WORLD POLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION

 

Francis A. Beer

 

University of Bordeaux

 

Fall, 2003

 

Introduction

 

            This course provides a brief overview of world politics and international communication. It conceives of international relations as a system where agents, connected through networks, think, talk, and act.  International realism is the dominant theory describing, explaining, and predicting the behavior of this system. Realists believe that the dominant actors in world politics are nation states that act on the basis of national interest defined in terms of power. There are many forms of power, but military power is essential. As Thucydides famously put it, “the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must. In this course, we shall consider what may come after realism, post-realism. In a post-realist perspective, realism is only one among many possible models for international relations. An alternative or supplement to realism is defined by a focus on actors other than the nation state, with its focus on national interest defined in terms of power. Instead, post-realism populates the world with a network of multiple actors engaged in multiple interactions. One of these forms of action is international communication.

 

            The outline presents a sample of topics and readings. Some, but not all, of them will be considered in depth during the course. Some of the readings marked with an asterisk (*) will be assigned. Other references may be consulted if students are interested.

 

            During the course, students will be expected to discuss assigned readings in class, prepare a short oral presentation which will be the basis for a written report, and hand in a final examination. The oral presentation and the written report will center on the use of metaphor in relation to some contemporary issue of French foreign policy.   The final examination will ask students to synthesize the work of the course.

 

            Readings will come from the following books:

Beer, Francis A. Meanings of War and Peace. College Station TX: Texas A&M University Press, 2002.

Beer, Francis A. and Robert Hariman Post-Realism: The Rhetorical Turn in

        Inter­national Relations, Francis A. Beer and Robert Hari­man, Eds.

        East Lansing MI: Michigan State University Press: 1996.

Holman, Valerie and Debra Kelly, eds.  France at War in the Twentieth Century: Propaganda, Myth, and Metaphor.  New York NY: Berghahn Books, 2000.

Kagan, Robert. Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003.

Roche, Jean-Jacques. Théories des relations internationales.

      Paris: Montchrestien.

 

            Students are asked to read Le Monde Diplomatique each week. The most recent issue of Le Monde and the International Herald Tribune should be read before each class

 

I.       World Politics

A.   International Actors in Networks

      The course begins with Actor-Network Theory (ANT). This general theory describes world politics as a system composed of agents linked in networks. This theory has been technically developed under another name, complexity theory.

      Students who are interested in further examples may wish to consult the following website:               http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/act_net.html

      For a critical view, see Bruno Latour, “On Recalling ANT”                                                                          http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/stslatour1.html

 

B.   International Realism, Neo-Realism, and Post-Realism

1.     Realism and Neo-Realism: National Interest and Power

The dominant substantive theory of world politics is realism. Realist theory suggests that states are the dominant actors in the network of international relations and that they do and should act on the basis of national interest defined in terms of power. In the pursuit of power, national leaders use all available tools of war and peace as they may be appropriate.

      Students who wish to read further may consult:

                  * Roche, Jean-Jacques. Théories des relations internationales.

                               Introduction, Ch. 1.    

2.     Realism and Hyper-Realism: Ideology, Hegemony and Anarchy

      In contemporary times, realism has assumed an exaggerated form, where it justifies the extended use of force. At the center, it justifies a drive for hegemony; at the periphery, it reflects and promotes anarchy. 

Fukuyama, Francis. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press, 1992

Kagan, Robert. Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003.

Kaplan, Robert D. The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post-Cold War. New York NY: Random House, 2000.

Kaplan, Robert D. Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos. New York: Random House, 2002.

Mearsheimer, John J. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York NY: Norton, 2001.

Snyder, Glenn H. “Mearsheimer’s World—Offensive Realism and the Struggle for Security,” International Security 27, 1 (Summer, 2002): 149-173.

 

C.   Post-Realism: Multiple Actors & International Communication

      Post-realism implies a general concern with communication as an important component of international relations. In doing so, it draws upon a rich prior and current tradition.

Brown, Robin. “International Communications and International Relations,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 24, 3 (Winter, 1995).

Keohane, Robert O., and Joseph Nye Jr. (1998). “Power and Interdependence in the Information Age,” Foreign Affairs, fall 1998.

McPhail, Thomas L. Global Communication. Theories, Stakeholders, and Trends. Boston MA: Allyn and Bacon.

* Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds. Website. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/ics/ (See particularly the publications and courses of Robin Brown, Philip Taylor, and Jayne Rodgers).

D.   Post-Realism: Rhetoric

Whereas realism presents itself as the fundamental science of international relations, post-realism takes a rhetorical perspective. Post-realist suggests that realism is only one of many possible models or narratives of international relations.     

* Beer, Francis A. and Robert Hariman, "Realism and Rhetoric in International Relations" in Post-Realism.

* Roche, Jean-Jacques. Théories des relations internationales.

                            Paris: Montchrestien, Chs. 2-fin.

II.    Actors in International Communication

A.   International Law and Organization

1.     The New International Information Order

Galtung, Johan and Richard C. Vincent. Global Glastnost: Toward a New World Information/Communication Order? Creskill NJ: Hampton Press.1992.

2.     International Regulation

Hills, Jill. The Struggle for Control of Global Communication: The Formative Century (The History of Communication). Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press, 2002.

Marsden, Christopher T. Regulating the Global Information Society (Warwick Studies in Globalisation).  New York NY: Routledge, 2000.

Moran, Albert, ed. Film Policy: International, National and Regional Perspectives (Culture, Policy, and Politics).New York: Routledge, 1996.

 

B.   International Society

1.     International Civil Society

Manning, C. A. W. The Nature of International Society. London: London School of Economics and Political Science, 1962.

Toulmin, Stephen E. Cosmopolis: The Hidden Agenda of Modernity. New York: Free Press, 1990.

2.     The Clash of Cultures        

Barber, Benjamin R. Jihad vs. McWorld: How Globalism and Tribalism are Reshaping the World (New York: Ballantine Books, 1996).

Friedman, Thomas. The Lexus and the Olive Tree. New York NY: Anchor Books, 2000

Hoffmann, Stanley. “Clash of Globalizations,” Foreign Affairs.

Huntington, Samuel. The Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order (New York NY: Simon and Schuster, 1997.

Nye, Joseph S. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.    

C.   Nation-States

1.     International Communication: Public Diplomacy

Fortner, Robert S. Public Diplomacy and International Politics: The Symbolic Constructs of Summits and International Radio News. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994.

McEvoy-Levy, Siobhàn. American Exceptionalism and US Foreign Policy: Public Diplomacy at the End of the Cold War. New York: Palgrave, 2001.

Metzl, Jamie Frederic. “Can Public Diplomacy Rise from the Ashes?” Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2001.

Nye, Joseph S. Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. New York: Basic Books.

Zaharna, R. S. “American Public Diplomacy in the Arab and Muslim World: A Strategic Communication Analysis,” FPIF Policy Report, November 2001. .

2.     International Communication: Propaganda and Information War

Chomsky, Noam.  Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York NY: Pantheon, 1988.

Collins, John, and Ross Glover, eds. Collateral Language: A User’s Guide to America’s New War. New York: New York University Press, 2002.

Ellul, J. (1965). Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes. Reprint. New York: Vintage Books, 1973.

Shaw, Martin. Civil Society and Media in Global Crises: Representing Distant Violence New York: Pinter, 1996.

Taylor, Philip M. British Propaganda in the Twentieth Century: Selling Democracy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

* Taylor, Philip M. “The Role of Propaganda in the War against Terrorism.” http://www.leeds.ac.uk/ics/propaganda01.pdf

3.     Psywar and Psy-Ops

Abner, Alan K. Psywarriors: Psychological Warfare during the Korean War. Shippensburg PA: Burd Street Press, 2001.

Elliston, Jon ed. Psywar on Cuba: The Declassified History of U.S. Anti-Castro Propaganda. Melbourne NY: Ocean Press, 1999.

D.   Sub-National Organizations

1.     Media

Alterman, Eric. What Liberal Media?: The Truth about Bias and the News (New York NY: Basic Books, 2003).          

* Baudrillard, Jean. ‘La Guerre de Golfe n'a pas eu lieu’, Libération, 29 mars 1991.

* Beer, Francis A. and G. R. Boynton, “Globalizing Terror,” POROI Journal 1 (2003) http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030174/beer/globalterror/

Carruthers, Susan L. The Media at War. New York: St. Martin's, 2000.

Comor, Edward. A. The Global Political Economy of Communication: Hegemony, Telecommunication, and the Information Economy (New York NY: St. Martin's Press, 1994).

Roeder, George H., Jr., The Censored War: American Visual Experience During World War Two New Haven CN: Yale University Press, 1993.

Shaw, Martin. “Crystallizations of Media in the Global Revolution: 

News Coverage and Power from Kurdistan to Kosova.”

      http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/hafa3/crystal.htm

Shaw, Martin. “Late Modern Militarism: Mediated War.” http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Users/hafa3/lists/war.htm#9

Taylor, John. Body Horror: Photojournalism, Catastrophe, and War. New York NY: NYU Press, 1998.

Taylor, Philip. M. Global Communications, International Affairs, and the Media since 1945. London UK: Routledge, 1997.

Tehranian, Majid. Global Communication and World Politics: Domination, Development, and Discourse Boulder CO: Lynne Rienner, 1999).

2.     Audiences

* Beer, Francis A. and G. R. Boynton. “Talking about Dying: Rhetorical Phases of the Somalia Intervention,” in Beer, Meanings of War and Peace.

* Beer, Lichbach, and Balleck. “Beer and Quiche in the Fast Lane: Signaler’s Dilemma, Democratic Debate, and the Gulf War,” in Beer, Meanings of War and Peace.

E.   Groups and Individuals

1.     Language Games

 Fierke, Karin.  “Dialogues of Manoeuvre and Entanglement: NATO, Russia, and the CEECs.”  Millennium: Journal of International Studies 28 (1999): 27-52.

2.     Argument and Deliberation

Alker, Hayward. “The Dialectical Logic of Thucydides’ Melian Dialogue,” pp. 23-63 in Hayward R. Alker, Rediscoveries and Reformulations: Humanistic Methodologies for International Studies. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

White, James Boyd. When Words Lose their Meaning: Constitutions and Reconstitutions of Language, Character, and Community. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press, 1984.

3.     Negotiation

Burton, John W. Conflict Resolution: Its Language and Processes. Lanham, MD. : Scarecrow Press, 1996.

Cohen, Raymond Negotiating Across Cultures: International Communication in an Interdependent World. Washington DC: United States Institute for Peace, 1997.

Kriesberg, Louis. Constructive Conflicts: From Escalation to Resolution. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 1998.

Zartman, I. William, ed. Elusive Peace: Negotiating an End to Civil Wars. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1995.

4.     Cognition

* Alice F. Healy, Joshua M. Hoffman, Lyle E. Bourne, Jr., and Francis A. Beer, “Terrorists and Democrats: Individual Reactions to International Attacks” Political Psychology 23, 3 (September 2002): 439-467.

III.   Foreign Policy Rhetorics

A.   United States Foreign Policy Themes

1.     Metaphor

* Beer, Francis A. and Barry J Balleck, "Body, Mind, and Soul in the Gulf War                Debate," in Beer, Meanings of War and Peace.

* Beer, Francis A. and Laura Brunell, “Women’s Words: Gender and Rhetoric in the Gulf War Debate” in Beer, Meanings of War and Peace.

Chilton, Paul A.  Security Metaphors:  Cold War Discourse from Containment to Common House.  New York NY: Peter Lang, 1996.

* Doty, Roxanne. “The Logic of Différance in International Relations: U. S. Colonization of the Philippines,” in Beer and Hariman, Post-Realism.

Khong, Yuen Foong.  Analogies at War: Korea, Munich, Dien Bien Phu, and the Vietnam Decisions of 1965.  Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.

Kull, Stephen. Minds at War. Nuclear Reality and the Inner Conflicts of Defense Policymakers. New York: Basic Books, 1988.

Lakoff, George.  “Master Metaphor List.”  ftp://cogsci.berkeley.edu/pub/cogling/Metaphor/

* Lakoff, George.  “Metaphor and War: The Metaphor System Used to Justify War in the Gulf.”  Peace Research 23 (1991) 25-32 (http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Texts/Scholarly/Lakoff_Gulf_Metaphor_1.html).

Milliken, Jennifer. “Metaphors of Prestige and Reputation in American Foreign Policy and American Realism” in Beer and Hariman, Post-Realism.

Neustadt, Richard and Ernest May.  Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for Decision Makers.  New York NY: Free Press, 1986.

2.     Narrative, Myth, and Identity

* Beer, Francis A. and Jeffrey Kopstein. “Between Maastricht and Sarajevo,” in Beer, Meanings of War and Peace.

Lacapra, Dominick. Writing History, Writing Trauma. Baltimore MD, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001.

B.   French Foreign Policy Themes

Caillois, Roger. Jeux et sports. 1968.

De Baecque, Antoine.  The Body Politic: Corporeal Metaphor in Revolutionary France, 1770-1800.  Stanford CA: Stanford University Press, 1993.

* Holman, Valerie and Debra Kelly, eds.  France at War in the Twentieth Century: Propaganda, Myth, and Metaphor.  New York NY: Berghahn Books, 2000.

Lévi Strauss, Claude. Le cru et le cuit. Paris: Plon,

Mireille, Andráes.  Lacan et la Question du Métalangage.  Paris, France: Point hors ligne, 1987.

Ricoeur, Paul.  La Métaphore Vive.  Paris, France: Editions du Seuil, 1975.

Thornborrow, Joanna.  “Metaphors of Security: A Comparison of Representation in Defence Discourse in Post-Cold-War France and Britain.”  Discourse and Society 4 (1993): 99-119.

C.   Irony

Der Derian, James, “Reinterpretation of Realism: Genealogy, Semiology, Dromology,” in Post-Realism.

Virilio, Paul. Guerre et cinéma. Paris: Cahiers du cinéma/Editions de l’etoile, 1984.

 

IV.Globalization and Political Communication

A. Globalization

Giddens, Anthony, Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping our Lives. New York: Routledge, 2000.

Shaw, Martin. Theory of the Global State: Globality as an Unfinished Revolution. New York NY: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

B. Global Political Communication

Beer, Francis A. and G. Robert Boynton, “Globalizing Sympathy”

* Beer, Francis A. and G. Robert Boynton, “Globalizing Terror” POROI Journal 1. http://www.uiowa.edu/~c030174/beer/

V.   Meaning in International Political Communication

* Beer, Francis A., Meanings of War and Peace, Conclusion.

* Beer, Francis A. “Toward the Terrorist Anti-World: Appropriate

 Reactions.” Counterpunch, October 30, 2001.                                                                        http://www.counterpunch.org/beer1.html

Hedges, Chris. War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning. Public Affairs, 2002.

Laïdi, Zaki. Un monde privé de sens. Paris: Librairie Arthème Fayard. 1994.