位课程学习。要求博士研究生积极参与研究所的学术交流和课题研究,培养独立从事科学研究能力和创新能力。建立学生与导师每月不少于一次的见面交流制度,检查和指导研究生的课程学习、科学研究和学位论文工作。
三、研究方向
1、国际关系理论
国际关系理论主要瞄准当前国际国内前沿领域,深入研究国际政治和国际安全的一些重大问题,同时广泛借鉴各种学派、方法、角度,不断充实中国自身的国关理论内涵与特色,使国际关系理论专业方向培养的学生能够紧跟时代潮流,胜任本领域的任何研究使命。
2、国际战略
了解当代主要大国国际战略及其演变方向,和对我国的影响、互动;掌握我国制定国际战略的理论依据和建国以来我国国际战略的历史和发展方向;研究落实我国国际战略的具体方针、原则和策略;研究我国国际战略和国内政策的相互关系、互动和制约。
四、学习年限:博士研究生在校学习时间不能少于3年。
五、课程设置与学分
1、公共课
(1)马克思主义理论课:马克思主义与当代社会思潮 3学分
(2)外国语课
① 第一外国语 3学分
② 第二外国语 2学分
2、专业基础课
(1)国际关系前沿(必修) 3学分
(2)国际政治经济学(必修) 3学分
以下可任选其中2门
(3)国际关系史 3学分
(4)国际战略学 3学分
(5)西方国际政治学史 3学分
(6)西方国际政治理论经典 3学分
3、专业课
(1)国际关系理论前沿(必修) 4学分
以下可任选其中2门
(2)专业外语 3学分
(3)中国当代外交研究 3学分
(4)国际战略概论 3学分
(5)中国国际战略的特点与内涵 3学分
(6)全球化理论与全球性问题研究 3学分
(7)国际安全理论 3学分
(8)区域经济、政治一体化理论 3学分
(9)经济、社会体制比较 3学分
(10)市民社会的理论与实践 3学分
(11)中国国际政治学的教学现状 3学分
(12)改革开放以来的中国国际关系理论研究 3学分
(13)各国国际关系理论比较研究 3学分
4、限制性跨学科课(必修) 3学分
5、选修课 2学分
6、社会实践(必修) 2学分
六、学科综合考核
考核委员会由5人组成,根据博士生培养方案拟定考核题目。考核时间为博士生入学后第四学期,考核采取笔试。考核成绩合格者进行学位论文开题报告。
七、学位论文
1、要求博士论文应当瞄准前沿领域,有独创性并且注重学术规范,在同行中独树
一帜,达到出版水平。
2、博士学位论文实行开题报告制度,时间安排在第三学期的后8周至第四学期的前8周完成。开题报告通过后进入论文写作。
3、博士研究生用于写作学位论文的时间,应不少于1学年。论文一般为十万字左右。
4、博士论文答辩前实行匿名评审制度。要求第五学期期末之前完成论文初稿,在第六学期初(3月底之前)通过资格审查后,将论文交教务处打印。匿名评审通过者进入论文答辩。
八、其他学习项目安排
1、 导师应在博士生入学后三个月内完成制定博士生的个人培养计划。
2、 博士生的公共必修课要求在第一学年完成。专业课应在学科综合考核前完成。
3、 博士生在院学习期间,至少公开发表2篇学术论文,否则不能进行论文开题报告。
国际关系专业博士研究生培养方案
一、培养目标
1、能较好地掌握马列主义、毛**思想和邓小平理论,拥护党的基本路线,热爱祖国,遵纪守法,有良好品德和严谨学风,具有较强的事业心和献身精神,能积极为社会主义现代化建设事业服务。
2、全面系统地掌握本专业的基本理论和专业知识,尤其要充分了解国内外国际关系理论研究的重要学派和前沿课题,写作能力较强,外语水平较高。毕业后能够独立承担国际关系领域的重大研究项目,理论水平和研究能力在国内外处于比较领先的位置。
3、身体健康。
二、培养方式
根据学生的特点,制定个人培养计划,合理安排学位课程学习。要求研究生积极参与研究所的学术交流和课题研究,培养独立从事科学研究能力和创新能力。建立学生与导师每月不少于一次的见面交流制度,检查和指导研究生的课程学习、科学研究和学位论文写作。
三、研究方向
1、国际关系理论
要求学生关注国际国内的理论前沿领域,深入研究国际政治与国际安全的重大问题,通过研读和借鉴各学派的理论体系与研究方法,充实与发展中国的国际关系理论研究。通过学习,学生应打下坚实的学术基础,在选定的研究领域进行创新。
2、国际战略
要求学生深入研读国际关系理论的基本学说与方法,在此基础上系统研究国际战略的基本理论与重大现实问题。通过学习,一方面掌握进行战略评估的基本方法,另一方面在战略理论与实证分析中有所创新。学生在学习中应把对国际问题的研究与对中国战略选择的研究结合起来,形成自己较完整的战略理念。
四、学习年限:博士研究生在校学习时间不能少于3年。
五、课程设置与学分
1、公共课
(1)马克思主义理论课:马克思主义与当代社会思潮 3学分
(2)外国语课
① 第一外国语 3学分
② 第二外国语 2学分
2、专业基础课
(1)国际政治经济学(必修) 3学分
(2)国际关系前沿(必修) 3学分
(3)国际关系史 3学分
(4)国际战略学概论 3学分
(5)西方国际关系学说史 3学分
(6)西方国际关系理论经典 3学分
(7)专业外语 3学分
3、专业课
(1)国际关系理论前沿(必修) 4学分
(2)中国当代外交研究 3学分
(3)全球政治与全球问题 3学分
(4)国际安全概论 3学分
(5)外交决策学 3学分
(6)大国关系研究 3学分
(7)中国国际关系理论研究 3学分
(8)各国国际关系理论的比较研究 3学分
4、限制性跨学科课(必修) 3学分
5、选修课 2学分
6、社会实践(必修) 2学分
六、学科综合考核
考核委员会由5人组成,根据博士生培养方案拟定考核题目。考核时间为博士生入学后第四学期期末之前,考核采取笔试或口试由相关导师确定。考核成绩达到合格者进行学位论文写作阶段。逾期未考者,按不合格处理。不合格者如要求继续攻读博士学位,须重修有关课程,一年后重新参加学科综合考核。
七、学位论文
1、博士论文应当瞄准前沿领域,有独创性并且注重学术规范,在同行中独树一帜,达到出版水平。
2、博士学位论文实行开题报告制度,时间安排在第三学期的后8周至第四学期的前8周完成。开题报告通过后进入论文写作阶段。
3、博士研究生用于写作学位论文的时间,应不少于1学年。论文一般为10万字左右。
4、博士论文答辩前实行匿名评审制度。要求第五学期期末之前完成论文初稿,在第六学期初(3月5日之前)将论文软盘交到教务处。匿名评审通过者进入论文答辩。
5、答辩时间要求在5月底之前完成,博士论文提交给答辩委员与答辩时间之间的最短时间不得少于30天。
八、其他学习项目安排
1、博士生的公共必修课要求在第一学年完成。专业课应在论文开题报告前完成。社会实践要求在第五学期末之前完成。
2、博士生在院学习期间,要求至少公开发表2篇学术论文,否则不能进行论文答辩。
课 程 教 学 大 纲
课程编号:X600001
课程名称:国际政治经济学
讲授对象:国际学部硕士、博士研究生
任课教师及职称:张宇燕教授
授课方式:讲授、讨论
学时:60
学分:3
课程内容概要:
本课程首先要说明国际政治经济学与一国内部的政治经济学的区别与联系,并简要介绍国内外在此领域内的研究现状及主要研究成果、流派。和国际上通行的国际政治经济学主要以政治学为基础不同,本课程的理论基础是经济学,特别要讲授相关的政治经济学理论,重点讨论一国对外政策的内政基础和国家利益的形成。经济全球化和全球治理亦是本课程着重讨论的题目,它们与民族国家和区域组织的关系也自然会被涉及到。在其中,一国的贸易金融政策的形成,尤其是国内各利益集团之间的竞争与讨价还价过程与机理,将构成本课程的有机组成部分。全球问题及与此关联的世界政府(国际机构)和全球公共产品提供问题,是本课程的重要内容之一。
教学要求:
要求学生应具备一定的微观、宏观和国际经济学的基础,特别是要具备政治经济学和历史以及国际关系方面的知识。对国际政治经济学的基本概念、理论命题、检验手段、价值观念及前人所做的工作,有准确的理解和掌握,能够写出有发表水平的课程论文。
考核方式:口试、课程论文
参考书目:
1、《马克思恩格斯选集》(1-4卷)
2、康德:《历史哲学批判文集》
3、吉尔平:《国际关系政治经济学》
4、摩根索:《国家间的政治》
5、米塞斯:《自由与繁荣的国度》
6、驮正编:《中国边疆经略史》
7、列宁:《帝国主义论》
8、宋新宁:《国际政治经济学》
9、彼德.林德特:《国际经济学》
10、奥尔森:《国家兴衰探源》
课程编号:X600002
课程名称:国际关系前沿
讲授对象:国际学部硕士、博士研究生
任课教师及职称:国际学部副教授、教授及部分外请专家、学者
授课方式:讲授、讨论
学时:60
学分:3
课程内容概要:
当代国际政治与传统的国际政治相比发生了巨大变化,尤其是冷战结束以来更出现了复杂多样的新特点、新趋势。该课程重点介绍和分析这些新现实,一方面评述国内外学者在这方面的新见解、新方法,另一方面讨论研究者自己的看法和意见,使学生能够全面地了解国际政治研究的基本理论和方法。
教学要求:
要求学生应具备一定的国际政治理论基础,通读相关研究资料,关心国际时事。对国际政治的基本概念、理论命题及前人所做的工作,有准确的理解和掌握,能够写出有发表水平的课程论文。
考核方式:提交课程论文
参考书目:有关国际政治研究的书籍、报刊及任课教师编著和推荐的著作。
课程编号:B610001
课程名称:国际关系理论前沿
授课对象:国际政治专业博士研究生
授课教师及职称:王逸舟教授
授课方式:讲授、讨论、自学
学时:100
学分:4
课程内容概要:
“国际关系理论前沿”课程是国际政治专业博士学位课程的主课,它的主要目标是让学生充分了解国外各种前沿最新研究成果,同时培养独立归纳、讲演、争辩的较强能力。
教学要求:以外文原著为主要阅读目标,讲授、讨论、自学三者结合,人人须演讲。
考核方式:口试、课程论文、考查
参考书目:随时更新,基本上是外文原版书。
课程编号:B610002
课程名称:专业外语
授课对象:国际政治专业博士研究生
授课教师及职称:王逸舟教授
授课方式:讲授、翻译、自学
学时:60 (两个学期)
学分:3
课程内容概要:
这门课程的主要目的有二,一是培养专业文献翻译能力,二是争取使译出来的成果在学术界产生影响。主要办法是要求学生翻译文章或书籍,严格训练,严格要求,达到较高的外语水平。
教学要求:主要是培养专业书籍的翻译能力。
考核方式:专业文献的翻译。
参考书目:随时更新
课程编号:B610003
课程名称:中国当代外交研究
授课对象:国际政治专业博士研究生
授课教师及职称:王逸舟教授
授课方式:讲授、讨论、自学
学时:60 (两个学期)
学分:3
课程内容概要:
这门课的主要目的,是将所学的国际关系最新理论及方法,应用到分析当代中国外交的实践。具体办法是,用案例分析的方法,一个一个领域进行探索,争取在中国外交研究方面开创一些新的研究思路。
考核方式:笔试、口试、课程论文
参考书目:随时更新
课程编号:B610004
课程名称:各国国际关系理论比较研究
授课对象:国际政治专业博士研究生
授课教师及职称:王逸舟教授
授课方式:讲授、讨论、自学
学时:60 (两学期)
学分:3
课程内容概要:
这门课程的主要目标,是广泛比较各国各种国际关系理论的特点,充分汲取养分,借鉴其经验教训,为建立有中国自身特点的国际关系理论做出扎扎实实的工作,也使学生具备更加开阔的视野。
教学要求:大量阅读、讨论、比较,尽可能多地比较各国理论方法。
考核方式:笔试、口试、课程论文
参考书目:随时更新
课程编号:B610005
课程名称:国际战略概论
授课对象:国际政治专业博士研究生
授课教师及职称:沈骥如教授
授课方式:讲授、讨论、自学相结合
学时:60
学分:3
课程内容概要:
1、 战后美苏两极格局的形成和冷战时期美国、苏联、西欧、日本等主要力量中心国际战略的形成和走向;
2、 殖民体系的瓦解和发展中国家的兴起对全球战略格局的影响。发展中国家在新世纪国际格局中的地位。发展中世界对形成新的国际经济、政治秩序所起的作用;
3、 建国以来不同历史时期我国的国家利益以及制定我国国际战略理论依据的发展和演变。不同历史时期新中国国际战略的重要内容;
4、 在科技革命和经济全球化条件下国际战略的相互影响、互动和相互制约。
5、 多级世界、单极世界、反对霸权主义、建立国际经济政治新秩序、树立新的安全观的关系研究;
6、 我国在21世纪上半叶的国际战略和落实我国国际战略的手段、方针和策略研究;
7、 我国国际战略和国家总目标、国内政策的相互关系、互动和相互制约。
教学要求:以自学为主,讲授为辅,通过师生讨论解答疑难问题。
考核方式:提交报告
参考书目:
1、 马克思、恩格斯:《共产党宣言》;
2、 马克思:《哥达纲领批判》;
3、 《不列颠在印度的统治》;
4、 《不列颠在印度统治的未来结果》;
5、 恩格斯:《恩格斯致约、布洛赫 1890年9月21日》、《反杜林论》暴力篇;
6、 《关于共产主义运动总路线的论战》,人民出版社,1965年3月版;
7、 邓小平选集第三卷;
8、 江**:在中国***第十五次全国代表大会上的讲话,1997年9月;在庆祝中国***成立八十周年大会上的讲话,2001年7月;在联合国千年首脑会议上的讲话,2000年9月,人民出版社;
9、 余起芬:《国际战略论》,军事科学出版社,1998年;
10、 潘百英:《现代战略思考》,世界知识出版社,1993年;
11、 高金钿:《国际战略学概论》,国防大学出版社,2001年;
12、 王缉思:《高处不胜寒》,世界知识出版社,1999年;
13、 洪兵:《国家利益论》,军事科学出版社,1999年;
14、 腾藤:《邓小平理论与世纪之交的中国国际战略》,人民出版社,2001年;
15、 张蕴岭:《伙伴还是对手》,社会科学出版社,2001年;
16、 阎学通:《美国霸权与中国安全》,天津人民出版社,2000年;
17、 朱阳明:《亚太安全战略论》,军事科学出版社,2000年;
18、 亨利?基辛格:《大外交》,海南出版社,1998年;
19、 利德尔?哈特:《战略论》,战士出版社,1981年;
20、 塞缪尔?亨延顿:《文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建》,新华出版社,1998年;
21、 姜长斌;罗伯特?罗斯:《从对峙走向缓和》,世界知识出版社,2000年;
22、 罗伯特?基欧汉、约瑟夫?奈:《权力与相互依赖——转变中的世界政治》,中国人民公安大学出版社,1992年;
23、 保罗?肯尼迪:《大国的兴衰》,求实出版社,1988年;
24、 布热津斯基:《大棋局》,上海人民出版社,1998年;
25、 尼克松:《1999:不战而胜》,长征出版社,1988年。
根据学习进程,随时补充参考书目。
课程编号:B610014
课程名称:国际关系理论前沿
讲授对象:国际关系专业博士研究生
任课教师及职称:王逸舟教授
授课方式:讲授、自学、讨论
学时:100
学分:5
课程内容概要:
研读国际关系理论研究中的最新文献,了解讨论中的前沿问题和最新动态。主要教学方式是自学与读书会。内容涉及国际关系理论研究中的各个领域。
教学要求:
学生在广泛阅读学科文献的过程中,要结合自己的研究方向,精读重点文献,并提出自己的分析。
考核方式:课程论文
参考书目:
‘Interview with Ken Waltz,’ conducted by Fred Halliday and Justin Rosenberg, Review of International Studies 24:3 (1998) 371-386.
‘Realism vs Cosmopolitanism: A Debate Between Barry Buzan and David Held,’ conducted by Anthony McGrew Review of International Studies 24:3 (1998) 387-398.
Adam Jones, ‘Does “Gender” Make the World Go Round? Feminist Critiques of International Relations,’ Review of International Studies, 22: 4 (1996) 405-429.
Alexander George, ‘Strategies for Preventive Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution: Scholarship for Policymaking,’PS: Political Science and Politics (March 2000).
Alexander George, Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy (Wahington, DC: The United States Institute of Peace Press, 1993) xvii-xxvi, 3-29.
Alexander Wendt, ‘Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics,’International Organization 46:2 (1992) 391-425.
Alexander Wendt, ‘On Constitution and Causation in International Relations,’ Review of International Studies 24: special issue (1998) 101-117.
Alexander Wendt, ‘The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory,’ International Organization, 41 (1987) 335-370.
Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).
Andreas Bieler and Adam David Morton, ‘The Gordion Knot of Agency-Structure in International Relations: A Neo-Gramscian Perspective,’ European Journal of International Relations 7:1 (2001) 5-35.
Andreas Osiander, ‘Reading early 20th century IR theory: Idealism Revisited,’ in International Studies Quarterly 42:3 (1998) 409-432.
Andrew Linklater, ‘The Achievements of Critical Theory,’ in International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski, eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 279-298.
Andrew Linklater, ‘The Transformation of Political Community: E.H. Carr, Critical Theory and International Relations,’ Review of International Studies 23:3 (1997) 321-338.
Andrew Linklater, Beyond Realism and Marxism: Critical Theory and International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1990).
Andrew Linklater, Men and Citizens in the Theory of International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1990).
Andrew Moravcsik, ‘Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,’ International Organization 51:4 (1997) 513-553.
Anthony Douglas Smith, Theories of Nationalism, Holmes & Meier Publishers Inc., 1983.
Barry Buzan and Richard Little, ‘Why International Relations Has Failed as an Academic Project and What to do about it,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies 30:1 (2001): 19-39.
Barry Buzan, ‘The Timeless Wisdom of Realism?’ in International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski, eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 47-65.
Barry Buzan,‘The English School: An Underexploited Resource in IR,’ Review of International Studies 27:3 (2001) 471-488.
Beate Jahn, ‘One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: Critical Theory as the Latest Edition of Liberal Idealism,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 27: 3 (1998) 613-641.
Bill McSweeney, Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).
Bradley S. Klein, Strategic Studies and World Order: The Global Politics of Deterrence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).
Brian Schmidt, ‘Lessons from the Past: Reassessing the Interwar Disciplinary History of International Relations,’ in International Studies Quarterly 42:3 (1998) 433-460.
Brian White, Richard Little and Michael Smith, Issues in World Politics, New York: St. Martin Press, 1997.
Bruce Hoffman, Inside Terrorism, London: Victor Gollancz, 1998.
Bruce Russet, Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995).
Chris Brown, ‘“Turtles All the Way Down”: Anti-Foundationalism, Critical Theory and International Relations,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies 23 (1994) 213-236.
Chris Hill, ‘Academic International Relations: The Siren Song of Policy Relevance’ in Two Worlds of International Relations: Academics, Practitioners and the Trade in Ideas, Christopher Hill & Pamela Beshoff, eds. (London: Routledge, 1994) 3-25.
Christine Sylvester, Feminist Theory and International Relations in a Postmodern Era (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).
Christopher Layne and Benjamin Schwarz, "American Hegemony--Without an Enemy," Foreign Policy, No. 92, Fall 1993.
Christopher Layne, ‘Kant or Cant: The Myth of the Democratic Peace,’ International Security, 19: 2 (1994) 5-49.
Conway W. Henderson, International Relations, Boston: McGraw Hill, 1998.
Cynthia Enloe, Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990).
Cynthia Enloe, Maneuvers: The International Politics of Militarizing Women’s Lives (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000).
Cynthia Weber,‘IR: The Resurrection or New Frontiers of Incorporation,’ European Journal of International Relations 5:4 (1999) 435-450.
Daniel Deudney and G. John Ikenberry, ‘The Nature and Sources of Liberal International Order,’Review of International Studies 25:2 (1999) 179-196.
Daniel Deudney, ‘Geopolitics as Theory: Historical Security Materialism,’ European Journal of International Relations 6:1 (2000) 77-107. 6
David Baldwin, ed., Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).
David Campbell, Politics Without Principle: Sovereignty, Ethics and the Narratives of the Gulf War (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1993).
David Campbell, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, rvs. ed. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998).
David Dessler, ‘The Use and Abuse of Social Science for Policy,’ SAIS Review 9:2 (1989) 203-223.
David Held and Anthony McGrew, ‘The End of the Old Order? Globalisation and the Prospects for World Order,’Review of International Studies 24: special issue (1998) 219-243.
E. H. Carr, The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations (London: Papermac, 1981 [1939]) .
Fareed Zakaria, From Wealth to Power: The Unusual Origins of America’s World Role, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.
Fred Halliday, ‘The End of the Cold War and International Relations: Some analytic and Theoretical Conclusions,’ in International Relations Theory Today, Ken Booth and Steve Smith, eds. (Oxford: Polity, 1995) 38-61.
Frederic S. Pearson and J. Martin Rochester, International Relations, New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 1998.
Friedrich Kratochwil and Edward D. Mansfield, International Organization: A Reader, Harper Collins College Publishers, 1994.
Friedrich Kratochwil, Rules, Norms and Decision: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
George H. Sabine and Thomas L. Thorson, A History of Political Theory, Dryden Press, 1973.
George Modelski, Long Cycles in World Politics, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1987.
Gideon Rose, "Neoclassic Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy," World Politics 51, October 1998.
Hans J. Morgenthau, ‘A Realist Theory of International Politics,’ Politics Among Nations (New York: Alfred A Knopf, 1985).
Harold Brown, Thinking About National Security, Westview Press, 1983.
Hedley Bull and Adam Watson, eds., The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985).
Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics, 2nd ed. (London: Macmillan, 1995) .
Helga Haftendorn, "The Security Puzzle: Theory-Building and Discipline-Building in International Security," International Studies Quarterly, 35, 1991.
Ian Clark, Globalisation and Fragmentation: International Relations in the Twentieth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).
Ian Clark,‘Beyond the Great Divide: Globalization and the Theory of International Relations,’ Review of International Studies 24: 4 (1998) 479-498.
J. Ann Tickner, ‘You Just Don’t Understand: Troubled Engagements Between Feminists and IR Theorists,’International Studies Quarterly 41: 4 (1997) 611-632.
J. Ann Tickner, Gender in International Relations: Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992).
James C. Hsiung, Anarchy and Order, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1997.
James Goldgeier and Michael McFaul, ‘A Tale of Two Worlds: Core and Periphery in the post-Cold War Era,’International Organization 46:2 (1992) 467-491.
James Mayall, Nationalism and International Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).
James N. Rosenau and Ernst-Otto Czempiel, eds. Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
James N. Rosenau, ‘Thinking Theory Thoroughly,’ in International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism and Beyond, Paul Viotti and Mark Kauppi (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997) 29-37.
Jan Aart Scholte, Globalization: A Critical Introduction (New York: St. Martin's Press, 2000).
Jeffrey W. Legro, Andrew Moravcsik, “Is Anybody Still a Realist?” International Security, Vol.24, No.2, Fall 1999.
Jennifer Milliken, ‘The Study of Discourse in International Relations: a Critique of Research and Methods,’European Journal of International Relations 5:2 (1999) 225-254.
Jenny Edkins, Poststructuralism and International Relations: Bringing the Political Back in (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1999).
Jill Hills, ‘Dependency Theory and Its Relevance Today: International Institutions in Telecommunications and Structural Power,’ Review of International Studies, 20: 2 (1994) 169-186.
Jim George, ‘(Re)Introducting Theory as Practice of International Relations,’ Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to International Relations (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1994) 1-39.
Jim George, ‘The Backward Discipline Revisited: The Closed World of Neo-realism,’ Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to International Relations (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1994) 111-138.
Jim George, ‘The Positivist-Realist Phase: Morgenthau, Behaviouralism, and the Quest for Certainty,’ Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to International Relations (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1994) 91-110.
Jim George, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to International Relations (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1994) esp. pp. 139-231.
John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds., The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, 2nd ed., (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) .
John Gerard Ruggie, ‘Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution,’ in Paul Viotti and Mark Kauppi, International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism and Beyond (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997) 331-339.
John Lewis Gaddis, ‘International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War,’ International Security 17: 3 (1992) 5-58.
John Mearsheimer, ‘Back to the Future: Instability in Europe After the Cold War,’ International Security 15:1 (1990) 5-56.
John Mearshemier, ‘The False Promise of International Institutions,’ International Security, 19: 3 (1994/95) 5-49.
John Mearshimer, ‘Back to the Future: Instability in Europe After the Cold War,’ International Security 15:1 (1990) 5-56.
Joseph S. Nye, Jr.: Understanding International Conflicts, New York, Longman, 1997.
Jutta Weldes et al, eds. Cultures of Insecurity: States, Communities and the Production of Danger (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999).
Jutta Weldes, ‘Constructing National Interests,’ European Journal of International Relations 2:3 (1996) 275-318.
K.J. Holsti, ‘Scholarship in an Era of Anxiety: The Study of International Politics During the Cold War,’ Review of International Politics 24 (1998) 17-46.
Kalevi Holsti, The State, War, and the State of War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Katzenstein, Keohane and Krasner, eds., Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics, 1999].
Ken Booth and Steve Smith, eds., International Relations Theory Today, (Cambridge: Polity, 1995).
Ken Booth, ‘Security in Anarchy: Utopian Realism in Theory and Practice,’ International Affairs 67:3 (1991) 527-545.
Ken Booth, 'A Reply to Wallace,' Review of International Studies 23:3 (1997) 371-377.
Ken Booth, ed. Statecraft and Security, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998) .
Kenneth Waltz, ‘Realist Thought and Neorealist Theory,’ in The Evolution of Theory in International Relations (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1991) 21-37.
Kenneth Waltz, ‘Structural Realism After the Cold War,’ International Security 25:1 (2000) 5-41.
Kenneth Waltz, ‘The New World Order,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies 22:2 (1993) 187-196.
Kenneth Waltz, Man, the State and War: A Theoretical Analysis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959).
Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: Random House, 1979).
Kimberly Hutchins, ‘Foucault and International Relations Theory,’ in The Impact of Foucault on the Social Sciences and Humanities, Moya Lloyd and Andrew Thacker, eds. (London: Macmillan, 1997) 102-127.
Len Scott and Steve Smith, ‘Lessons of October: Historians, Political Scientists, Policy-makers and the Cuban Missile Crisis,’ International Affairs 70:4 (1994) 659-684.
Marc A. Genest, Conflict and Cooperation: Evolving Theories of International Relations, Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1996.
Mark Hoffman, ‘Restructuring, Reconstruction, Reinscription, Rearticulation: Four Voices in Critical International Theory,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies 20:2 (1991) 169-185.
Mark Neufeld, ‘International Relations Theory and the Aristotelian Project,’ in The Restructuring of International Relations Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995) 9-21.
Mark R. Amstutz, International Conflict and Cooperation, Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1999.
Martin Hollis and Steve Smith, Explaining and Understanding International Relations (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990) .
Martin Wight, International Theory: The Three Traditions, ed. Gabriele Wight and Brian Porter (London: Leicester University Press, 1991).
Marysia Zalewski, ‘Feminist Theory and International Relations,’ in From Cold War to Collapse, Michael Bowker and Robin Brown, eds. (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 115-144.
Marysia Zalewski, ‘The Women/“Women” Question in International Relations,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies 23:2 (1994) 407-423.
Marysia Zalewski, ‘Well, What’s the Feminist Perspective on Bosnia?’ International Affairs 71:2 (1995) 339-356.
Michael Brecher: “International Studies in the Twentieth Century and Beyond: Flawed Dichotomies, Synthesis, Cumulation,” International Studies Quarterly, Vol.43, No.2, June 1999.
Michael C. Webb and Stephen D. Krasner, "Hegemonic Stability Theory: An Empirical Assessment," Review of International Studies, April 1989.
Michael E. Brown, Sean M. Lynn-Jones, and Steven E. Miller, eds., Debating the Democratic Peace,Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1996.
Michael F. Glennon, “The New interventionism,” Foreign Affairs, May/June 1999.
Michael Nicholson, ‘What is the Use of International Relations?’ Review of International Studies 26:4 (2000) 183-198.
Michael W. Doyle, ‘Liberalism and World Politics,’ in American Political Science Review 80:4 (1986) 1151-1169.
Michael Walzer: Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations, New York: Basic Books, 1977.
Miles Kahler, ‘Inventing International Relations: International Relations Theory after 1945,’ in New Thinking in International Relations Theory, Michael Doyle and John Ikenberry, eds. (Boulder, CO: Westview press, 1997) 20-53.
Nick Wheeler, ‘Guardian Angel or Global Gangster: A Review of the Ethical Claims of International Society,’ Political Studies 44 (1996) 123-135.
Ole Waever, ‘The Sociology of Not So International a Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations,’ International Organization 52:4 (1998) 687-727.
Paul R. Viotti and Mark V. Kauppi, International Relations and World Politics, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1997.
Paul Viotti and Mark Kauppi, International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism and Beyond (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997) .
Peter H. Gleick, "Water and Conflict," International Security, Vol.18, No.1, Summer 1993.
Peter Mangold, National Security and International Relations, London and New York: Routledge, 1990.
Peter Wilson, ‘Introduction: The Twenty Years’ Crisis and the Category of Idealism in International Relations,’ in Thinkers of the Twenty Years’ Crisis: Inter-war Idealism Reassessed (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995) 1-24.
Peter Wilson,‘The Myth of the “First Great Debate,”’ Review of International Studies 24: special issue (1998) 1-15.
R.B.J. Walker, Inside/outside: International Relations as Political Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993).
Randolph M. Siverson, ‘A Glass Half-Full? No, but Perhaps a Glass Filling: The Contributions of International Politics Research to Policy,’ PS: Political Science and Politics (March 2000).
Raymond Cohen, ‘Pacific Unions: A Reappraisal of the Theory that “Democracies do not go to War with Each Other,”’ Review of International Studies 20:3 (1994) 207-223.
Rey Koslowski and Friedrich V. Kratochwil, ‘Understanding Change in International Politics: The Soviet Empire’s Demise and the International System,’ International Organization 48:2 (1994) 215-247.
Richard Clutterbuck, Terrorism in an Unstable World, London: Routledge, 1994.
Richard Devetak, ‘Postmodernism,’ in Theories of International Relations, Scott Burchill et al (London: Macmillan, 1996) 179-209.
Richard Falk, Predatory Globalisation: A Critique (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000) intro & chapter 1.
Richard Ned Lebow and Thomas Risse-Kappen, eds., International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995).
Richard Ned Lebow, ‘The Long Peace, the End of the Cold War and the Failure of Realism,’ International Organization 48:2 (1994) 249-277. 6 [re-published in International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War, Lebow and Risse-Kappen, eds.]
Richard Wyn Jones, Security, Strategy and Critical Theory (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1999).
Robert Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).
Robert L. Rothstein, ‘On the Costs of Realism,’ in Political Science Quarterly 87:3 (1972) 347-362.
Robert O. Keohane and Joesph S. Nye, Jr, ‘Realism and Complex Interdependence,’ in Paul Viotti and Mark Kauppi, International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism and Beyond (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997) 307-318.
Robert O. Keohane and Joseph Nye, Jr., eds., Transnational Relations and World Politics, Cambridge, MA,: Harvard University Press, 1972.
Robert O. Keohane and Joseph Nye, Jr., Power and Interdependence, Third Edition, New York: Longman, 2000.
Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye Jr., "Globalization: What's New? What's Not? (And So What?)," Foreign Policy, Spring 2000.
Robert O. Keohane, ‘Theory of World Politics: Structural Realism and Beyond,’ in International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism and Beyond, Paul Viotti and Mark Kauppi (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997) 153-183.
Robert O. Keohane, ed., Neorealism and Its Critics, New York: Columbia University Press, 1986.
Robert Powell, “Anarchy in International Relations Theory: The Neorealist-Neoliberal Debate,” International Organization, Spring 1994.
Robert W. Cox with Timothy Sinclair, Approaches to World Order, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).
Robert W. Cox, ‘Civil Society at the Turn of the Millennium: Prospects for an Alternative World Order,’ Review of International Studies 25:1 (1999) 3-28.
Robert W. Cox, ‘Realism, Positivism and Historicism,’ in Approaches to World Order, Robert W. Cox with Timothy Sinclair (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 49-59.
Robert W. Cox, ‘Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory,’ in Approaches to World Order, Robert W. Cox with Timothy Sinclair (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 85-123.
Robert W. Cox, Production, Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987).
Roger Carey and Trevor C. Salmon, International Security in the Modern World, New York City, St. Martin's Press, 1992.
Roger Epp, ‘The English School on the Frontiers of International Society; A Hermeneutic Recollection,’ Review of International Studies 24: special issue (1998) 47-63.
S. D. Krasner, ed., International Regime, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press, 1983.
Samuel P. Huntington, "The Lonely Superpower," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 78, No. 2, March/April 1999.
Scott Burchill et al, Theories of International Relations, (London: Macmillan, 1996).
Scott Burchill, ‘Introduction,’ in Theories of International Relations, Scott Burchill et al (London: Macmillan, 1996) 1-27.
Scott Burchill, ‘Realism and Neorealism,’ Theories of International Relations, Scott Burchill et al (London: Macmillan, 1996) 67-92.
Stanley Hoffman, ‘An American Social Science: International Relations (1977)," in International Theory: Critical Investigations, James Der Derian, ed. (London: Macmillan, 1995).
Stephen Hobden and Richard Wyn Jones, ‘Marxist Theories of International Relations,’ in The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, 2nd ed., John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) 200-223.
Stephen Van Evera, "Hypotheses on Nationalism and War," International Security, Vol.18, No.4, Spring 1994.
Stephen Walt, ‘The Renaissance of Security Studies,’ International Studies Quarterly (1991) 211-239.
Steve Smith, ‘The Self Images of a Discipline: A Genealogy of International Relations Theory,’ in International Relations Theory Today, Ken Booth and Steve Smith, eds. (Oxford: Polity, 1995) 1-37.
Steve Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski, eds., International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).
Steve Smith, 'Power and Truth: A Reply to William Wallace,' Review of International Studies 23:4 (1997) 507-516.
Steven L. Lamy, ‘Contemporary Mainstream Approaches: Neo-realism and Neo-liberalism,’ in The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, 2nd ed., John Baylis and Steve Smith, eds. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) 182-199.
Steven Weber, ‘Institutions and Change,’ in New Thinking in International Relations Theory, Michael Doyle and John Ikenberry, eds. (Boulder, CO: Westview press, 1997) 229-265.
Tarak Barkawi and Mark Laffey, ‘The Imperial Peace: Democracy, Force and Globalisation,’ European Journal of International Relations 5:4 (1999) 403-434.
Theda Skocpol, ‘Wallerstein’s World Capitalist System: A Theoretical and Historical Critique,’ American Journal of Sociology 82:5 (1977) 1075-1090.
Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960/1980.
Thomas F. Homer-Dixon, "Environmental Scarcities and Violent Conflict," International Security, Vol.19, No.1, Summer 1994.
Thomas F. Homer-Dixon, "On the Threshold," International Security, Vol.16, No.2, Fall 1991.
Thomas Risse-Kappen, ‘Ideas do not Float Freely: Transnational Coalitions, Domestic Structures, and the End of the Cold War,’ International Organization 48:2 (1994) 185-214.
Tim Dunne, ‘The Social Construction of International Society,’ European Journal of International Relations, 1: 3 (1995) 367-389.
Tim Dunne, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1998).
Van Evera, “Offense, Defense and the Causes of War,” International Security, Vol.22, No.4, Spring 1998.
Vendulka Kubálková, Nicholas Onuf and Paul Kowert, eds., International Relations in a Constructed World (New York: M.E. Sharpe, 1998).
Wendy Lambourne: “Humanitarian Intervention—Has Anything Really Changed?” Pacific Research, February 1994.
William Robinson, Promoting Polyarchy: Globalization, US Intervention and Hegemony (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).
William Wallace, ‘Between Two Worlds: Think-tanks and Foreign Policy’ in Two Worlds of International Relations: Academics, Practitioners and the Trade in Ideas, Christopher Hill & Pamela Beshoff, eds. (London: Routledge, 1994) 139-163.
William Wallace, 'Truth and Power, Monks and Technocrats: Theory and Practice in International Relations,' Review of International Studies 22:3 (1996) 301-321.
Yale H. Ferguson, et al., "What Is the Polity? A Roundtable," International Studies Review, Vol.2, Issue 1, Spring 2000.
John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001. |
|