LEADERSHIP IN INTERNATIONAL SECURITY COURSE

RECOMMENDED PRE-COURSE READINGS

In advance of the course, we recommend that you look through the publications section of the GCSP
website, and read as many opinion pieces and editorials as possible in newspapers to gain an
overview of security-related issues.

In addition, if you are not already familiar with them, we require that you read the selected texts listed
below in order to be fully prepared for the course (*please click on the title of the article, highlighted
in blue, to access the online version).

FOREWORD TO THE PREPARATORY READINGS:

The aim of this set of preparatory texts is to provide you with an overview of the authors and
paradigms that have influenced our understanding of international security since the end of the Cold
War. Paradigms are conceptual frameworks that seek to capture and distil the complexity of the world
around us. They may comprise elements of several theories or concepts and allow us to identify key
trends and dynamics, to reflect on, synthesize and try to make sense of key events that continuously
unfold. The paradigms and concepts discussed in these articles are commonly referred to in
international security debates, and most will be referred to by visiting speakers, GCSP staff and
course participants during the eight months.

Overall, we have seen a broadened understanding of international security, since the end of the Cold
War, incorporating the need to move beyond the state. Indeed, the first paradigms to emerge in the
post-Cold War era highlighted the role not only political and economic principles, but religion, identity
and global inequalities as drivers of global order. Yet more recently, we have seen a return to power
redistribution and power shifts amongst states, as well as the balance of regime types. The articles
below explore these differing paradigms and their relevance to understanding the current international
order and the evolving context of international security.

As you review these selected articles, we ask you to consider the following questions:

o How convincing are these paradigms and concepts?

o Do they adequately account for the complexity of international security today? Why/Why
not?

o To what extent are they challenged by the unfolding current events?

o What will be the paradigm(s) and concepts that best capture the complexity of global order
during the LISC (2015-2016)?

1
CORE TEXTS:

The paradigms and concepts covered in these articles are frequently referred to within the context of
international relations, and are mandatory for any discussion of international security.

o Fukuyama, Francis, "The End of History?", The National Interest, 16 (Summer), 1989

Francis Fukuyama was the first to suggest that 1989 represented the triumph of market capitalism
and liberal democratic ideology over all possible alternatives – he advanced a doctrine of
democratic universalism: "What we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the
passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such... That is, the end
point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as
the final form of human government." Even though Francis Fukuyama fundamentally revised his
view, it is still important to study his highly influential opinion.

o Mahbubani, Kishore, "End of Whose History?" The New York Times, November 11, 2009
(Summary article of his book: (2008), The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global
Power to the East (New York, Public Affairs)
st
Mahbubani’s book offers possible implications regarding the 21 century geopolitical era that the
world seems to be entering, picturing the West’s reducing world domination and the return of Asia.
The author argues that Asian societies are successfully rising due to their effective implementation
of Western best practices in areas from free market economies to science and technology. Asia’s
rise and increasing domination is deemed unstoppable, thus providing the West with the dilemma
of whether to accept Asia’s rise and work with it in partnership or to attempt to prevent it. Kishore
Mahbubani argues in this article that the ‘end of history’ did not herald the triumph of the West but
rather its retreat and the related failure by most western intellectuals to recognise the “return of
Asia”.

o Huntington, Samuel, "The Clash of Civilizations", Foreign Affairs, 72/3, 1993

By 1993 Samuel Huntington, analysing the same events as Fukuyama, agreed that 1989-1991
represented the demise of the Cold War international system, but offered a radically divergent
interpretation of its implications. Huntington argued that as a consequence of the breakdown of
the Cold War order, the future was not one of ‘democratic peace’ and co-operation within a single
global system in which the triumph of Western-style modernity was set to create one universal
world civilisation, but rather continual and protracted wars between ‘civilisational blocs’. Seven
civilisations spanned the globe, each at its heart characterised by alternative belief systems and
the values they encapsulated. Where civilisations brushed up against each other, Huntington
argued, cultural fault-lines could be identified and it was along these fault-lines that future conflicts
were most likely to occur.

o Said, Edward W., “The Clash of Ignorance”, The Nation, 2 October 2001
In this article, Edward Said discusses the weaknesses and assumptions of the very influential
article by Samuel Huntington, in which he argues that labels like "Islam" and "the West", as
developed by Huntington serve only to confuse us about a disorderly reality. He furthermore
explores how links between these civilizations are actually closer than expected, and the
implications of this.

o Nye, Joseph, “Chapter 8: Future Worlds and American Choices”, in Bound to Lead: The
Changing Nature of American Power, New York: Basic Books, 1990

In this book, Nye first explores the very concepts of power and decline before analyzing America's
position relative to major competitors and our nation's outlook for the future. In Chapter 8 he
proposes four alternative visions for the future, and develops recommendations for how American
strategy should respond to the emerging context. In considering the period in which it was written

2
 at the end of the Cold War and the current era, it is interesting to reflect on the degree to which his
analysis is upheld (or not) in his assessment of the new power realities of an increasingly
interdependent world.

o Sanjeev Khagram and Saleem H. Ali, “Possible Future Architectures of Global Governance:
A Transnational Perspective/Prospective”, Global Governance 12, 2006
st
Although no single form of governance architecture constitutes the backbone of 21 century world
order, in 2006 Sanjeev Khagram identified six potential future global governance normative-
analytical models: ‘multilateralism’ (‘polyarchic inter-statism’ characterised by transparency,
participation and accountability); ‘grassroots globalism’ (characterised by direct participation, self-
governing communities and decentred territorial bureaucratic states); ‘multiple regionalisms’
(regional collectivities of diverse political units with inter-regional cooperation where benefits were
apparent); ‘world statism’ (as democratically constituted and governed); networked governance
(with multiple stakeholders but transgovernmentalism predominates); and, ‘institutional heterarchy’
(multilayered or polyarchic in nature). It is interesting to compare the difference in thinking
between this and the previous article.

o Yaqing, Qin, “Rules vs Relations, Drinking Coffee and Tea, and a Chinese Approach to
Global Governance”, Theory Talk No. 45, November 30, 2011

Since the end of the Cold War, IR has been preoccupied with the rise of China, yet most analyses
of, and theorizing around, China is the product of western scholars; more generally, IR theory is
profoundly biased towards western interests, institutions, and ideas. There are however other
conceptions of international relations. Much discussed for instance is the so-called ‘ASEAN way’,
the success of which seems to hinge more on relations than on rules. In this Talk, the eminent
Chinese IR scholar Qin Yaqing not only expands on the oriental or Chinese approach to IR, but
also engages the western bias in IR and, in extension of Chinese values, and argues that any
approach to theorizing global governance needs to be first and foremost balanced.

o Ayoob, Mohammed, "Inequality and Theorizing in International Relations: The Case for
Subaltern Realism", International Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 3. 2002

Most of the above texts give interpretations of international order from a Global North perspective,
and suggest that the Global South is an object, not subject of international relations. Mohammed
Ayoob, a Muslim of Indian descent and a professor of international relations, provides an
alternative perspective, emphasising the key dynamics and dominant concerns of Third World
states and elites and how this relates to causes of conflict. The subaltern realism paradigm argues
that because Third World states are generally weak, and often economically and militarily
dependent on external benefactors (particularly industrialized states in the North), they are
consequently more concerned with relative gains and short-term benefits than long-term benefits
and absolute gains. Such state behaviour is rational and reflects their lack of material (military and
economic) power. These states cooperate with others that possess similar characteristics and
therefore privilege South-South relations over North-South and are more concerned with regional
rather than global issues.

o Fukunda-Parr, Sakiko and Carol Messineo, “Human Security: A Critical Review of the
Literature”, Centre for Research and Development, KU Leuven, 2012

Human security is a concept that identifies the security of human lives as the central objective of
national and international security policy. It contrasts with, and grew out of increasing
dissatisfaction with, the state-centered concept of security as an adequate conceptual framework
for understanding human vulnerabilities in the contemporary world and military interventions as
adequate responses to them. The concept has become increasingly widely used since the mid
1990s. Yet human security is a contested concept. This paper reviews the concept and its
applications, focusing on those areas most relevant to violent conflicts and fragile states. The first

3
 section reviews human security as a concept, exploring alternative definitions currently in
circulation and their historical antecedents. The second section identifies the major policy
applications to promote ‘human security’ and their diverse objectives and mechanisms. The third
section surveys the critical debates, particularly in the academic literature. The final section
concludes with commentary on its relevance for violent conflicts and fragile states.

o Sen, Amartya, The Many Faces of Gender Inequality, The New Republic, 17 September 2001

Gender security has more recently emerged as a crucial dimension in ensuring a comprehensive
perspective of the security challenges and solutions that currently exist, particularly in developing
and post conflict environments. Using the data collected on poverty, Sen, in this article, developed
the concept of "missing women" - estimated to exceed 100 million round the world. Focusing on
South Asia, he discovers in the data thrown up by the Census of 2001 an interesting phenomenon
– a split India, “something of a social and cultural divide across India, splitting the country into two
nearly contiguous halves, in the extent of anti-female bias in natality and post-natality morality.” He
concludes by indentifying the principal issues, emphasizing the need to “take a plural view of
gender inequality”, calling for a new agenda of action to combat and put an end to gender
inequality, key to promote sustainable solutions to the challenges confronted by affected societies.

RECENT TEXTS ON GEOPOLITICS:

These more up-to-date texts provide an excellent overview of more recent assessments on geopolitics
and international security.

o Rogers, Paul “A Century on Edge: From Cold War to Hot World: 1945-2045”, International Affairs
90, 1, January 2014

o Micklethwait, John and Adrian Woolridge, “The State of the State”, Foreign Affairs, July/August
2014.

o Mearsheimer, John J, “Can China Rise Peacefully?” The National Interest, 25 October 2014

o Waltz, Kenneth N, “Why Iran Should Get the Bomb”, Foreign Affairs, July/August 2012

o Ikenberry, G. John, “The Illusion of Geopolitics”, Foreign Affairs, May/June 2014

o Walt, Stephen, “What will 2050 look like?”, Foreign Policy, 12 May 2015

LEADERSHIP:

These articles on leadership introduce you to some of the key thinking on it, and its relevance to you
as individuals, which is important to explore prior to the course.

o Goffee, Robert and Gareth Jones, “Why Should Anyone Be Led By You?”, Harvard Business
Review, September/October 2000

o Kellerman, Barbara, “Leadership - Warts & All”, Harvard Business Review, January 2004

o Kellerman, Barbara and Deborah Rhode, “Viable Options: Rethinking Women and Leadership”,
Compass: A Journal of Leadership, Fall 2004

o Ungerer, Carl, “The Force of Ideas: Leadership in International Security Policy”, GCSP, 04
February 2015

o World Economic Forum, ‘Lack of Leadership’, Outlook Global Agenda 2015