Topics in International Relations

Course code: IRS270

Semester and year: Spring 2025

Day and time: Tuesday, 15:30-18:15

Instructor: Pamir Halimzai Sahill, Ph.D.

Instructor contact: pamir.halimzai@aauni.edu

Consultation hours: On Mondays 18:00-18:30, and Tuesdays 14:30-15:15 CET at Faculty Lounge/Teams. The students will need to email to arrange a consultation meeting. 

Credits US/ECTS	3/6	Level	Advanced
Length	15 weeks	Pre-requisite	IRS 200 (IR theories)
Contact hours	42 hours	Course type	Bachelor Required

1.     Course Description

This course builds on the theoretical knowledge gained in the Introduction to International Relations course by applying learned theory to empirical reality through discussion of particular IR topics, cases and phenomena. This way, the course serves as a testing “laboratory” for students to see “how it’s done,” how does theory connect to reality.

The course is an advanced IR course, in seminar format, with the bulk of work focused on IR topics/cases and comparison of their analysis from particular theoretical perspectives, to demonstrate to students the given theory’s logic and argumentation, work with data, operationalization of theoretical concepts etc.

2.     Student Learning Outcomes

Upon completion of this course, students should be able to:

• understand the structure of research papers and case studies i.e., be able to identify article organization such as research question, literature review, problem justification, and their function
• identify theoretical perspective, its basic assumptions and concepts used, follow logic of argumentation, identify their operationalization into real life data if applicable, conclusions and limitations
• develop and refine critical thinking skills i.e., be able to identify principles (basic theory assumptions and defined concepts) and comparatively weigh the strengths and drawbacks of given theoretical perspective in their application to topics/cases
• form one’s opinion on discussed topic backed by theoretical perspective

3.     Reading Materials

• Buzan, Barry (2010): “China in International Society: Is ‘Peaceful Rise’ Possible?”, The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 3: 5-36
• Chandler, David, Cudworth, Erika and Stephen Hobden (2018): “Anthropocene, Capitalocene and Liberal Cosmopolitan IR: A Response to Burke et al.’s ‘Planet Politics’”, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 46(2): 190-208
• Cox, Michael (1998): “The End of the Cold War and Why We Failed to Predict It”, in Hunter, Allen (ed.) Rethinking the Cold War, Philadelphia: Temple University Press: 157-174
• Dodds, Klaus (2007): “Steve Bell’s Eye: Cartoons, Geopolitics and the Visualization of the ‘War on Terror’”, Security Dialogue, 38(2): 157-177
• Dunne, Timothy, Kurki, Milja, and Smith, Steve, (2013). International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. (3. ed.) Oxford University Press.
• Foucault, Michel, (2009), Security, Territory, Population. Edited by Michel Senellart, François Ewald, and Alessandro Fontana. Translated by Graham Burchell. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Chapter/Lecture 1 – pp. 1-28
• Gotz, Elias (2015): “It’s Geopolitics, Stupid: Explaining Russia’s Ukraine Policy”, Global Affairs, 1(1): 3-10
• Ikenberry, John G. (2011): “The Rise of the American System”, in Liberal Leviathan. The Origins, Crisis and Transformation of the American World Order, Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press: 159-219
• Kaldor, Mary (2005) “New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era.” In: Diehl, Paul F., ed., War, vol. I. London: Sage, 365-397.
• Lanoskza, Alexander (2016) “Russian Hybrid Warfare and Extended Deterrence in Eastern Europe.” International Affairs 92:1. 175-195.
• Lindsay, Jon (2013) Stuxnet and the Limits of Cyber Warfare. Security Studies, 22. 365-404.
• Mearsheimer, John J. (1994-95): “The False Promise of International Institutions”, International Security, 19(3): 5-49
• Reid, Julian (2020): “Constructing Human vs. Non-Human Climate Migration in the Anthropocene: The Case of Migrating Polar Bears in Nanavut, Canada”, Anthropocenes – Human, Inhuman, Posthuman 1(1): 1-12
• Schmidt, Brian C. and Williams, Michael C., (2008): “The Bush Doctrine and the Iraq War: Neoconservatives Versus Realists”, Security Studies, 17(2): 191-220
• Strange, Susan (1999): “The Westfailure System”, Review of International Studies 25(3): 345-354

4.     Teaching methodology

The course will be a seminar alternating between the lecturer and the student leading the discussion of the readings on a given topic. Each standard session will involve dissecting, comparing, and contrasting the two different texts for the day; as well as discussing the topic/event at the center of the analyses and engaging in analysis of that topic/event.

5.     Course Schedule

Date	Class Agenda
February 04, 2025	Topic: Introduction and Course Preparation Description: We will discuss the course contents, assignments, and settle on the schedule. Reading: Dunne, Timothy, Kurki, Milja, and Smith, Steve, (2013). International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. (3. ed.) Oxford University Press. Introduction and Chapter 1 (pp. 1-35). Assignments/deadlines: None
February 11, 2025	Topic: The Connection of Events Description: The lecture discusses the significance and importance of Cold War within the discipline of IR and its unexpected or sudden end. The session then moves on to analyze the Westphalian system and its “failures”. Finally, a critique of the western-centric nature of IR as a discipline is offered within the context of the topics it focuses on and (un)intentionally omits. Reading: Cox, Michael, “The End of the Cold War and Why We Failed to Predict It”; Strange, Susan, “The Westfailure System”; and Dunne, Timothy, et. al. Introduction and Chapter 1 (pp. 1-35). Assignments/deadlines: Students begin thinking about their B session presentations. We will discuss that further after the lecture.
February 18, 2025	Topic: Post-Cold War Global Order- Institutions A Description: Lecture. The session explores the post-Cold War international system, unipolarity, the dawn of the so-called “end of history” moment, and its (neo)realist critique. Reading: Ikenberry, John G., “The Rise of the American System”; and Mearsheimer, John J., “The False Promise of International Institutions” Assignments/deadlines: B readings and preparation for the surprise quiz.
February 25, 2025	Topic: Post-Cold War Global Order- Institutions B Description: Students’ presentations. Reading: Provided by students, uploaded to NEO’s Students’ Readings folder. Assignments/deadlines: Presentation.
March 04, 2025	Topic: The War on Terror A Description: Lecture. The session focuses on how the global war on terror (GWoT) was launched and expanded from two theoretical perspectives and presents a holistic, critical analysis.  Reading: Dodds, Klaus, “Steve Bell’s Eye: Cartoons, Geopolitics and the Visualization of the ‘War on Terror’”; and Schmidt, Brian C. and Williams, Michael C., “The Bush Doctrine and the Iraq War: Neoconservatives Versus Realists” Assignments/deadlines: B readings. Students keep an eye on NEO for the surprise quiz.
March 11, 2025	Topic: The War on Terror B Description: Students’ presentations. Reading: Provided by students, uploaded to NEO’s Students’ Readings folder. Assignments/deadlines: Presentation
March 18, 2025	Mid-term Exam.
March 25-28, 2025	Reading: Buzan, Barry, “China in International Society: Is ‘Peaceful Rise’ Possible?”; and Gotz, Elias, “It’s Geopolitics, Stupid: Explaining Russia’s Ukraine Policy” Assignments/deadlines: Students submit readings for B sessions for April 08, April 22, and May 06 by March 29, 11:59 (23:59) CET.
April 01, 2025	Topic: Changes in Power and Capabilities- Russia and China A Description: Lecture. The session discusses the notion of “multipolarity” particularly focusing on the rise of China and Russia and their geostrategic, geopolitical, and economic ambitions and strategies. Reading: Buzan, Barry, “China in International Society: Is ‘Peaceful Rise’ Possible?”; and Gotz, Elias, “It’s Geopolitics, Stupid: Explaining Russia’s Ukraine Policy” Assignments/deadlines: B readings, students prepare their presentations.
April 08, 2025	Topic: Changes in Power and Capabilities- Russia and China B Description: Students’ presentations. Reading: Provided by students, uploaded to NEO’s Students’ Readings folder. Assignments/deadlines: Presentation. Students prepare for the surprise quiz.
April 15, 2025	Topic: Gray Zone Warfare A Description: Lecture. The session will map a short history outlining the distinction between the “old” and “new” wars, the politics of war in the current global age, and will offer a critical analysis with the help of an array of cases including the wars in Ukraine, the Middle East, and in Africa. Reading: Kaldor, Mary, “New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era”; and Lanoskza, Alexander, “Russian Hybrid Warfare and Extended Deterrence in Eastern Europe” Assignments/deadlines: B readings, students prepare their presentations.
April 22, 2025	Topic: Gray Zone Warfare B Description: Students’ presentations. Reading: Provided by students, uploaded to NEO’s Students’ Readings folder. Assignments/deadlines: Presentation
April 29, 2025	Topic: Climate Change A Description: Lecture. In this multi/interdisciplinary session, first the terms “Anthropocene” and “Capitalocene” are defined and discussed, before bringing them back within the IR/ir context(s). The lecture, with the help of cases, will also explore how indigenous knowledge clashes with the policies of contemporary state(s), and the politics of climate change. Reading: Reid, Julian, “Constructing Human vs. Non-Human Climate Migration in the Anthropocene: The Case of Migrating Polar Bears in Nanavut, Canada”; and Chandler, David, Cudworth, Erika and Stephen Hobden, “Anthropocene, Capitalocene and Liberal Cosmopolitan IR: A Response to Burke et al.’s ‘Planet Politics’” Assignments/deadlines: B readings
May 06, 2025	Topic: Climate Change B Description: Students’ presentations. Reading: Provided by students, uploaded to NEO’s Students’ Readings folder. Assignments/deadlines: Presentation
May 13, 2025	Topic: Artificial Intelligence and the future of governmentality and security Description: Lecture. The session discusses the future of practicing security and the (near) future changes of governmentality with their impact on international system/relations. Reading: Foucault, Michel, (2009), Security, Territory, Population. Edited by Michel Senellart, François Ewald, and Alessandro Fontana. Translated by Graham Burchell. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Chapter/Lecture 1 (pp. 1-28) Assignments/deadlines: Surprise quiz.

6.     Course Requirements and Assessment (with estimated workloads)

Assignment	Workload (average)	Weight in Final Grade	Evaluated Course Specific Learning Outcomes	Evaluated ILOs*
Participation	25	20%	Understand paper structure, Identify theoretical perspective, assumptions, define concepts Practice critical thinking	1, 2
B Session Presentations	65	35%	Understand paper structure, Identify theoretical perspective, assumptions, define concepts Practice and refine critical thinking Form one’s opinion on topic Communicating ideas, polishing presenting and public speaking skills	1, 2, 3
Surprise Quizzes	20	15%	Identify theoretical perspective, assumptions, define concepts Practice and refine critical thinking Form one’s opinion on topic	1, 2, 3
Mid-term Exam	40	30%	Identify theoretical perspective, assumptions, define concepts Theory-driven work Refine critical thinking Communicating opinions clearly	1, 2
TOTAL	150	100%

*1 = Critical Thinking; 2 = Effective Communication; 3 = Effective and Responsible Action

 

7.     Detailed description of the assignments

• B Session Presentations:

The course will focus on 5 topics/events beginning in session 3. For each topic, there is an A and B session. For each B session, the student must prepare a presentation on two academic works from two different theoretical perspectives that are relevant to the stated topic. The student must email the readings to the lecturer by the end of the relevant A session i.e., one week before the presentation. During the mid-term break, the students will submit readings for all the remaining B sessions by March 29, 11:59pm/23:59 CET. 

The student should be able to summarize the arguments of each text, compare and contrast them, and discuss their strengths and weaknesses in relation to theory, argumentation, and application to the topic. For every academic paper, the student will have 7 minutes to present. This means that each presentation will be 14-minute long. 

If a student is absent for an unexcused reason on the day of their presentation, they will receive an automatic failure of the assignment.

The student’s grade is based on the degree of understanding of the texts, arguments, and theories, and their ability to engage in informed discussion utilizing the texts.

Assessment Breakdown

Assessed area	Percentage
Technical: 1.                  being present 2.                  being prepared being within time/structure limits	50%
Substantive: 1.                  demonstrating knowledge of the theories 2.                  ability to utilize this knowledge in a clear, concise, well- structured manner 3.                  ability to engage critically with the texts and theories 4.                  ability to defend own argument staying on topic	50%
Total	100%

•  Mid-term Exam:

The mid-term exam will include questions from lectures and Session A readings. The exam will have two parts. The first, worth 40% amount, will have multiple choice questions (MCQs) and/or short answers, and the second part will be comprised of two essay questions, having 60% weightage of the total marks. 

For the essay questions, students will be provided with a passage from two academic papers. The students will identify theoretical perspective(s), assumptions, define concepts and will offer a comprehensive, critical analysis along with their personal opinions. Each essay answer should be between 700 and 750 words long. Not following the word-limit will result in receiving a lower grade. The exam session lasts for 120 minutes. After the allotted time, the exam will not be available. 

The exam will be given online to all students via NEO on March 18, 2025, at 15:35 (3:35 pm) CET. All students must be present during the exam in the classroom and remote students will be taking it via Teams with their cameras on throughout the session. 

All students must bring their laptops to the class so that they can access NEO. 

If an on-site student cannot attend the exam due to a justified (and excused) reason, they will take it on campus on a different date, otherwise, they will receive an automatic failure for the assignment. 

Assessment breakdown

Assessed area	Percentage
Identify theoretical perspective, assumptions, define concepts	40%
Theory driven analysis along with clearly communicating ideas and opinions	35%
Polishing critical thinking	25%
Total	100%

• Surprise Quizzes:

Apart from discussing reading assignments each week, surprise quizzes will be given to students from readings and lectures. These will be MCQs, and/or short answers, in written form. All surprise quizzes will be given to all students via NEO. All quizzes must be answered during the allotted time in class, at campus (and via Teams if the student is taking the course remotely). 

Assessment breakdown

Assessed area	Percentage
Identify theoretical perspective, assumptions, define concepts	50%
Practice and refine critical thinking	25%
Form one’s opinion on topic	25%
Total	100%

•  Participation:

Attending and participating in class is one of the best ways to gain an understanding of the course topic and material. Participation is premised on having read the assignments for that particular day and actively engaging in the class discussion. 

Participation does not mean speaking for the sake of speaking, asking questions that are off topic, criticizing another person for not understanding something, carrying on a private conversation with another student. Participation does mean contributing thoughtfully to the conversation or debate, asking questions if something is not understood, honestly attempting to answer a question even if you are not sure you are correct. 

The student’s grade will be based on the quantity and quality of participation.

Assessment Breakdown:

Assessed area	Percentage
Technical: 1.       Being present	0%
Substantive: 1.                  engaging in the class discussion 2.                  attempting to answer questions 3.                  asking questions when something is not understood 4.                  refraining from talking off topic 5.                  refraining from talking with individual students outside the bounds of the class discussion 6.                  refraining from using phones refraining from using computers for non-class purposes	100%
Total	100%

 

8.     General Requirements and School Policies

General requirements

All coursework is governed by AAU’s academic rules. Students are expected to be familiar with the academic rules in the Academic Codex and Student Handbook and to maintain the highest standards of honesty and academic integrity in their work.

Electronic communication and submission

The university and instructors shall only use students’ university email address for communication, with additional communication via NEO LMS or Microsoft Teams. Students sending e-mail to an instructor shall clearly state the course code and the topic in the subject heading, for example, “COM101-1 Mid-term Exam. Question”.

 

All electronic submissions are through NEO LMS. No substantial pieces of writing (especially take-home exams and essays) can be submitted outside of NEO LMS.

Attendance

Attendance, i.e., presence in class in real-time, at AAU courses is default mandatory; however, it is not graded as such. (Grades may be impacted by missed assignments or lack of participation.) Still, students must attend at least two thirds of classes to complete the course. If they do not meet this condition and most of their absences are excused, they will be administratively withdrawn from the course. If they do not meet this condition and most of their absences are not excused, they will receive a grade of “FW” (Failure to Withdraw). Students may also be marked absent if they miss a significant part of a class (for example by arriving late or leaving early).

Absence excuse and make-up options

Should a student be absent from classes for relevant reasons (illness, serious family matters), and the student wishes to request that the absence be excused, the student should submit an Absence Excuse Request Form supplemented with documents providing reasons for the absence to the Dean of Students within one week of the absence. Each student may excuse up to two sick days per term without any supporting documentation; however, an Absence Excuse Request Form must still be submitted for these instances. If possible, it is recommended the instructor be informed of the absence in advance. Should a student be absent during the add/drop period due to a change in registration this will be an excused absence if s/he submits an Absence Excuse Request Form along with the finalized add/drop form.

 

Students whose absence has been excused by the Dean of Students are entitled to make up assignments and exams provided their nature allows. Assignments missed due to unexcused absences which cannot be made up, may result in a decreased or failing grade as specified in the syllabus.

 

Students are responsible for contacting their instructor within one week of the date the absence was excused to arrange for make-up options.

Late work: No late submissions will be accepted – please follow the deadlines.

Electronic devices

Laptops, tablets, and mobile phones are forbidden from being used in class. Use of any of these devices in class will result in the student losing all participation points for the day. Repeated use will result in failure of the participation component for the semester. No electronic devices may be used during tests or exams.

Eating is not allowed during classes.

Cheating and disruptive behavior

If a student engages in disruptive conduct unsuitable for a classroom environment, the instructor may require the student to withdraw from the room for the duration of the class and shall report the behavior to the student’s Dean.

Students engaging in behavior which is suggestive of cheating will, at a minimum, be warned. In the case of continued misconduct, the student will fail the exam or assignment and be expelled from the exam or class.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism obscures the authorship of a work or the degree of its originality. Students are expected to create and submit works of which they are the author. Plagiarism can apply to all works of authorship – verbal, audiovisual, visual, computer programs, etc. Examples are:

• Verbatim plagiarism: verbatim use of another’s work or part of it without proper acknowledgement of the source and designation as a verbatim quotation,
• Paraphrasing plagiarism: paraphrasing someone else’s work or part of it
• without proper acknowledgement of the source,
• Data plagiarism: use of other people’s data without proper
• acknowledgement of the source,
• False quotation: publishing a text that is not a verbatim quotation as a verbatim quotation,
• Fictitious citation: quoting, paraphrasing, or referring to an incorrect or a non-existent work,
• Inaccurate citation: citing sources in such a way that they cannot be found and verified,
• Ghostwriting: commissioning work from others and passing it off as one’s
• own,
• Patchwriting: using someone else’s work or works (albeit with proper acknowledgement of sources and proper attribution) to such an extent that the output contains almost no original contribution,
• Self-plagiarism: unacknowledged reuse of one’s own work (or part of it) that has been produced or submitted as part of another course of study or that has been published in the past,
• Collaborative plagiarism: delivering the result of collective collaboration as one’s own individual output.

At minimum, plagiarism will result in a failing grade for the assignment and shall be reported to the student’s Dean. A mitigating circumstance may be the case of novice students, and the benefit of the doubt may be given if it is reasonable to assume that the small-scale plagiarism was the result of ignorance rather than intent. An aggravating circumstance in plagiarism is an act intended to make the plagiarism more difficult to detect. Such conduct includes, for example, the additional modification of individual words or phrases, the creation of typos, the use of machine translation tools or the creation of synonymous text, etc. The Dean may initiate a disciplinary procedure pursuant to the Academic Codex. Intentional or repeated plagiarism always entail disciplinary hearing and may result in expulsion from AAU.

Use of Artificial Intelligence and Academic Tutoring Center

USE OF AI IS PROHIBITED IN THIS COURSE AND WILL LEAD TO FAILURE OF THE SUBMITTED WORK.

 

If unsure about technical aspects of writing, and to improve their academic writing, students are encouraged to consult with the tutors of the AAU Academic Tutoring Center. For more information and/or to book a tutor, please contact the ATC at: http://atc.simplybook.me/sheduler/manage/event/1/.

Course accessibility and inclusion

Students with disabilities should contact the Dean of Students to discuss reasonable accommodations. Academic accommodations are not retroactive.

Students who will be absent from course activities due to religious holidays may seek reasonable accommodations by contacting the Dean of Students in writing within the first two weeks of the term. All requests must include specific dates for which the student requests accommodations.

9.     Grading Scale

 

Letter Grade	Percentage*	Description
A	95 – 100	Excellent performance. The student has shown originality and displayed an exceptional grasp of the material and a deep analytical understanding of the subject.
A–	90 – 94
B+	87 – 89	Good performance. The student has mastered the material, understands the subject well and has shown some originality of thought and/or considerable effort.
B	83 – 86
B–	80 – 82
C+	77 – 79	Fair performance. The student has acquired an acceptable understanding of the material and essential subject matter of the course but has not succeeded in translating this understanding into consistently creative or original work.
C	73 – 76
C–	70 – 72
D+	65 – 69	Poor. The student has shown some understanding of the material and subject matter covered during the course. The student’s work, however, has not shown enough effort or understanding to allow for a passing grade in School Required Courses. It does qualify as a passing mark for the General College Courses and Electives.
D	60 – 64
F	0 – 59	Fail. The student has not succeeded in mastering the subject matter covered in the course.

* Decimals should be rounded to the nearest whole number. 

Prepared by and when: Dr. Pamir H. Sahill   January 14, 2025.

Approved by and when:  Dr. George Hays II  January 25, 2025.