PSCI 5820: Graduate Research Seminar in International Conflict Management Michael Greig Phone: 565-4996 E-mail: greig@unt.

edu

Office: 158 Wooten Hall Office hours: TR 10-11:30 & by appt

This class is a research seminar in international conflict management. This class is not a seminar for practitioners. Our focus will not be on how to manage conflicts. Instead, the focus of the course will be two-fold: (1) to survey the theoretical and empirical literature in international conflict management and (2) to conduct an original research project on the subject. The aim of this seminar is to equip the students with the necessary background and tools with which to study international conflict management and produce original research in the field. Much of the literature we will read this semester will rely upon multivariate statistics as well as some formal models. As a result, the prerequisite for this course is the Department of Political Sciences proseminar in international relations, research methods course, and introductory methods course. It is highly unlikely that students without this background will do will in this course and even less likely that they will find it a useful class. Quite simply, if you do not have a background in graduate-level IR theory and cannot interpret regression models, this is likely not the course for you. Readings The following books are available at the university bookstore: Stuart Bremer, What Do We Know About War. Rowman & Littlefield. I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen, Peacemaking in International Conflict. Washington: United States Institute of Peace. Steven Brams and Alan Taylor. 1996. Fair Division: From Cake-Cutting to Dispute Resolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richard Holbrooke. 1999. To End a War. New York: Random House. Additional readings are available online and from the instructor Research Project Students will be divided into groups of 3 in order to conduct an original research project on international conflict management from beginning to end. Students are free to use whatever research methodology best suits their project, including formal models, multivariate statistics, or case studies. Most importantly, the paper must make an original contribution to the field (ie; not a replication) and it must be theoretically rigorous. The projects will be conducted in stages and students will receive extensive feedback from both the instructor and fellow class members throughout the term. We will devote a substantial portion of each class to discuss the progress of the projects in order to brainstorm ideas about how to make the papers better. The goal for these projects is to produce a paper that could be presented at a political science conference and, subsequently, presented to a journal for review. Research Project Schedule September 9 Discuss research topic ideas in class. Come prepared with your topic. September 16 Submit your research proposal. This proposal should outline what your topic is, what question(s) you are answering, how you plan to go about answering your question(s), and where your paper fits into the literature. Approximately 2-3 pages

September 30 Submit your literature review. This literature review should provide a solid over view of the literature that you are examining in your research project. The literature should discuss not only what the literature says but also its areas of strength and weakness. Of particular importance is a discussion of the gaps within the literature you are focusing upon. Approximately 5-8 pages. October 14 Submit your theory section. This section spells out in detail the hypothesis being tested in your paper and the theoretical arguments that support these hypotheses. This section represents your ideas about the new knowledge that you seek to create in your paper. It is important that this section of your paper be logically constructed and carefully argued. Approximately 5-10 pages October 28 Submit your research design section. This section of your paper will discuss the methodology you will use to test the hypotheses discussed in the theory section of your paper. Essential to this section of your paper is that you describe the research design in sufficient detail that someone reading your research design could replicate the analysis conducted in your paper perfectly. November 18 Submit results and conclusion sections. This section of your paper will examine the results of your analysis. In this section, you will discuss the ways in which your analysis supports or differs from the hypotheses that you raised in the theoretical section of your paper. As part of the discussion, you will walk the reader through your findings and interpret what these findings mean. In the conclusion section, you will take a broader view of your findings and place these results within the broader literature. What have you contributed? Why is it important? Are these results surprising? Why? December 9 Submit full paper with an introduction. The introduction of your paper should set the stage for your reader, describing to them why your topic is important and why they should bother reading the remainder of the paper. You can also signal to readers in your paper what your findings are. Once you finish the introduction, you can now put all of the sections you have written into one complete paper, taking into account the suggestions for revision that have been made throughout. Be careful to make sure that the paper reads like one, well-flowing paper and not a serious of separate sections put together. Make certain that your paper is of conference presentation quality: properly cited and free of grammatical errors. After finishing your paper, you will present it to the group as if you were at a conference. Grading Class Participation Research Project Final Exam 33.33% 33.33% 33.33%

Your class participation grade will be based upon the quality of your contribution to our class discussions both as a weekly discussant and as a seminar participant. Failure to participate in class will be harshly penalized. Students are expected to attend all classes. Students missing more than 1 class during the term will be asked to drop the class. The details of the group research project are outlined above. Grades on the group project will be based upon the quality of the paper at each stage of submission, the quality of the final paper, and the presentation of the paper. Papers will be presented at the end of the term in a conference format. In order to guard against (and punish) free-riding, students will also evaluate the performance of members of their group. The final exam will be an in-class, prelim type examination. Students will receive exam questions 1 week in advance of the exam and a subset of those questions will be chosen for the exam. In answering the exam questions, students will have a choice among the questions selected for the exam. The final exam will be on Tuesday, December 14th from 1:30-3:30

Class Meetings This course will be conducted in a seminar format. As such, much of the success or failure of the course will rest with the students. Students are expected to attend all classes, read all assigned material, and participate thoughtfully in our discussions. Students who fail to attend class, who are unprepared, or who do not participate in class will be penalized heavily. Participation involves more than simply restating the material that is assigned, but instead involves making insightful points about those readings and raising thoughtful questions about the material that stimulate discussion. Graduate school represents a transition point in scholarship in which students are asked to move from consumers of knowledge to producers of knowledge. As a result it is important for students to begin to deconstruct and analyze the material presented in class as a means of moving toward this transition. In order to aid in this transition, students will take turns leading our discussions each week.

Class Schedule September 2 Introduction September 9 Theories of Conflict Bremer, Stuart. 2000. Who Fights Whom: When, Where, and How. In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield. Paul Hensel. Territory: Theory and Evidence on Geography and Conflict. In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield. Douglas Gibler. Alliances: Why Some Cause War and Why Others Cause Peace. In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield. Gary Goertz and Paul Diehl. Rivalries: The Conflict Process. In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield. Daniel Geller. Material Capabilities: Power and International Conflict. In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield.

September 16 What is Conflict Management? Gary Goertz and Patrick Regan, "Conflict Management in Enduring Rivalries." International Interactions, 22 (1997): 321-340. Daniel Druckman and Paul Stern, " Evaluating Peacekeeping Missions" Mershon International Studies Review, 41 (1997): 151-165. J. Lewis Rasmussen. 1997. Peacemaking in the Twenty-First Century: New Rules, New Roles, New Actors. In Peacemaking in International Conflict, edited by I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen. Washington: United States Institute of Peace. Louis Kriesberg. The Development of the Conflict Resolution Field. In Peacemaking in International Conflict, edited by I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen. Washington: United States Institute of Peace. Cameron Hume. 1997. A Diplomats View. In Peacemaking in International Conflict, edited by I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen. Washington: United States Institute of Peace.

September 23 - Deterrence Paul Senese and Stephen Quackenbush. 2003. Sowing the Seeds of Conflict: The Effect of Dispute Settlements on Durations of Peace. The Journal of Politics 65(3): 696-717 Paul Huth and Bruce Russett. 1993. General Deterrence Between Enduring Rivals: Testing Three Comp eting Models. American Political Science Review, 87, 1 (1993): 61-73. Frank Harvey. 1998. Rigor Mortis or Rigor, More Tests: Necessity, Sufficiency, and Deterrence Logic. International Studies Quarterly 42: 675-707.

September 30 Early Warning J. Craig Jenkins and Doug Bond. 2001. Conflict-Carrying Capacity, Political Crisis, and Reconstruction: A Framework for the Early Warning of Political System Vulnerability. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(1): 3-31 Peter Brecke. 1998. Finding Harbingers of Violent Conflict: Using Pattern Recognition to Anticipate Conflicts. Conflict Management and Peace Science 16: 31-56. Philip A. Schrodt; Deborah J. Gerner. 1997. Empirical Indicators of Crisis Phase in the Middle East, 19791995. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 41(4):529-552.

October 7 Crisis Bargaining Michael Brecher, Patrick James, Jonathan Wilkenfeld. 2000. Escalation and War in the Twentieth Century: Findings from the International Crisis Behavior Project. In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield. Russell Leng. Escalation: Crisis Behavior and War. In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield. James Fearon. 1994. Signaling versus the Balance of Power and Interests: An Empirical Test of the Crisis Bargaining Model. Journal of Conflict Resolution 38: 236-269. Russell Leng. 1983. When Will They Ever Learn: Coercive Bargaining in Recurrent Crises. Journal of Conflict Resolution 27: 379-419. T. Clifton Morgan. 1990. Issue Linkages in International Crisis Bargaining. American Journal of Political Science 34(2): 311-333. October 14 Negotiation Strategies Steven Brams and Alan Taylor. 1996. Fair Division: From Cake-Cutting to Dispute Resolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Daniel Druckman. Negotiating in the International Context. Peacemaking in International Conflict Daniel Druckman. 1994. Determinants of Compromising Behavior in Negotiation: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution 38: 507-556. Robert Putnam. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization 42: 428-460. October 21 - Mediation Jacob Bercovitch. 1997. Mediation in International Conflict: An Overview of Theory, A Review of Practice. In Peacemaking in International Conflict, edited by I. William Zartman and J. Lewis Rasmussen.

Washington: United States Institute of Peace. J. Michael Greig. 2005. Stepping into the Fray: When Do Mediators Mediate? American Journal of Political Science. Forthcoming. James Wall, John Stark, and Rhetta Standifer. 2001. Mediation: A Current Review and Theory Development. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(3): 370-391. Richard Holbrooke. 1999. To End a War. New York: Random House.

October 28 - Ripeness J. Michael Greig. 2001. Moments of Opportunity: Recognizing Conditions of Ripeness for Mediation Between Enduring Rivals. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(6): 691-718. Patrick Regan and Allan Stam. 2000. In the Nick of Time: Conflict Management, Mediation Timing, and the Duration of Interstate Disputes. International Studies Quarterly 44(2): 239-260 Mariek Kleiboer. 1994. Ripeness of conflict: A fruitful notion?. Journal of Peace Research 31(1)

November 4 - Peacekeeping James Wall and Daniel Druckman. 2003. Mediation in Peacekeeping Missions. The Journal of Conflict Resolution 47(5): 693-705 Paul Diehl, Daniel Druckman, and James Wall. 1998. International Peacekeeping and Conflict Resolution: A Taxonomic Analysis with Implications. Journal of Conflict Resolution 42(1): 33-55 Page Fortna. 2004. Does Peacekeeping Keep Peace? International Intervention and the Duration of Peace After Civil War. International Studies Quarterly 48(2): 269-292. November 11 Peace Science No class November 18 Democracy and Conflict Manageme nt James Lee Ray. Democracy: On the Level(s), Does Democracy Correlate With Peace? . In What Do We Know About War, edited by Stuart Bremer. Rowman & Littlefield. William Dixon. 2002. Democracy, Disputes, and Negotiated Settlements. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46, no. 4 (2002): 547-571 William Dixon. 1994. Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict. American Political Science Review 88: 14-32. Gregory Raymond. 1994. Democracies, Disputes, and Third-Party Intermediaries. Journal of Conflict Resolution 38: 24-42. Gregory Raymond. 1996. Demosthenes and Democracies: Regime Types and Arbitration Outcomes. International Interactions 22: 1-20. November 25 Thanksgiving December 2 - Peacebuilding John Paul Lederach. 1997. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington: U.S. Institute of Peace Press.

Michael W. Doyle and Nicholas Sambanis. 2000. International Peacebuilding: A Theoretical and Quantitative Analysis . The American Political Science Review 94(4): 779-801 December 9 Paper presentations December 14 1:30-3:30 Final Exam

University of North Texas Policy on Cheating and Plagiarism The UNT Code of Student Conduct and Discipline defines cheating and plagiarism as the use of unauthorized books, notes, or otherwise securing help in a test, copying others tests, assignments, reports, or term papers, representing the work of another as ones own, collaborating without authority with another student during an examination or in preparing academic work; or otherwise practicing scholastic dishonesty. Normally, the minimum penalty for cheating or plagiarism is a grade of F in the course. In the case of graduate departmental exams, the minimum penalty shall be the failure of all fields of the exam. Determination of cheating or plagiarism shall be made by the instructor in the course, or by the field faculty in the case of departmental exams. Cases of cheating or plagiarism on graduate departmental exams, theses, or dissertations shall automatically be referred to the departmental Graduate Studies Committee. Cases of cheating or plagiarism in ordinary course work may, at the discretion of the instructor be referred to the Undergraduate Studies Committee in the case of undergraduate students, or the Graduate Studies Committee in the case of graduate students. These committees, acting as agents of the Department Chair, shall impose further penalties, or recommend further penalties to the Dean of Students, if the determine that the case warrants it. In all cases, the Dean of Students shall be informed in writing of the case. Students may appeal a decision under this policy by following the procedures laid down in the UNT Code of Student Conduct and Discipline.

University of North Texas-Statement of ADA Compliance The Political Science cooperates with the Office of Disability Accommodation to make reasonable accommodations for qualified students with disabilities. Please present your written accommodation request on or before the sixth day of class.