8
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OF LATIN AMERICA
Political Science 2484/Section 10
Spring 2012
Syllabus is final only through February 16
COURSE INFORMATION
CRN 60460
Time: T and R 2:20-3:35
Location: Gov 101
INSTRUCTOR
Prof. Cynthia McClintock
Office: Monroe 407
Tel: (202) 994-6589
E-mail:
Office hours: W 2:30-4:45 (and by appointment)
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The United States has been the preponderant power in the hemisphere since the early twentieth century. Prior to the midterm, we explore U.S. policies toward the region during the twentieth century and explanations for these policies. In particular, during the Cold War, the U.S. and the USSR were considered the world’s two powers and the U.S. was concerned about challenges presented by the USSR in Latin America. We assess to what extent U.S. policies reflected security threats by the USSR and to what extent economic concerns, democracy concerns, and/or features of the U.S. policy-making process.
After the midterm, we explore the evolution of the power configuration in the hemisphere in the 2000s. Is the hemisphere unipolar? Does the U.S. remain preponderant? Has China become the second most important power in the region? Does China present an opportunity, or a threat, similar in some respects to the USSR during the Cold War? Are Brazil, Venezuela, and Mexico significant “middle powers”? What does the rise of China and Latin American nations mean for U.S. goals in the hemisphere? Is the U.S. achieving its goals on key issues of the hemispheric agenda (the “war on drugs,” interstate cooperation, climate change, and democratization)?
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
As a result of completing this course, students will:
- Know trends in U.S.-Latin American relations, in the roles of extra-hemispheric actors in the region, and the roles of Latin American nations in the global arena
- Understand the variety of scholarly explanations for U.S. policy in the hemisphere
- Analyze key policy issues relevant to the region more effectively
- Know key sources for knowledge on the international relations of Latin America
- Be able to make more cogent analytical arguments
GRADE COMPUTATION
1. Midterm exam (25%).
2. Final exam (40%). (In accord with GWU policy, the final exam will be on the officially scheduled date, not during the last week of the semester.)
3. Research paper (25%). (See below for guidelines.)
4. Attendance and participation (10%). For students who make regular, positive contributions to class discussion and/or electronic debate on Blackboard, additional points may be given.
RESEARCH PAPER GUIDELINES
Each student will submit to the professor a hard copy of the paper, which is to be a maximum of 2,250 words or 7 pages, excluding bibliography (with a 12-point font and 1 inch margins), which responds to one of the questions under a class heading in the syllabus. Excessive length will be penalized. The student is to address the question as specifically as possible; detailed historical background is not to be provided. To the extent possible, alternative arguments should be rebutted. The “/” mark in the questions indicates that students should choose their position and/or can choose among the specified options. If a student would like to modify the question, s/he should consult the professor. This paper is to be carefully researched and documented, using recommended works from PSC 2484 as well as additional readings. Not only direct quotes but also paraphrased text and ideas taken from a source must be cited. Also, statistics that may vary by source should be cited. For assistance with proper citation, visit the Writing Center (http://www.gwu.edu/~gwriter).
Students who advise the professor of their intent to present their paper in the relevant class by 5:00 pm on the Friday before the class, post the paper on “Discussions” in Blackboard by noon the day before the relevant class, and present their paper in the relevant class will receive 5 additional points on their grade for the paper. (When a topic spans two dates, the second date is “the relevant class.”) The amount of time for the paper presentation will vary depending on the number of students presenting and other factors, but will usually be about 7 minutes. The deadline for students who do not present their paper in the relevant class is April 26.
CLASS POLICIES
Late work: 2 points will be subtracted from a grade for the first hour that a paper is late; after one day, an additional 3 points will be subtracted for each day that a paper is late.
Religious holiday: Please notify me if you must be absent due to a religious holiday.
Computer use: Computers are to be used only for taking notes. The professor will observe any student permanently riveted to his/her computer screen and query him/her.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
Remember that paraphrased text from a source must be cited. Academic honesty policies (http://www.gwu.edu/~ntegrity/code.html) will be strictly enforced. Visit http://www.gwu.edu/~gwriter for further assistance.
TEXTS
LaRosa, Michael and Mora, F. O. (eds.), Neighborly Adversaries: Readings in U.S.-Latin American Relations. (Rowman and Littlefield, 2nd ed). F1418.N397 (L & M)
Lowenthal, A.F., et. al. (eds.), The Obama Administration and the Americas: Agenda for
Change. (Bookings, 2009). JZ1480.A53S55 2010
Smith, Peter, Talons of the Eagle (Oxford, 2008). 3rd ed. F1418.365 2008
Current History, February 2012 issue (CH).
ADDITIONAL READINGS
Required book chapters and articles are available on "Electronic Reserves" on Blackboard. Recommended materials that are also on “Electronic Reserves” are indicated by the symbol BB. Other recommended articles are available through "e-journal title finder" at the Aladin home page of Gelman. Some journal titles are abbreviated: FP=Foreign Policy, FA=Foreign Affairs; JLAS=Journal of Latin American Studies; World Politics=WP. Recommended books are at the Reserve Desk in Gelman.
Also, students should be up-to-date on events and issues. Valuable sources available through Gelman e-journals are The New York Times (NYT), The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Economist, the Latin American Weekly Report and the Latin American Regional Report. Recommended websites are the U.S. Dept. of State (www.state.gov) and: 1) center, center-right: www.miami.edu/chp; csis.org; 2) center, center-left: thedialogue.org, crisisgroup.org; 3) center-left, left: ciponline.org, wola.org, lawg.org, coha.org, cepr.net. Readings in Spanish and Portuguese from periodicals based in Latin America are also encouraged; a good website is http://lanic.utexas.edu.
JAN. 17 INTRODUCTION
Smith, pp. 10-11.
PART ONE
U.S.-LATIN AMERICAN RELATIONS IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY
JAN. 19 EXPLANATIONS FOR U.S. POLICY TOWARD LATIN AMERICA: THE CASE OF MEXICO DURING WWI and WW2
Smith, pp. 56-59.
L & M, Ch. 14.
Nau, H.R. Perspectives on International Relations, pp. 20-33.
Hayes, M.D., “Dimensions of U.S. Security Interests in LA,” Latin America and the U.S. National Interest, pp. 219-236.
Reid, M., The Forgotten Continent, pp. 35-40.
Molineu, H., U.S. Policy Toward Latin America, pp. 135-140.
Sloan, J., “U.S. Policy Responses to the Mexican Revolution,” JLAS Vol. 10, No. 2 (Nov. 1978), pp. 283-295 and 300-308.
Recommended:
Smith, pp. 18-56.
Dominguez, J.I., “U.S.-Latin American Relations During the Cold War and Aftermath,” in Bulmer-Thomas et. al. (eds.), The U.S. and Latin America…, Ch. 2 BB
Vasquez, J.A., Classics of International Relations, Chs. 16, 17 (Morgenthau, Wolfers)BB
Kegley, C.W. and Wittkopf, American Foreign Policy: Patterns and Processes, 4th ed., pp. 280-288, 480-489, 494-504. BB
Harrison, B.T., “Chandler Anderson and Business Interests in Mexico,” Inter-American Economic Affairs (Winter 1979), pp. 3-23.
JAN. 24 U.S. POLICY TOWARD BOLIVIA AND GUATEMALA IN THE EARLY 1950s
RESEARCH PAPER: Why did the United States choose accommodation with Bolivia but confrontation with Guatemala?
L & M, pp. 1-6, 51-53, Chs.15 and 16.
Smith, pp. 69-80, 113-128, 149-153.
Rabe, S.O., Eisenhower and Latin America, pp. 42-64 and 77-83.
Recommended:
Lehman, K., “Revolutions and Attributions: Making Sense of Eisenhower Administration Policies in Bolivia and Guatemala,” Diplomatic History, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Spring 1997), pp. 185-213. BB
JAN. 26 THE U.S. AND CUBA, l958-l962
RESEARCH PAPER: Was Fidel Castro’s Cuba a “dagger in the heart” OR a “thorn in the side”? AND/OR Between January and June 1961, what policy [specify a policy] should President Kennedy have pursued to defuse the threat?
Smith, pp. 128-131 and 153-157.
L & M, Ch. 17.
Blasier, C., “The Giant’s Rival: The USSR and Latin America, Ch. 6.
“CIA Bares Its Bungling,” NYT 2/22/98.
Recommended:
Miller, N., Soviet Relations with Latin America, 1959-1987, Ch. 5 F1416.S65M55 1989
Paterson, T., Contesting Castro, Ch. 22. E183.8.C9 P36 1994
Wyden, P. Bay of Pigs, pp. 19-31, 93-114, 146-152, 313-327. #F1788.W9
Gleijeses, P., "Ships in the Night: The CIA, the White House, and the Bay of Pigs," JLAS Vol. 27, Part 1 (February 1995), pp. 1-42. BB
JAN. 31 THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION AND U.S. POLICY TOWARDS CHILE, l970-l973
RESEARCH PAPER: The national security explanation is/is not the best explanation for U.S. policy toward Chile 1970-73.
Smith, pp. 136-147 and 161-167.
Nogee, J.L., & Sloan, J.W., “Allende’s Chile and the Soviet Union,” Journal of InterAmerican Studies and World Affairs, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Aug. 1979), pp. 339-368.
Fagen, R., “The United States and Chile: Roots and Branches,” FA, Vol. 53, No. 2 (Jan.1975), pp. 297-313.
Hersh, S., The Price of Power: Kissinger in ... White House, pp. 270-276.
Lowenthal, A., “The United States and Latin America: Ending the Hegemonic Presumption,” FA 55, 1 (Oct. 1976), pp. 199-213.
Recommended:
L & M, Ch. 18.
The films “Frost-Nixon” and "Missing”
Sigmund, P., The U.S. and Democracy in Chile, Ch. 3 and 9. E183.8.C4; S57 1993
Maxwell, K., "The Other 9/11" FA (Nov.-Dec. 2003), pp. 147-151 & subsequent debate between Rogers and Maxwell, FA (Jan-Feb. ‘04), pp. 160-165.
FEB. 2 THE CARTER ADMINISTRATION: HUMAN RIGHTS AND U.S. POLICY TOWARDS NICARAGUA
RESEARCH PAPER: Could/could not the Carter administration have prevented the taking of power by the Sandinistas? (If so, how might the administration have done so most effectively [specify policy]?
Smith, pp. 145-147, 186, 191-194 and 198-199.
L & M, Ch. 19.
Booth, J.A., et. al., Understanding Central America, pp. 69-76.
McClintock, C., Revolutionary Movements in Latin America, 216-221.
Recommended:
Arnson, C. Crossroads: Congress, the President, and Central America, 1976-1993, 2nd ed., Ch. 2. F14136.8UA76
Sikkink, K., Mixed Signals: U.S. Human Rights Policy and Latin America, Ch. 6.
JC 599.L3 S55 2004
Lake, A., Somoza Falling, Ch. 13. #E183.8.N5.L35 1990
Smith, T., America's Mission, pp. 239-252 and 260-265. E744.S588 1994 BB
FEB. 7 THE REAGAN AND BUSH ADMINISTRATIONS AND U.S. POLICY TOWARD NICARAGUA AND EL SALVADOR
RESEARCH PAPER: Was the Reagan administration’s policy towards Nicaragua/El Salvador a failure/a success? (Why? By what criteria?)
Smith, pp. 171-179 & 206-209.
Bischof, H., “The Socialist Countries and Central American Revolutions,” in Grabendorff, W., et. al., Political Change in Central America, pp. 228-244..
McClintock, C., Revolutionary Movements in Latin America, pp. 48-63 & 221-231.
Carothers, T., In the Name of Democracy, pp. 1-1 and 78-111.
Recommended:
Arnson, C., Crossroads: Congress, the President, and Central America, 1976-1993, 2nd ed., Conclusion. F14136.8UA76
Leiken, R.S., “Soviet and Cuban Policy in the Caribbean Basin,” in Schulz, D.E. & G Graham, D.H., Revolution and Counterrevolution in Central America and the Caribbean, pp. 447-478. BB
Peace, R., “Winning Hearts and Minds: The Debate Over U.S. Intervention in Nicaragua,” Peace and Change, Vol. 38, No. 1 (Jan. 2010), pp. 1-38.
FEB. 9 THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, DEMOCRACY PROMOTION, AND U.S. POLICY TOWARD HAITI
RESEARCH PAPER: The Clinton administration’s policy toward Haiti was a failure/a success? [Why? By what criteria?]
Smith, pp. 263-271.
L & M, p. 326.
“Debate: The Haiti Intervention,” FP 102 (Spring 1996), pp. 134-151.
McClintock, C. and Vallas, F., The United States and Peru, pp. 157-160.
Palmer, D.S., U.S. Relations with Latin America During the Clinton Years, pp. 34-36, 47-51 and 65-68.
Recommended:
Lowenthal, Ch. 9.
FEB. 14 THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION AND THE HEMISPHERIC AGENDA IN THE WAKE OF THE COLD WAR
RESEARCH PAPER: The Clinton administration enacted policies that prioritized/did not prioritize trade and economic interests OR During the Clinton administration, there was/was not a lost opportunity for partnership with the Americas.
Smith, pp. 213-240.
Palmer, D.S., U.S. Relations with Latin America During the Clinton Years, pp. 22-34, 36-46, 51-65, and 68-73.
McClintock, C. and Vallas, F., The United States and Peru, pp. 38-49.
Crandall, R., United States and Latin America after the Cold War, Ch. 6.
Mahon, J. & Corrales, F, “Pegged for Failure? Argentina’s Crisis,” CH
(Feb. ’02), pp. 72-80.
Recommended:
Eichengreen, B., “The Globalization Wars,” FA (July-Aug. 2002), pp. 157-164.
FEB. 16 MIDTERM EXAM
PART TWO
THE U.S., CHINA, AND LATIN AMERICA IN THE 2000s
PLEASE NOTE: ASSIGNED READINGS FOR FEB. 22 AND SUBSEQUENTLY WILL BE FINALIZED AFTER THE PUBLICATION OF THE 2012 ISSUE OF CURRENT HISTORY.
FEB. 21-23 POWER DISTRIBUTION IN LATIN AMERICA IN THE 2000s
RESEARCH PAPER: In international relations, the definition of power is [specify a definition] and the criteria for the stipulation of the global distribution of power are [specify criteria] OR During the Bush administration, U.S. power in Latin America eroded/did not erode, but/and to some degree it has/has not been restored under Obama.
Lowenthal, Chs. 1 and 11.
Nye, Altman & Haass, & Gelb, articles in FA (Nov./Dec. ’10), pp. 2-12, 25-43.
Ikenberry, G.J., “The Future of the Liberal World Order,” FA (May/June 2011), pp. 56-68.
Crandall, R., “The Post-American Hemisphere,” FA (May/June 2011), pp. 83-95.
“A new line on democracy?” Wash Post 10/4/10 (op-ed page).
Olson, J., “Latin America in 2010,” testimony at the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 12/1/10.
Recommended:
www.justf.org, for figures on recent U.S. economic and military aid to LA.
Nye, J.S., Jr., “Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power,” FA (July/Aug. 2009), pp. 160-163.
McClintock, C., “U.S. Policy Toward Latin America.” testimony at the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs’ Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, 2/4/09 at http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/111/mcc02409.pdf
FEB. 28- CHINA AND LATIN AMERICA IN THE 2000s
MAR. 1
RESEARCH PAPER: China is/is not the second most important external power in Latin America in 2012 AND/OR China presents an opportunity/threat to the U.S. in the region OR China’s role in Latin America is similar to the USSR’s in various respects, but different in other respects [specify respects].