Handbook

Politics & International Relations
2022-2023
Foundations in Global Security

PLIT10154
Semester 1, Honours
Key Information
Course Convenor
Dr Luba Zatsepina, Luba.Zatsepina@ed.ac.uk
Guidance and feedback hours 11:00-13:00, Tuesdays, week 1-11, Room 2.14
Chrystal Macmillan Building
Lecture
Tuesday 14:10-15:00, week 1-10
MST_G.07 Meadows Lecture Theatre - Doorway 4
Practical (optional post-lecture group activity and discussion)

Tuesday 15:10-16:00, week 2-10
MST_G.07 Meadows Lecture Theatre - Doorway 4
Tutorial
Please see course timetable
Course Tutors
Guidance and feedback hours: other than course organizer, by arrangement
Lauren Rogers, lrogers3@ed.ac.uk

Dr Daniel Mobley, rmobley@ed.ac.uk
Course Administrator
Ms Ieva Rascikaite ieva.rascikaite@ed.ac.uk
***
Primary guidance for all matters related to the course is contained herein or will be
communicated via LEARN. This supersedes and overrides any meeting, timing, or
other guidance and information found on PATH, DRPS, or timetabling.
***
Contents
Key Information................................................................................................ 1
Aims and Objectives.........................................................................................3
Teaching Methods............................................................................................4
Assessment......................................................................................................5
Communications and Feedback.......................................................................9
Readings and Resource List............................................................................9
Lecture Summary...........................................................................................12
Course Lectures and Readings......................................................................13
Appendix 1 – General Information..................................................................28
Students with Disabilities................................................................................28
Learning Resources for Undergraduates........................................................28
English Language Support.............................................................................28
Discussing Sensitive Topics...........................................................................29
Tutorial Allocation...........................................................................................29
Data Protection Guidance for Students..........................................................29
Appendix 2 – Feedback sheets......................................................................30
2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 2

Aims and Objectives
This course aims to discuss a range of approaches to global security, providing a set
of key concepts and resources that help you develop an in-depth understanding of
the modern security environment. In doing so, it will explore both the orthodox
approach to international security as well as the recent turn towards a broader
security agenda (heralded in academic Security Studies by the emergence of ‘critical
security studies’). In particular, it will explore the ideas associated with Strategic
Studies, realism and liberalism broadly conceived, feminism, postcolonialism, and
works associated with the Copenhagen, Welsh, and Paris Schools of security
research. Students will thus be presented with an opportunity to investigate and
question what security might mean in the context of contemporary international
politics – in particular, we will return to three animating questions: security for whom,
security of what, and security from which ‘threat’?
The course also takes an expansive view of practical security issues. While inter-
state dynamics and the role of power politics are prominent in, for example, the
thermonuclear dilemma, we will also cover issues that transcend the traditional IR
focus on state-based actors alone, e.g., irregular warfare, bioterrorism, gender,
health, and climate change. Through a policy brief and an analytical essay, students
will also learn to synthesize and master both theoretical and practical forms of
knowledge and to develop the analytical tools for unpacking and assessing political
responses to security challenges.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of the course, students will have:
 An understanding of how International Relations theory applies to global

security;
 The ability to understand key aspects of global security;
 The ability to search relevant literature and sources;
 Presentation and discussion skills, nurtured in the tutorials;
 Factual knowledge about the security politics of the contemporary
international system.

Teaching Methods
This course consists of one 50-minute lecture plus one tutorial per week.
Attendance of lectures and tutorials is compulsory and both are subject of
participation assessment.
Lectures & practicals
There are 2-hour slots scheduled for each lecture (Tuesdays 14.10-16.00)
but the main session will always be held in the first part (14.10-15.00). The
additional hour is used for practicals, which consist of various activities,
films, discussions, briefing sessions, and alternative learning formats
(please see ‘Lecture Summary’, p. 12). Practical hours are entirely
voluntary and non-assessed, and there is no expectation of preparation
beyond that required for lecture. They are also, more often than not,
opportunities to engage security issues outside of traditional reading,
writing, and lecturing formats.
The first lecture will be held on TUESDAY 20 SEPTEMBER 2022, 14:10-15:00,

in MST_G.07 Meadows Lecture Theatre - Doorway 4
Tutorials
Weekly tutorials are an essential part of your academic learning and provide you with
the chance to discuss the material covered during the course, further your own
thinking about a specific tradition, approach or issue and, importantly, to engage with
the Course Organiser/Tutor as well as your fellow students in an extended, primarily
written dialogue.
Students are expected to prepare in advance for tutorials and then actively
participate in discussions, including making presentations or undertaking activities on
relevant topics. These will vary by tutorial group depending on the tutor. More details
on the organization of and requirements in tutorials will be provided during the first
week of tutorials (i.e., Week 2).
To participate actively and constructively to tutorials is key to develop your ability to

write strong position pieces as well as essays. In addition to engaging with the
required reading, students are asked to come prepared to discuss what they liked or
did not like about the readings (both tutorial and lecture readings); what questions did
they answer or leave unanswered; engage with, and show that they understand, the
crucial concepts and/or arguments contained in the readings; share with the Tutors
and the rest of the class a personal perspective on the reading, explaining how did
the readings affect/influence their understandings of international relations and
events.
How to sign up
You will be automatically assigned to a Tutorial group. Your group should

be assigned by the beginning of week 1. Should you need to request a
change of tutorial group you should submit the change request form
https://www.ed.ac.uk/timetabling-examinations/timetabling/personalised-
timetables

As usual, your lecturers/tutors will be available to discuss the course content and
assessment during guidance and feedback hours, either online or in-person.
Assessment
Students will be assessed by:
Word limit1
Do not exceed
the word limit or
penalties will be Weighting
Assessment
applied
(excluding
bibliography)
Tutorial
N/A 15%
participation
Policy Brief 1500 words 35%
Essay 2500 words 50%
Note: All coursework is submitted electronically through ELMA. Please read the
School Policies and Coursework Submission Procedures which you will find here.
Please check the ‘Assessments’ tab on the course LEARN page for assessment
deadline information for the current academic year.
Information on how to apply for extensions and special circumstances can be found
here.
We cannot guarantee that markers will meet the usual norm of 15 working days for
marking and feedback on late submissions, regardless of whether these fall within
special circumstances, authorized extensions, or simply late work. The Global
Security teaching team recognizes and supports all students who may receive an
extension or who may need to file for special circumstances, things happen every
semester that legitimately impact students' ability to work to deadlines. This decision
strikes a balance between that support and a year-on year increase in late
submissions of all kinds, which impacts tutors’ ability to meet their other
responsibilities (e.g., researching and writing their PhDs, preparing for academic
conferences and workshops where appropriate, and tutoring other courses).
If you submit an assessment after the scheduled deadline for any reason,
please do not expect a 15 working day turnaround. Where possible we will work
to ensure that you receive a provisional mark and feedback prior to the second
assessment deadline, so that you can benefit from the formative aspects of
feedback.
1
Do not exceed the word limit or penalties will be applied. There is no buffer. You
will not be penalized for submitting work below the word limit, but considerably
shorter papers struggle to achieve the required depth and coverage needed for a
high mark.

Policy Brief
Policy briefs offer a useful training tool and an especially relevant skill that may
benefit you after university, particularly in the domains of politics and international
relations. Should you go into work in government, advocacy, the policy sector, or any
number of related fields, chances are good that you will read, write, and/or criticize
policy briefs at some point. These documents typically ask for an assessment of and
actionable recommendations to deal with a specific challenge, and comprise an
executive summary, situation brief, policy options/recommendation and a list of key
sources, as would be presented to decision-makers or managers. As such, they
require a broader skill set than a regular undergraduate essay.2
The specific assignment for the policy brief will be posted on LEARN at the beginning
of the semester.
You will also receive plenty of guidance by the course organizer (both in class and on
LEARN) on how to write a policy brief. On Tuesday 27 September 2022, course
organiser will hold a Policy Brief Information Session during the Practical (15:10 -
16:00, MST_G.07 Meadows Lecture Theatre - Doorway 4), which you are strongly
advised to attend.
We encourage you to start working on the brief early in the semester and to discuss
your draft plan/outline with the course organizer or your tutor.3
Assessment Criteria
The policy brief is specifically assessed on:
1. Research Effort;
2. Understanding;
3. Quality of Analysis;
4. Evaluation of Options and Recommendation, and;
5. Writing and Presentation.
Other general marking criteria for coursework apply.
Please note that policy briefs going over the maximum word count will incur penalties
according to the school Honours guidelines. All parts of the policy brief count
towards the word count; the list of key sources and the bibliography, however, are
not included. See Appendix 2 for the policy brief feedback sheet.
2
The educational rationale of policy briefs as a teaching tool is discussed in: Keating,
Michael F. and James D. Boys, (2009) ‘The Policy Brief: Building Practical and
Academic Skills in International Relations and Political Science’, Politics 29:3, 201-
208.
3
While we are happy to look at and discuss a bullet point outline, due to fair practices
standards, we cannot read any drafts ahead of the submission.

Essay
Part of assessment for this course is also a classic critical essay on a question you
choose from a range of options. You can seek guidance for your essay throughout
the semester with the course organizer as well as with your tutor. Please make a
particular effort to use quality sources in your essay and read and research broadly.
The optional reading list for each week, included in this handbook, is an excellent
starting point for researching your chosen topic. Remember also that textbooks,
some of which are listed on p.10 of this handbook, are specifically designed for
learning and do not constitute original research – they are summaries of research!
This makes them a good source for identifying further reading and sources for your
essay, but you should only cite them sparingly and they must not form the backbone
of the literature that you engage in the essay.
Specific essay topics will be posted on LEARN at the start of the semester.
Assessment Criteria
The essay will be assessed according to the following criteria:
 Development and coherence of arguments

 Range and use of supporting evidence
 Demonstration of an advanced and critical understanding of relevant key
debates examined on the course
 Degree of reflexivity and critical thinking in relation to arguments and evidence
 Drawing together major arguments by way of conclusion in relation to the
assignment
 Formal presentation and style: correct referencing and quotation practices;
spelling, grammar and style; layout and visual presentation.
Other general marking criteria for coursework apply.
As with the policy brief, the maximum word count is non-negotiable. All parts of the
essay including references (be they in text or in footnotes) count towards your word
count; the bibliography, however, is not included. See Appendix 2 for the essay
feedback sheet.
Please refer to the assessment and submission procedure information which you will
find here.

Attendance & participation
Attendance and participation in both lectures and tutorials are essential to do well on
this course. We want to give you credit for your work by basing 15% of your overall
mark for this course on your contribution to lectures and tutorials.
Attendance will be monitored in tutorials, and you are expected to attend all
compulsory sessions of the course (i.e., attend all lectures, attend all tutorials).
Should you be unable to attend you must inform us in advance of the relevant
session: for tutorials, please contact your tutor directly. Please be prepared to
provide medical evidence where appropriate. Note that repeated or unexcused
absence will directly affect your participation mark and be reported to the relevant
Student Adviser (SA).
Engagement and active participation are encouraged. We will seek to make sure
everybody gets an opportunity to take part in the discussions and in-class activities.
Note that overly passive behaviour and disinterest can affect your participation mark.
Preparation for tutorial tasks and discussion is essential because the tutorial depends
on your contributions as much as others’. Make sure you read both the core readings
and the more specific tutorial readings before the session. Always bring some ideas
or points for discussion and be ready to be asked to share your perspective on topics
raised in the lecture and in the readings.
Listening to others is as important as talking. Listening carefully to the contributions

of others will help you develop your own communication skills. Ideally, you will be
able to incorporate and build off the ideas of others as well. (Please also see below,
‘Discussing sensitive topics’).
A mark will be awarded for each of the above components; these will then be
averaged out to give you an overall mark for the participation element (15% of your
total mark for the course). You will also receive specific feedback by your tutor.
Please keep in mind that the aim of participation assessment is mainly to reward your
contribution to the course, and not to catch you out or continuously monitor you. The
criteria set out in the feedback sheet (see Appendix 2 of this course handbook) are
meant to make the marking process more transparent, but you should not be too
concerned about this or even feel forced to e.g., compete for talking time or to
constantly “prove” that you are prepared. The aim is really just to get everybody
involved and to give you an incentive to participate.

Communications and Feedback
You are strongly encouraged to use email for routine communication with lecturers
and tutors. We shall also use email to communicate with you, e.g., to announce any
additional information or changes. All students are provided with email addresses on
the university system, if you are not sure of your address, which is based on your
matriculation number, check your EUCLID database entry using the Student Portal.
This is the ONLY email address we shall use to communicate with you. Please note
that we will NOT use ‘private’ email addresses such as yahoo or gmail; it is therefore
essential that you check your university email regularly, preferably each day.
There are various avenues for you to provide us with feedback about the course:
 At the end of each section, some tutorial time will be given over to feedback
sessions on various aspects of the course, and the tutors will pass on your
comments to the course organiser.
 Each class will have one or more programme representatives based on the
size of the class. Programme representatives (Programme Reps) are a link
between students and staff and will collect feedback for the course review
meeting. They will also have opportunities to feedback to Staff Student Liaison
Committees. Your Programme Rep(s) contact details will be available on the
course Learn page should you wish to contact them.
 If you would like to apply to be a Programme Rep, or are looking for more
information, please see our Student Representation webpage.
 At the end of the course, we ask all students to fill in an online questionnaire
about the various lecture blocks and other aspects of the course. We do hope
you will take note of what you like and dislike as the course progresses, and
that you then take the time to share your experience with us. We do our best
to include your constructive suggestions into the program for subsequent
years.
Readings and Resource List

There are three sets of readings for each week of the course:
• Core readings: these are compulsory readings that you should complete before
coming to the lecture, which may be delivered on the assumption you have
completed the core reading.
• Tutorial readings: these are compulsory readings that you should complete before
the tutorial to be able to contribute to the discussion and activities. They complement
the core readings of each week, so make sure you read those first (see above).
• Further readings: these are suggested readings that are intended to give you
more specific insights into a topic you are particularly interested in. They are also a
starting point for your essay research, although note that you are expected to show
evidence in your sources of research beyond these non-exhaustive lists.
Where available, Core and Tutorial Readings can be obtained electronically via
LEARN and the Course Resource List (available at resourcelist.ed.ac.uk and on
LEARN) or the links in the main library catalogue. If you have any difficulty getting
hold of any of the readings, contact the course organiser.

Beyond the Core and Tutorial readings, useful textbooks include:
 Baylis, John et al. (eds) (2013) Strategy in the Contemporary World: An

Introduction to Strategic Studies (4th edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
 Collins, Alan (ed.) (2018) Contemporary Security Studies (5th edition). Oxford:
OUP.
 Dannreuther, Roland (2013) International Security: The Contemporary Agenda
(2nd edition). Cambridge: Polity.
 Hough, P. et al. (2015) International Security Studies. Theory and Practice.
London: Routledge.
 Huysmans, J. (2014) Security Unbound: Enacting Democratic Limits. Routledge.
 Peoples, Columba and Nick Vaughan-Williams (2010) Critical Security Studies:
An Introduction. London: Routledge.
 Williams, P. (ed.) (2012) Security Studies: An Introduction (2nd ed.). London:
Routledge.
Peer-reviewed journals and other useful sources

The following peer-reviewed journals are particularly relevant for this course: Journal
of Global Security Studies, European Journal of International Security, Contemporary
Security Policy, Cooperation and Conflict, European Journal of International Security,
Foreign Affairs, International Affairs, International Peacekeeping, International
Security, International Studies Quarterly, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Journal of
Global Security Studies, Journal of Strategic Studies, Millennium, Review of
International Studies, Security Dialogue, Security Studies, Survival, Third World
Quarterly.
Consider consulting non-mainstream platforms like www.opendemocracy.net/.
Make use of the Oxford University Press online bibliographies (you must be
logged into EASE):
http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/obo/page/international-relations
Useful websites
Please make sure to use all of these sources critically, i.e., consider their background
and own agenda before taking their opinions and findings as ‘facts’.
International organisations
www.un.org/en/, www.nato.int, www.europa.eu, www.osce.org,
Non-governmental organisations
Human Rights Watch www.hrw.org
International Committee of the Red Cross/Crescent www.icrc.org
International Crisis Group https://www.crisisgroup.org
Minority Rights Group www.minorityrights.org
Nature Friends International https://www.nf-int.org/en
Prevent Genocide www.preventgenocide.org
Stop Genocide Now https://stopgenocidenow.org

Research centres, think tanks, projects, and online documentation
Asia-Pacific Leadership Network https://www.apln.network
Carnegie Council for Ethics and International Affairs www.cceia.org
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace https://carnegieendowment.org
Council on Foreign Relations www.cfr.org
European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) www.iss.europa.eu/
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) www.globalr2p.org/
Human Security Centre http://www.hscentre.org
Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy http://ifsh.de/en/
Institute for War and Peace Reporting www.iwpr.net/
International Institute for Strategic Studies www.iiss.org/
International Relations and Security Network www.isn.ethz.ch/net/prin/hsc.cfm140
RAND Corporation www.rand.org
Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) https://www.rusi.org/
Web Genocide Documentation Centre
https://phdn.org/archives/www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide.htm
Yale University Avalon Project (for international treaties from the sixteenth century to
the present) https://avalon.law.yale.edu
Rational choice games website

https://ncase.me/trust/

Lecture Summary
Week Day Date Lecture

Introduction: The Concept &
Tuesday 20/9/22
1 Field of Security
Practical None
Tuesday 27/9/22 Strategy and Victory in War

2 Practical (15:10-16:00
Policy brief information session
Tuesday)
Tuesday 04/10/22 The Thermonuclear Revolution
3 Practical (15:10-16:00
The nuclear sublime
Tuesday)
Tuesday 11/10/22 Securitization
4 Practical (15:10-16:00 Critical Security Studies
Tuesday) methods lab
Emancipation and Everyday
Tuesday 18/10/22
Security
5
Practical (15:10-16:00
Security Architects
Tuesday)
Environmental Security (Dr Ben
Tuesday 25/10/22
Coulson)
6
Practical (15:10-16:00 Environmental Security
Tuesday) Practical (Dr Coulson)
New Security Agendas?
Tuesday 01/11/22
Bioterrorism & Health Security
7
Essay Information Session
Tuesday)
Deterrence in the 21st Century
Tuesday 08/11/22 (Nicholas Taylor, Defence
8 Science & Technology Lab)
Practical (15:10-16:00 Careers in security analysis
Tuesday) (Nicholas Taylor, DSTL)
Decolonising Security (Dr
Tuesday 15/11/22
Annika Bergman Rosamond)
9
TBC (Dr Bergman Rosamond)
Tuesday)
Gender and Security (Dr Annika
Tuesday 22/11/22
Bergman Rosamond)
10
Futures wheels
Tuesday)
No lectures, no tutorials, course organiser will hold extended

11
guidance & feedback hours 11:00 – 15:00

Course Lectures and Readings
WEEK 1 - Introduction: The concept and field of security
Core reading
1. McSweeney, B. (1999) Security, Identity, and Interests (Cambridge
University Press) chp. 1 ‘The Meaning of Security’, pp. 13-22. [Resource
List]
2. Buzan, B. and Lene Hansen (2009) The Evolution of International
Security Studies (Cambridge University Press) chp. 1, ‘Defining
International Security Studies’, pp. 8-20. [Resource List]
3. Skim at least one of the US, UK and EU security strategy statements:
a. US 2017 National Security Strategy (NSS), available at:
http://nssarchive.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2017.pdf
(previous versions in 2015, 2010, 2006, and 2002 will also be
informative)
b. ‘European Security Strategy (ESS): A Secure Europe in a Better
World’ (2003)
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/30823/qc7809568enc.pdf
c. ‘Global Britain in a Competitive Age: The Integrated Review of
Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy’ (2021)
available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste
m/uploads/attachment_data/file/975077/
Global_Britain_in_a_Competitive_Age-
_the_Integrated_Review_of_Security__Defence__Development_a
nd_Foreign_Policy.pdf
Tutorial reading
No tutorials in week 1
Further reading
The changing concept of security
David Baldwin, “The concept of security”, Review of International Studies 23/1
(1997).
L. Bialasiewicz, et al., (2007) ‘Performing Security: the Imaginative Geographies of
Current US Strategy’, Political Geography 26:4, 405–422.
J. Peter Burgess, ‘Value, security, and temporality in Nietzsche’s critique of
modernity’, The Sociological Review, v60n4 (2012): 696-714.
James der Derian, ‘The value of security: Hobbes, Marx, Nietzsche, and Baudrillard’
chapter 2 in Lipschutz, ed., On Security, Columbia Univ. Press (1995): 24-45.
Michael Dillon, ‘Specters of biopolitics: finitude, eschaton, and katechon’ South
Atlantic Quarterly, v110n3 (2011): 780-92.
K.M. Fierke, ‘Definitions and Redefinitions’ & ‘The Proliferation of Security Concepts’
in Critical Approaches to International Security. Polity 2007.
Lawrence Freedman, “International Security: Changing Targets”, Foreign Policy
110/1 (1998).
Andrew R. Hom, ‘Angst springs eternal: Dangerous times and the dangers of timing
the “Arab Spring”’, Security Dialogue 47(2): 165-183 (2016).
Jeff Huysmans (1998) ‘Security! What Do You Mean? From Concept to Thick
Signifier’, European Journal of International Relations 4:2, 226–255.
Snyder, J. (2004) ‘One World, Rival Theories’, Foreign Policy, 145, 53-62.
Richard Ullman, “Redefining Security”, International Security 8/1 (1983).

Arnold Wolfers, (1952) ‘”National Security” as an Ambiguous Symbol’, Political
Science Quarterly 67:4, 481-502.
The changing field of security studies

David Baldwin, (1995) ‘Security Studies and the End of the Cold War’, World Politics
48:1, 117-141.
Barry Buzan, (1997) ‘Rethinking Security after the Cold War’, Cooperation and Conflict
32:1, 5-28.
Barry Buzan and Lene Hansen, The Evolution of International Security Studies.
Cambridge, 2009.
Lawrence Freedman, (2006) ‘The Transformation of Grand Strategy’, Adelphi Papers,
45:379, 27-48.
John Lewis Gaddis, Chapters 3 & 4 (‘The Twentieth Century’ and ‘The Twenty-first
Century’) in Surprise, security, and the American Experience, Harvard
University Press (2005): 35-68.
Samuel P. Huntington, (1992) ‘The Clash of Civilizations’, Foreign Affairs 72: 22.
Edward A. Kolodziej, “Renaissance in Security Studies? Caveat Lector!”,
International Studies Quarterly 36/4 (1992).
Richard K. Betts, “Should strategic studies survive?” World Politics 50/1 (Oct. 1997).
Keith Krause and Michael Williams, ‘From Strategy to Security: Foundations of
Critical Security Studies,’ pp. 33-60, in Critical Security Studies. University of
Minnesota Press, 1997.
Bill McSweeney, ‘Early Stages of Development’ and ‘Broadening the Concept of
Security,’ pp. 25-67, in Security, Identity and Interests. Cambridge University
Press, 1999.
Adam Roberts, (2008) ‘International Relations after the Cold War’, International
Affairs 84:2, 335-350.
Steve Smith, “The Increasing Insecurity of Security Studies: Conceptualizing Security
in the Last Twenty Years”, Contemporary Security Policy 20/3 (1999).
Stephen Walt, “The renaissance of security studies,” International Studies Quarterly
(June 1991).
WEEK 2 - Strategy and victory in war
Core reading
1. Strachan, H. (2005) ‘The Lost Meaning of Strategy’, Survival 47(3) 33-54.
[Resource List]
2. Cronin, A. (2014) ‘The “War on Terrorism”: What Does It Mean to Win?’
Journal of Strategic Studies 37(2) 174-97. [Resource List]
3. For policy brief information session – Matt Davies (2014) IR Theory:
Problem-Solving Theory Versus Critical Theory? [Online]. Available from:
https://www.e-ir.info/2014/09/19/ir-theory-problem-solving-theory-versus-
critical-theory/. [Resource List]
Tutorial reading
4. Heuser, B. (2017) Defeat as Moral Victory. In: Moral Victories: The Ethics
of Winning Wars, edited by Andrew R. Hom, Cian O’Driscoll, and Kurt Mills
(Oxford University Press), 52-68. [Resource List]
Further reading
Abrahamsen, R. and Williams, M.C. (2010) Security Beyond the State. Security
Privatization and International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arquilla, John (2007) ‘The end of war as we knew it? Insurgency, counterinsurgency
and lessons from the forgotten history of early terror networks’, Third World

Quarterly 28:2 pp. 369-86.
Art, Robert J. and Kenneth Waltz. The Use of Force: Military Power and International
Politics. Rowman & Littlefield. (7 editions)
**Bacevich, Andrew J. (2010) Washington Rules: America’s Path to Permanent
War. New York: Metropolitan Books.
Bacevich, Andrew J.and Eliot Cohen, eds. (2001) War over Kosovo: Politics and
Strategy in a Global Age. New York: Columbia University Press.
Blum, Gabriella. 2013. ‘The Fog of Victory’ European Journal of International Law
24(1): 391-421.
Blum, Gabriella, and David Luban. “Unsatisfying Wars: Degrees of Risk and the Jus
Ex Bello.” Ethics 125, no. 3 (April 1, 2015): 751–80. doi:10.1086/679558.
van Creveld, Martin. The Transformation of War, Free Press, 1991.
**van Creveld, Martin (2006) The Changing Face of War. Lessons of Combat, from
the Marne to Iraq. New York: Presidio Press.
**von Clausewitz, Carl 1976. On War, trans. Michael Howard & Peter Paret,
Princeton University Press, especially Book 1, ch. 1: ‘What is War?’ (There
are many online copies of this book, which will be fine for our purposes; e.g.
the Project Gutenberg version, available at:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1946/1946-h/1946-h.htm#link2HCH0001 )
Gray, Chris H. Postmodern War: The New Politics of Conflict, Routledge, 2005.
Gray, Colin (2005) Another Bloody Century: Future Warfare. London: Phoenix [ch. 4
‘Grand Narratives of War 1800-2100’].
Gray, C.S. Irregular Enemies and the Essence of Strategy: Can the American Way of
War Adapt, US Army War College, 2006.
Heuser, Beatrice (2017) ‘Defeat as Moral Victory: The Historical Experience’, in
Moral Victories: The Ethics of Winning Wars, edited by Andrew R. Hom, Cian
O’Driscoll, and Kurt Mills (Oxford University Press): 52-68.
Heuser, Beatrice. The Evolution of Strategy, Cambridge: CUP.
Holmes, Terence M. (2017) ‘The Clausewitzian Fallacy of Absolute War’, Journal of
Strategic Studies 40(7): 1039-58.
Hom, Andrew R. and Cian O’Driscoll, and Kurt Mills, eds. 2017 Moral Victories: The
Ethics of Winning Wars, edited by (Oxford University Press).
**Kaldor, M. 1999. New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era.
Cambridge: Polity. Introduction; chapter 1, ‘Old Wars’; and chapter 2, ‘Bosnia-
Herzergovina: A Case Study of a New War’, pp. 1-70.
Kalyvas, Stathis N.The Logic of Violence in Civil War, Cambridge U.P., 2006
Keen, D. (2000) ‘War and Peace: What’s the Difference?’, International
Peacekeeping, 7(4), 1-22.
Krahmann, E. (ed.) (2005) New Threats and New Actors in International Security.
London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Linn, B.M. and R.F. Weigley, The American Way of War Revisited, Journal of
Military History, Vol. 66, No. 2 (2002), 501-533.
Luttwak, Edward. “Give War a Chance”, Foreign Affairs, 2000.
Luttwak, Edward N. Strategy: the Logic of War and Peace, Cambridge Mass.
Harvard U.P., 2001.
Mandel, Robert. Security, Strategy and the Quest for Bloodless War, Lynne Rienner,
2004.
Martel, William. 2007. Victory in War: Foundations of Modern Military Policy.
(Cambridge Univ Press).
McIntosh, Christopher (2015) "Counterterrorism as War: The Dangers, Risks, and
Oppurtunity Costs of War with Al Qaeda and its Affiliates," Studies in Conflict
and Terrorism 38, no. 1 (2015): 104-118.

Münkler, H. The New Wars, Cambridge, Polity, 2005
Nordstrom, C. (2004) Shadows of War: Violence, power, and international
profiteering in the twenty-first century. Berkeley, University of California
Press.
**Patterson, Eric (2017) ‘Victory and the Ending of Conflicts’, in Moral Victories: The
Ethics of Winning Wars, edited by Andrew R. Hom, Cian O’Driscoll, and Kurt
Mills (Oxford University Press), 103-22.
**Scheipers, Sibylle (2017) ‘Carl von Clausewitz and Moral Victories’, in Moral
Victories: The Ethics of Winning Wars, edited by Andrew R. Hom, Cian
O’Driscoll, and Kurt Mills (Oxford University Press), 34-51.
Shawn, Martin. The New Western Way of War: Risk-Transfer War and its crisis in
Iraq, Cambridge: Polity, 2005.
Simpson, Emile. War from the ground up: Twenty-first century combat as politics,
Hurst, 2012.
Smith, Rupert. The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World, Penguin,
2006.
Strachan, Hew and Sibylle Scheipers, The Changing Character of War, OUP, 2011,
pages 1-24.
Tripodi, Christian (2017) ‘Strategy, Theory, and History: Operation Trusky 1943’,
Journal of Strategic Studies 40(7):990-1015.
Weigley, R.F. 1977. The American Way of War: A History of United States Military
Strategy and Policy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
WEEK 3 - The Thermonuclear Revolution
Core reading
1. Brodie, B.(1978) ‘The Development of Nuclear Strategy’ International Security
2(4): 65-83. [Resource List]
2. Sagan, S. and Kenneth Waltz (2010) ‘The Great Debate: Is Nuclear Zero the
Best Option?’ The National Interest September 1: 88-96 [Resource List]
Tutorial reading
3. Cohn, C. (1987) ‘Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense
Intellectuals’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 12 (4): 687–
718. [Resource List]
Further reading
Adib-Moghaddam, A. (2007) Manufacturing War: Iran in the Neo-Conservative
Imagination. Third World Quarterly, 28(3): 635–653.
Ahmed, S. “Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program: Turning points and nuclear
choices.” International Security (Spring 1999).
Barkawi, T. (2013) Nuclear Orientalism. Al Jazeera, [online] 17 April. Available at:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/04/201341695253805841.htm
l
Brown, Chaim and Christopher F. Chyba, “Proliferation Rings: New Challenges to the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime”, International Security 29/2 (2004).
Brown, M. E., Cote Jr., O. R., Lynn-Jones, S. M. and Miller, S. E. (2010) Going
Nuclear. Nuclear Proliferation and International Security in the 21st Century.
An International Security Reader. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Busch, Nathan. “Russian roulette: The continuing relevance of Russia to the nuclear
proliferation debate,” Security Studies 11/3 (Spring 2002).
Caprioli, M. and Trumbore, P. F. (2005) Rhetoric Versus Reality. Rogue States in
Interstate Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(5): 770–791.
**Craig, Campbell. Glimmer of a New Leviathan: Total War in the Realism of
Niebuhr, Morgenthau, and Waltz. New York: Columbia University Press,

2003.
**Craig, Campbell. (2016) ‘The Nuclear Revolution as Theory’, in International
Relations Theory Today, edited by Ken Booth and Toni Erskine (Polity): 143-
56.
Ganguly, S. “India’s pathway to Pokhran II: The prospects and sources of New
Delhi’s nuclear weapons program,” International Security (Spring 1999).
Glaser, Charles L. and Steve Fetter, “National missile defense and the future of U.S.
nuclear weapons policy,” International Security (Summer 2001).
Huntley, Wade L. “Rebels without a cause: North Korea, Iran and the NPT”,
International Affairs 82/4 (2006).
Krause, Keith and Andrew Latham, ‘Constructing Non-Proliferation and Arms Control:
The Norms of Western Practice’ Contemporary Security Policy, 19/1 (1998):
23-54.
** Lewis, Jeffrey. 2018. The 2020 Commission Report on the North Korean Nuclear
Attacks against the United States: A Speculative Novel (Mariner Books).
Liberman, Peter .“The rise and fall of the South Africa bomb,” International Security
(Fall 2001).
Litwak, Robert. ‘The New Calculus of Pre-emption’, Survival 44/4 (2002).
Mandelbaum, M. (1995) ‘Lessons of the Next Nuclear War’, Foreign Affairs 74:2, 22-
37.
Maoz, Zeev. “The mixed blessing of Israel’s nuclear policy,” International Security
(Fall 2003).
Moshirzadeh, H. (2007) Discursive Foundations of Iran's Nuclear Policy. Security
Dialogue, 38(4): 521–543.
Müller, H., D. Fischer and W. Kötter, Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Global Order
Peoples, Columba Justifying Ballistic Missile Defence, Cambridge: CUP, 2009.
Potter, W. and Mukhatzhanova, G. (2008) Divining Nuclear Intentions: a Review
Essay. International Security, 33(1): 139–169.
Price, R. (2007) Nuclear Weapons Don't Kill People, Rogues Do. International
Politics, 44 (2/3) (March): 232–249.
Price, Richard and Nina Tannenwald, ‘Norms and Deterrence: the Nuclear and
Chemical Weapons Taboo’ in The Culture of National Security, Peter J.
Katzenstein, ed. (Columbia University Press) 1996, pp. 114-152.
Sagan, Scott “The perils of proliferation: Organization theory, deterrence theory, and
the spread of nuclear weapons,” International Security (Spring 1994).
Sagan, Scott. “Why do states build nuclear weapons? Three models in search of a
bomb”, International Security 21/3 (Winter 1996/97).
Sagan, Scott and Kenneth Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate
Renewed (WW Norton 2003); also Security Studies 4/4 (1995), pp. 660-810.
Sagan, Scott and Kenneth Waltz, and Richard Betts (2007) ‘A Nuclear Iran,
Promoting Stability or Courting Disaster?’ Journal of International Affairs, 60,
2: 135-153.
Tannenwald, N. “Stigmatizing the Bomb: Origins of the Nuclear Taboo” (International
Security, 29:4, 2005)
Walker, William. “Nuclear enlightenment and counter-enlightenment”, International
Affairs 83/3 (2007)
Walker, William. A Perpetual Menace: Nuclear Weapons and International Order
(Routledge, 2011)
WEEK 4 – Securitization (the Copenhagen School)
Core reading
1. McDonald, M. (2008) ‘Securitization and the Construction of Security’,
European Journal of International Relations 14(4): 563-87. [Resource
List]
2. Taureck, R. (2006) Securitization theory and securitization studies.

Journal of international relations and development. [Online] 9 (1), 53–61.
Available from: doi:10.1057/palgrave.jird.1800072. [Resource List]
Tutorial reading
3. Hansen, L. (2016) ‘The Little Mermaid’s Silent Security Dilemma and the
Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School’, Millennium. [Online] 29
(2), 285–306. Available from: doi:10.1177/03058298000290020501.
[Resource List]
Further reading
Balzacq, Thierry (2005) ‘The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency,

Audience and Context’, European Journal of International Relations Vol. 11:2,
171-201.
Balzacq, Thierry (2010) ‘Constructivism and Securitization Studies’, in Dunn Cavelty,
M. and Victor Mauer (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Security Studies.
London: Routledge.
Balzacq, Thierry et al. (2015) ‘What Kind of Theory – if any – is Securitization?’,
International Relations Vol. 29:1, 96-136.
Bevir, M., Daddow, O. and Hall, I. (eds) (2013) Interpreting global security. London:
Routledge.
Bigo, D. (2008) ‘Globalized (in)security’, in Terror, insecurity and liberty illiberal
practices of liberal regimes after 9/11, eds. Didier Bigo; Anastassia Tsoukala
(London: Routledge) pp. 10-48.
Bigo, Didier (2002) ‘Security and Immigration: Toward a Critique of the
Governmentality of Unease’, Alternatives: Global, Local, Political
27(1_supplement): 63-92.
Buzan, B, O. Waever and J. de Wilde (1998) Security: A Framework for Analysis.
Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner [chapters 1 and 2 in particular].
Buzan, B. and Wæver, O. (2003) Regions and powers: the structure of international
security, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dalby, Simon (1988) ‘Geopolitical Discourse: the Soviet Union as Other’,
Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 13:4, 415–442.
Felix Ciutǎ (2009) Security and the problem of context: a hermeneutical critique of
securitisation theory. Review of International Studies, 35:2, 301-326.
Guzzini, S. (2011) ‘Securitization as a causal mechanism’, Security Dialogue 42:4-5,
329-341.
Hansen, L. (2006) Security as Practice. Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War.
London: Routledge.
Huysmans, J. (2011) ‘What’s in an act? On security speech acts and little security
nothings." Security Dialogue 42:4-5, 371-383.
Lupovici, A. (2014) ‘The Limits of Securitization Theory: Observational Criticism and
the Curious Absence of Israel’, International Studies Review, 16:3, 390-410.
Roe, P. (2012) ‘Is Securitization a ‘Negative’ Concept? Revisiting the Normative
Debate over Normal Versus Extraordinary Politics’, Security Dialogue 43:3,
249-266.
Sjöstedt, R. (2013) ‘Ideas, identities and internalization: Explaining securitizing
moves’, Cooperation and Conflict 48:1, 143-164.
Stritzel, H. (2007) ‘Towards a theory of securitization: Copenhagen and beyond’
European Journal of International Relations 13:3 pp.357-383.

Weldes, J. et al. (eds) (1999) Cultures of Insecurity. States, Communities, and the
Production of Danger. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Wendt, A. (1992) ‘Anarchy is What States Make of it: the Social Construction of
Power Politics’, International Organization 46:2, 391-425.
Wendt, A. (1995) ‘Constructing International Politics’, International Security, 20:1, 71-
81.
Wilkinson, C. (2007) ‘The Copenhagen School on Tour in Kyrgyzstan: Is
Securitization Theory Useable Outside Europe?’, Security Dialogue 38:1, 5-
25.
Williams, M. C. (2003) ‘Words, Images, Enemies: Securitization and International
Politics’, International Studies Quarterly 47:4, 511-531.
Williams, M. C. (2011) ‘Securitization and the liberalism of fear’, Security Dialogue
42:4-5, 453-463.
WEEK 5 – Emancipation and everyday security (Welsh & Paris Schools)
Core reading
1. Booth, K. (1991) ‘Security and Emancipation’, Review of International
Studies 17(4): 313-26. [Resource List]
2. Côté-Boucher, K., Federica Infantino & Mark B. Salter (2014) Border
security as practice: An agenda for research Karine Côté-Boucher,
Federica Infantino, & Mark B Salter (eds.). Security dialogue. [Online] 45
(3), 195–208. Available from: doi:10.1177/0967010614533243.
[Resource List]
Tutorial reading
3. Doty, R.L. (2007) States of Exception on the Mexico?U.S. Border:
Security, “Decisions,” and Civilian Border Patrols. International political
sociology. [Online] 1 (2), 113–137. Available from: doi:10.1111/j.1749-
5687.2007.00008.x. [Resource List]
Further reading
Aradau, C. and A. Neal (2015) Virtual Special Issue: Foucault and Security Studies.
Beyond biopolitics?, Security Dialogue (available at
http://sdi.sagepub.com/site/Virtualspecialissues/FoucaultSecurityStudies.xhtm
l)
Aradau, C. and Van Munster, R. (2012) Politics of Catastrophe: Genealogies of the
Unknown. London: Routledge.
Bigo, D (2001) ‘The Möbius Ribbon of Internal and External Security (ies)’,
in: Mathias Albert/David Jacobson/Yosef Lapid (eds.) Identities, Borders,
Orders. Rethinking International Relations Theory, Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, pp. 91-116.
Bigo, D (2002) ‘Security and Immigration: Towards a Critique of the Governmentality
of Unease’, Alternatives 27: 63–92.
Bigo, D and E McCluskey (2018) ‘What Is a PARIS Approach to (In)securitization?
Political Anthropological Research for International Sociology,’ Oxford
Handbooks Online
Booth, K (ed) (2005) Critical Security Studies and World Politics, London: Lynne
Rienner.
Booth, Ken (2011) ‘Anchored in Tahrir Square’ European Security 20(3): 473-479.

Debrix, F. and Lacy, M. (2009) The Geopolitics of American Insecurity – Terror, Power
and Foreign Policy. London: Routledge.
Fierke, K. M. (2007) Critical approaches to international security. Cambridge: Polity.
Huysmans, J. (2006) The Politics of Insecurity. Fear, Migration and Asylum in the
EU. London: Routledge.
Jacob L. Stump(2017) ‘Studying everyday security politics: a note on methods of
access’, Critical Studies on Security, 5(2): 212-215
Jeandesboz, J (2018) ‘Putting security in its place: EU security politics, the European
neighbourhood policy and the case for practical reflexivity,” Journal of
International Relations and Development 21 (1):22-45.
Jones, R. W. (1995) ‘'Message in a bottle'? Theory and praxis in critical security
studies’, Contemporary Security Policy 16:3, 299-319.
Krause, K. (1998) ‘Critical Theory and Security Studies. The Research Programme of
Critical Security Studies’, Cooperation and Conflict 33:3, 298-333.
Krause, K. and M.C. Williams (eds) (1997) Critical Security Studies. Concepts and
Cases. London: UCL Press.
Levine, D.J. (2013) Recovering International Relations: The Promise of Sustainable
Critique. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Linklater, A. (1996) ‘13 The achievements of critical theory’, in Smith, S., Booth, K., &
Zalewski, M. (eds) (1996) International theory: positivism and beyond.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 279-. [e-book, library]
McCormack, T. (2013) Critique, Security and Power. The Political Limits to
Emancipatory Approaches. London: Routledge.
Mike Bourne & Dan Bulley (2011) ‘Securing the human in critical security studies: the
insecurity of a secure ethics’, European Security 20(3): 453-471
Newman, E. (2010) ‘Critical human security studies’, Review of International Studies 36:1,
77-94.
Nunes, J. (2012) ‘Reclaiming the political: Emancipation and critique in security
studies’, Security Dialogue, 43:4, 345-361.
Peoples, C (2011) ‘Security after emancipation? Critical theory, violence and
resistance’, Review of International Studies 37(3): 113–35
Peoples, C. and N. Vaughan-Williams (2010) Critical Security Studies. An
Introduction. London: Routledge.
Peterson, J (2013) ‘Creating Space for Emancipatory Human Security: Liberal
Obstructions and the Potential of Agonism, ‘International Studies
Quarterly 57(2): 318–328
Salter, M.B., and C.E. Mutlu (eds) (2013) Research Methods in Critical Security
Studies: An Introduction. London: Routledge. [e-book]
Shepherd, L. J. (ed.) (2013) Critical Approaches to Security: An Introduction to
Theories and Methods. London: Routledge.
Sylvester, C. (2007) ‘Anatomy of a Footnote’, Security Dialogue 38: 547-558.
Vaughan-Williams, N and D Stevens (2016) ‘Vernacular Theories of Everyday
(In)security: The Disruptive Potential of Non-elite Knowledge,’ Security
Dialogue 47 (1): 40–58.
WEEK 6 – Environmental Security (Dr Ben Coulson)
Core reading
1. Chapter 1 and 2 Dalby, Simon (2009) Security and Environmental Change.
Cambridge: Polity. Pages 13-55. [Resource List]

Tutorial reading
2. McDonald, M. (2018). Climate change and security: Towards ecological
security? International Theory,10(2): 153-180. [Resource List]
Further reading
Burke, A., Fishel, S., Mitchell, A., Dalby, S., & Levine, D. J. (2016). Planet Politics: A
Manifesto from the End of IR. Millennium, 44(3), 499–523.
Chandler, D., Cudworth, E., & Hobden, S. (2018). ‘Anthropocene, Capitalocene and
Liberal Cosmopolitan IR: A Response to Burke et. als ‘Planet Politics’’ Millennium,
46(2): 190–208.
Cudworth, Erika and Stephen Hobden (2011) Posthuman International Relations:
Complexity, Ecologism and Global Politics. London: Zed Books.
Dalby, Simon, (2007), ‘Anthropocene geopolitics: globalisation, empire, environment
and critique’, Geography Compass, 1: 103–118.
Fagan, Madeleine (2017) “Security in the Anthropocene.” European Journal of
International Relations 23(2): 292–314.
Hamilton, S. (2018). The measure of all things? The Anthropocene as a global
biopolitics of carbon. European Journal of International Relations, 24(1), 33-57.
Hardt, Judith Nora (2017) Environmental Security in the Anthropocene. London:
Routledge.
Harrington, Cameron (2016) ‘The Ends of the World: International Relations and the
Anthropocene’, Millennium, 44: 478-498.
Kim, C. J. (2021) ‘Dugong v. Rumsfeld: social movements and the construction of
ecological security’, European Journal of International Relations, 27: 258–280.
Klare, Michael (2002) Resource Wars. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Klein, Naomi (2015) This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. London:
Penguin.
Parenti, Christian (2011) Tropic of Chaos: Climate Change and the New Geography
of Violence. New York: Nation Books.
Rothe, Delf (2020) ‘Jellyfish encounters: science, technology and security in the
Anthropocene ocean’, Critical Studies on Security, 8: 145-159.
Ruddick, Sue (2015) ‘Situating the Anthropocene: Planetary Urbanization and the
Anthropological Machine’, Urban Geography 36: 1113–30.
Welzer, Harald (2012) Climate Wars: What People Will be Killed for in the 21st
Century. London: Polity Press.
WEEK 7 – New agendas? Bioterrorism & Health Security
Core reading
1. Rushton, S. (2011) ‘Global Health Security: Security for whom? Security from
what?’ Political studies. [Online] 59 (4), 779–796. Available from:
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2011.00919.x. [Resource List]
2. Atlas, R. M. (1999) ‘Combating the Threat of Biowarfare and Bioterrorism:
Defending against Biological Weapons is Critical to Global Security’,
Bioscience, 49(6): 465 – 477. [Resource List]
Tutorial reading
3. McLeish, C. and Nightingale, P. (2007) ‘Biosecurity, bioterrorism and the
governance of science: The increasing convergence of science and security
policy’, Research Policy, 36(10): 1635-1654. [Resource List]
4. Wenham, C. (2020) What is the future of UK leadership in global health

security post Covid‐19? IPPR progressive review. [Online] 27 (2), 196–203.
Available from: doi:10.1111/newe.12201. [Resource List]

Further reading
Health
Elbe, Stefan (2006) ‘Should HIV/AIDS be Securitized? The Ethical Dilemmas of
Linking HIV/AIDS to Security’ International Studies Quarterly 50(1): 119-144.
Enemark, Christian and Ian Ramshaw (2009) ‘Gene Technology, Biological
Weapons, and the Security of Science’ Security Studies 18(3): 624-641.
Ingram, A. (2007) ‘The New Geopolitics of Disease: Between Global Health and
Global Security’, Geopolitics, 10(3): 522-545.
Iqbal, Zaryab (2006) ‘Health and Human Security: The Public Health Impact of
Violent Conflict’ International Studies Quarterly 50(3): 631-649.
Kittelson, Sonja (2009) ‘Conceptualizing Biorisk: Dread Risk and the Threat of
Bioterrorism in Europe’ Security Dialogue 40(1): 51-71.
Kittelson, Sonja (2007) ‘Beyond Bounded Space: Europe, Security, and the Global
Circulation of Infectious Disease’ European Security 16(2): 121-142.
McInnes, Colin (2016) ‘Crisis! What Crisis? Global Health and the 2014-15 West
African Ebola Outbreak’ Third World Quarterly 37(3): 380-400.
McInnes, Colin and A. Roemer-Mahler (2017) ‘From Security to Risk: Reframing
Global Health Threats’ International Affairs 93(6): 1313-1337.
McInnes, Colin and Simon Rushton (2010) ‘HIV, AIDS and Security: Where are We
Now?’ International Affairs 86(1): 225-245.
Rushton, Simon (2011) ‘Global health Security: Securitiy for Whom? Security from
What?’ Political Studies 59(4): 779-796.
Peterson, Susan (2002) ‘Epidemic Disease and National Security’ Security Studies
12(2): 43-81.
Wenham, Clare (2016) ‘Ebola Respons-ibility: Moving from Shared to Multiple
Responsibilities’ Third World Quarterly 37(3): 436-451.
Bioterrorism
Atlas, R.M. (1998) ‘The medical threat of biological weapons’, Critical Reviews in
Microbiology 24: 157–168
Declercq, W., Geairon, Y., Bravo Navarro, C., Quintart, A., Vassiliou, A. (2021) ‘The
Threat of Bioterrorism: A Global Security Challenge’, Finabel, June 2021. Available
at: https://finabel.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/21.-Bioterrorism-1.pdf
Derbes, V.J. (1966) ‘De Musis and the great plague of 1348: A forgotten episode of
bacteriological war’, Journal of the American Medical Association 196: 59–62
Fidler, D. P. (2003) ‘Public Health and National Security in the Global Age: Infectious
Diseases, Bioterrorism, and Realpolitik’, The George Washington International Law
Review, 35(4): 787-856.
Guillemin, J. (2006) Biological Weapons: From the Invention of State-Sponsored
Programs to Contemporary Bioterrorism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Henderson D.A (1998) ‘Bioterrorism as a health threat’, Emerging Infectious
Diseases 4: 488–492.
Karwa, M., Currie, B. and Kvetan, V. (2005) ‘Bioterrorism: Preparing for the
impossible or the improbable’, Critical Care Medicine, 33(1): S75-S95.
Kittelsen, S. (2009) ‘Conceptualizing Biorisk: Dread Risk and the Threat of
Bioterrorism in Europe’, Security Dialogue, 40(1): 51-71.
Meselson, M.J., Guillemin, M., Hugh-Jones A Langmuir I Popova A Shelokov A
Yampolskaya O. (1994) ‘The Sverdlovsk anthrax outbreak of 1979’, Science 266:
1202–1208.
Ostfield, M. L. (2004) ‘Bioterrorism as a Foreign Policy Issue’, The SAIS Review of
International Affairs, 24(1): 131-146.
Parachini, J. V. and Gunaratna, R. K. (2022) ‘Implications of the Pandemic for
Terrorist Interest in Biological Weapons’, RAND Report, May 2022. Available at:
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA612-1.html
Parker, L. (2013) ‘Bioterrorism and Intelligence’, Global Security Studies, 4(3): 53-63.

Robertson, A.G., and Robertson, L.J. (1995) ‘From asps to allegations: Biological
warfare in history’, Military Medicine 160: 369–373.
Russell, P.K. (1997) ‘Biologic terrorism: Responding to the threat’, Emerging
Infectious Diseases 3: 203–204.
Simon, J.D. (1997) ‘Biological terrorism: Preparing to meet the threat’, Journal of the
American Medical Association 278: 428–430.
Williams, P., and Wallace, D. (1989) Unit 731: Japan's Secret Biological Warfare in
World War II. New York: Free Press.
WEEK 8 – Deterrence in the 21st century (guest lecturer: Nicholas Taylor, DSTL)
Core reading
1. Payne, K. (2003) The Fallacies of Cold War Deterrence and a New
Direction. Comparative Strategy. 22 (5), 411–428. Available from:
doi:10.1080/01495930390261431. [Resource List]
2. Knopf, J.W. (2010) The Fourth Wave in Deterrence Research.
Contemporary Security Policy. 31 (1), 1–33. Available from:
doi:10.1080/13523261003640819.[Resource List]
Tutorial reading
3. Freedman, L. (2021) ‘Introduction—The Evolution of Deterrence
Strategy and Research’, in Osinga F., Sweijs T. (eds), NL ARMS
Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2020. T.M.C. Asser
Press, The Hague. [Resource List]
Further reading
* The volume from which your tutorial reading comes is entitled NL ARMS 2020 –
Deterrence in the 21 st Century – Insigts from Theory and Practice, and is
available open access, with useful readings on subjects such as Russian
and Chinese concepts of deterrence, extended deterrence and ‘cyber
deterrence’, amongst other
things. https://www.asser.nl/asserpress/books/?rId=13965
* Deni, John R. (2018) ‘Alternative Deterrence in Modern Great Power Competition’,
Strategy Research Project Report (US Army War College, Carlisle Barracks).
* Friis, Karsten (2017) NATO and Collective Defence in the 21st Century: An
Assessment of the Warsaw Summit (Taylor & Francis).
* Haley, Frederick III M. (2018) A Modern Theory of Nuclear Deterrence:
Understanding 21st Century US Nuclear Posture Requirements (US Army
School for Advanced Military Studies, Fort Leavenworth) <available at:
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD1087267 >
* Morgan, Patrick M. (n.d.) ‘The Concept of Deterrence and Deterrence Theory’ in
Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics (OUP).
* Prior, Tim (2018) ‘Resilience: The “Fifth Wave” in the Evolution of Deterrence’ in
Strategic Trends 2018 (ETH Zurich), 63-80.
Adler, E. and Greve, P. (2009) ‘When security community meets balance of power:
overlapping regional mechanisms of security governance’, Review of
International Studies 35:S1, 59-84.
Adler, E. and M. Barnett (eds) (1998) Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Brooks, S.G. and W.C. Wohlforth (2008) World Out of Balance: International
Relations and the Challenge of American Primacy. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Caporaso, J. A. (1992) ‘International Relations Theory and Multilateralism: the
Search for Foundations’, International Organization 46:3, 599-632.

Chan, S. (1997) ‘In Search of Democratic Peace: Problems and Promise’, Mershon
International Studies Review 41:1, 59–91.
Daniel Deudney, and G. John Ikenberry (2009) ‘The Unravelling of the Cold War
Settlement’. Survival 51:6, 39-62.
Deudney, D. and G. Ikenberry, (1999) ‘The Nature and Sources of Liberal
International Order’, Review of International Studies 25:2, 179-196.
Deudney, Daniel H. “The Philadelphian System: Sovereignty, Arms Control, and
Balance of Power in the American States-Union, circa 1787–1861.”
International Organization 49, no. 2 (1995): 191–228.Labs, E.J. (1997)
‘Beyond Victory: Offensive Realism and the Expansion of War Aims’, Security
Studies 6:4, 1-49.
Deudney, Daniel H. Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to
the Global Village. Princeton University Press, 2007.
Fearon, J. D. (1995) ‘Rationalist Explanations for War’, International Organization
49:3, 379-414.
Glaser, C. (1997) ‘The Security Dilemma Revisited’, World Politics 50:1, 171-201.
Glaser, C.L. and C. Kaufmann (1998) ‘What Is the Offense-Defense Balance and
How Can We Measure It?’ International Security 22:4, 44-82.
Glenn H. Snyder, “Mearsheimer’s world: Offensive realism and the struggle for
security,” International Security 27:1 (2003).
Green, D. P. and Shapiro, I. (1994) Pathologies of rational choice theory: A critique
of applications in political science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Green, D. P. and Shapiro, I. (1995) ‘Pathologies revisited: Reflections on our critics’,
Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society, 235-276
Grieco, J. M. (1988) ‘Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: a Realist Critique of the
Newest Liberal Institutionalism’, International Organization 42:3, 485-507.
Guilhot, Nicolas. “Cyborg Pantocrator: International Relations Theory from
Decisionism to Rational Choice.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral
Sciences 47, no. 3 (June 1, 2011): 279–301.
Jervis, R. (1978) ‘Cooperation Under the Security Dilemma’, World Politics 30:2, 167-
214.
Ken Booth and Nicholas J. Wheeler (2008) The Security Dilemma: Fear, Cooperation
and Trust in World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Keohane, R.O. and L.L. Martin (1995) ‘The Promise of Institutionalist Theory’,
International Security 20:1, 39-51.
Keohane, Robert O., and J. S. Nye (1987) ‘Power and Interdependence Revisited’,
International Organization 41:4, 725-753.
Kirshner, J. (2000) ‘Rationalist Explanations for War?’ Security Studies 10:1, 143-
150.
Koschut, S. (2014) ‘Regional order and peaceful change: Security communities as a
via media in International Relations theory’, Cooperation and Conflict (online)
Lynn-Jones, S. (1999) ‘Realism and Security Studies’ in Craig A. Snyder (ed.)
Contemporary Security and Strategy (Macmillan Education UK) pp. 53-76.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (1990) ‘Why we Will Soon Miss the Cold War’, The Atlantic
Monthly, 266:2, 35-50.
Mearsheimer, John J. (1994) ‘The false promise of international institutions’,
International Security 19:3, 5-49. (see also Keohane and Martin 1995 below)
Mearsheimer, John J. (2001) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W.
Norton.

Michael W. Doyle (2005) ‘Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace’ American Political
Science Review 99:3, pp. 463-66.
Powell, R. (1994) ‘Anarchy in International Relations Theory: the Neorealist-
Neoliberal Debate’, International Organization 48:2, 313-344.
Scheuerman, William E. “The (Classical) Realist Vision of Global Reform.”
International Theory 2, no. 2 (2010): 246–82.
Schweller, R. (1996) ‘Neorealism’s Status-Quo Bias: What Security Dilemma?’ in
Frankel, B. (ed.) Realism: Restatements and Renewal. London: Frank Cass,
90-121.
Van Evera, S. (1990-91) ‘Primed for Peace: Europe after the Cold War’, International
Security 15:3, 7-57.
Van Evera, Stephen (1999) Causes of War. Power and the Roots of Conflict. Ithaca:
Cornell University Press.
Waltz, K. N. (1979) Theory of International Politics. Boston, McGraw-Hill.
Waltz, K. N. (1988) ‘The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory’, The Journal of
Interdisciplinary History 18:4: 615-628.
Waltz, K. N. (1990) ‘Nuclear Myths and Political Realities’, American Political Science
Review 84:3, 731–745.
Zhengyu Wu (2017) ‘Classical geopolitics, realism, and the balance of power theory’
Journal of Strategic Studies, Online First available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2017.1379398 or
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01402390.2017.1379398
WEEK 9 – Decolonising Security (Dr Annika Bergman Rosamond)
Core reading
1. Barkawi, T. (2016) ‘Decolonising War’, European Journal of International
Security, 1(2): 199-214. [Resource List]
2. Barkawi, T. and Laffey, M. (2006) ’The Postcolonial Moment in Security
Studies’, Review of International Studies, 32(2): 329 -352. [Resource
List]
Tutorial reading
3. Howell, A. and Richter-Montpetit, M. (2020) ‘Is securitization theory racist?
Civilizationism, methodological whiteness, and antiblack thought in the
Copenhagen School’, Security Dialogue, 51(1): 3-22. [Resource List]
Further reading
Barkawi, T. (2004) ‘On the pedagogy of “small wars”’, International Affairs, 80(1): 19-
37.
Benzing, B. (2019) “Whom You Don’t Know, You Don’t Trust: Vernacular Security
Distrust and Its Exclusionary Effect in Post-Conflict Societies.” Journal of Global
Security Studies 5 (1): 97–109.
Bilgin, P. (2009) ‘The International Political ‘Sociology of a Not So International
Discipline’, International Political Sociology, 3(3): 338-342.
Bilgin, P. (2010) ‘The ‘Western-Centrism of Security Studies: ‘Blind Spot’ or
Constitutive Practice?’, Security Dialogue, 41(6): 615-622.
Chukwuma, K. H. (2022) ‘Critical terrorism studies and postcolonialism: constructing
ungoverned spaces in counter-terrorism discourse in Nigeria’, Critical Studies on
Terrorism, 15(2): 399-416.
Doty, R. L. (1996) Imperial Encounters: The Politics of Representation in North-
South Relations. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Grovogui, S. N. (2002) ‘Regimes of Sovereignty: International Morality and the
African Condition’, European Journal of International Relations, 8(3): 315-338.
Hansen, L. (2020) ‘Are core feminist critiques of securitization theory racist?’ Security
Dialogue, 51(4): 378 – 385.
Hindawi, C.P. (2022) “Decolonizing the Responsibility to Protect: On pervasive
Eurocentrism, Southern agency and struggles over universals” Security
Dialogue, 2022, Vol. 53(1) 38–56.
Hobson, J.M. (2009) ‘Provincializing Westphalia: The Eastern Origins of
Sovereignty’, International Politics, 46(6): 671-690.
Hutchings, K. (2011) ‘Dialogue between Whom? The Role of the West/Non-West
Distinction in Promoting Global Dialogue in IR’, Millennium, 39(3): 639-647.
Ilyas, M. (2022) “Decolonialisation and the Terrorism Industry”, Critical Studies on
Terrorism 15:2 417-440.
Laffey, M. and Weldes, J. (2008) ‘Decolonizing the Cuban Missile Crisis’,
International Studies Quarterly, 52(3): 555-557.
Ling, L.H.M. (2013) The Dao of World Politics: Towards a Post-Westphalian, Worldist
International Relations (1st edition). London: Routledge.
Ling, L.H.M. (2017) ‘Afterword Postcolonial-Feminism: Transformative possibilities in
thought and action, hear and soul Pages”, Postcolonial Studies, 19(4): 478-580.
Mignolo, W. D. (2002) ‘The Geopolitics of Knowledge and Colonial Difference’, The
South Atlantic quarterly, 101(1): 57-96.
Parashar, S. (2016) ‘Feminism and Postcolonialism: (En)gendering Encounters’,
Postcolonial Studies, 19(4): 371-377.
Weaver, O. and Buzan, B. (2020) ‘Racism and Responsibility – The Critical Limits of
Deepfake Methodology in Security Studies: A Reply to Howell and Richter –
Montpetit’, Security Dialogue, 51(4): 386 – 394.
WEEK 10 – Gender and Security (Dr Annika Bergman Rosamond)
Core reading
1. Sjoberg, L. (2012) ‘Gender, Structure, and War: What Waltz Couldn’t See’,
International Theory 4(1): 1–38. [Resource List]
2. Bergman Rosamond, A. & Kronsell, A. (2018) ’Cosmopolitan militaries and
dialogic peacekeeping: Danish and Swedish women soldiers in Afghanistan’,
International Feminist Journal of Politics, 20:2, 172-187. [Resource List]
3. Wibben, A. (2018) “Why we need to study (US) militarism: A critical feminist
lens”, Security Dialogue, 49(1-2): 136-148. [Resource List]
Tutorial reading
4. Wibben, A. (2020) “Everyday Security, Feminism, and the Continuum of
Violence”, Journal of Global Security Studies, 5(1): 115-121.
Further reading
Agius, C. Bergman Rosamond, A. and Kinnvall, C. (2020) “Populism, ontological
insecurity and gendered nationalism: Masculinity, climate denial and Covid-19”
Politics, Religion and Ideology, 21:4, 432-450.
Cohn, C., F. Hill and S. Ruddick (2005) The Relevance of Gender for Eliminating
Weapons of Mass Destruction. Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission.
Daigle, Megan D. From Cuba with Love: Sex and Money in the Twenty-First Century.
Oakland, California: University of California Press, 2015.
Duncanson, Claire and Catherine Eschle (2008) ‘Gender and the Nuclear Weapons
State: A Feminist Critique of the UK Government's White Paper on Trident’
New Political Science 30:4 pp. 545-63.

Forum on “The State of the Discipline: A Security Studies Forum”, International
Studies Perspectives, 2013, pp. 436-462.
Hansen, L. (2000) ‘The Little Mermaid's Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of
Gender in the Copenhagen School’, Millennium: Journal of International
Studies 29:2, 285-306.
Hansen, L. (2000) ‘Gender, Nation, Rape: Bosnia and the Construction of Security’,
International Feminist Journal of Politics, Vol. 3:1, 55-57.
Hesford, Victoria, and Lisa Diedrich. “Introduction: Thinking Feminism in a Time of
War.” In Feminist Time Against Nation Time: Gender, Politics, and the Nation-
State in an Age of Permanent War, edited by Victoria Hesford and Lisa
Diedrich, 1–22. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010.
Johansson-Nogués, Elisabeth. “Gendering the Arab Spring? Rights and (In)security

of Tunisian, Egyptian and Libyan Women.” Security Dialogue 44, no. 5–6 (October 1,
2013): 393–409. doi:10.1177/0967010613499784.
Penttinen, Elina. Joy and International Relations: A New Methodology. Routledge,

2013.
Sjoberg, Laura (2014) Gender, War, and Conflict. London: Polity.
Sjoberg, Laura & Caron Gentry (2013) Mothers, Monsters, and Whores: Womens’
Violence in Global Politics. London: Zed.
Stern, Maria. “Racism, Sexism, Classism, and Much More: Reading Security-Identity
in Marginalized Sites.” In Feminist Methodologies for International Relations,
edited by Brooke A. Ackerly, Maria Stern, and Jacqui True, 174–98.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Stern, M. (2011) ‘Gender and Race in the European Security Strategy: Europe as a
‘Force for Good’ Quest’, Journal of International Relations and Development
14:1, 28-59.
Stern, M. and Zalewski, M. (2009) ‘Feminist Fatigue (s): Reflections on Feminism
and Familiar Fables of Militarisation’, Review of International Studies 35:3,
611-630.
Tickner, J. Ann. Gender in International Relations: Feminist Perspectives on
Achieving Global Security. Columbia University Press, 1992.
Tickner, J. Ann (2004) ‘Feminist responses to international security studies’, Peace
review 16:1, 43-48.
Wibben, A. (2010) Feminist security studies: a narrative approach. London:
Routledge.
Young, I.M. (2003) ‘Feminist Reactions to the Contemporary Security Regime’,
Hypatia 18:1, 223-231.

Appendix 1 – General Information
Students with Disabilities

The School welcomes disabled students with disabilities (including those with specific
learning difficulties such as dyslexia) and is working to make all its courses as
accessible as possible. If you have a disability special needs which means that you
may require adjustments to be made to ensure access to lectures, tutorials or exams,
or any other aspect of your studies, you can discuss these with your Student Adviser
or Personal Tutor who will advise on the appropriate procedures.
You can also contact the Student Disability and Learning Support Service, based on
the University of Edinburgh, Third Floor, Main Library, You can find their details as
well as information on all of the support they can offer at:
http://www.ed.ac.uk/student-disability-service
Learning Resources for Undergraduates

The Study Development Team at the Institute for Academic Development (IAD)
provides resources and workshops aimed at helping all students to enhance their
learning skills and develop effective study techniques. Resources and workshops
cover a range of topics, such as managing your own learning, reading, note-making,
essay and report writing, exam preparation and exam techniques.
The study development resources are available at ‘Study Hub’. Follow the link from
the IAD Study Development web page: www.ed.ac.uk/iad/undergraduates. This page
also offers links to workshops on study skills and Exam Bootcamp, a self-enrol online
resource to help students do well in exams
Workshops are interactive: they will give you the chance to take part in activities,
have discussions, exchange strategies, share ideas and ask questions. They are 90
minutes long and held on Wednesday afternoons at 1.30pm or 3.30pm. The
schedule is available from the IAD Undergraduate web page (see above).
Workshops are open to all undergraduates but you need to book in advance, using
the MyEd booking system. Each workshop opens for booking two weeks before the
date of the workshop itself. If you book and then cannot attend, please cancel in
advance through MyEd so that another student can have your place. (To be fair to all
students, anyone who persistently books on workshops and fails to attend may be
barred from signing up for future events).
Study Development Advisors are also available for an individual consultation if you
have specific questions about your own approach to studying, working more
effectively, strategies for improving your learning and your academic work. Please
note, however, that Study Development Advisors are not subject specialists so they
cannot comment on the content of your work. They also do not check or proof read
students' work.
Students can book a study skills consultation at https://www.ed.ac.uk/institute-

academic-development/undergraduate/services/quick-consultations
English Language Support

Students looking for Academic English support can accessed this at:
https://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/international/student-life/language-support

Students for whom English is a second language can also take the ALLIS training
course. More details can be found at https://www.ed.ac.uk/english-language-
teaching/insession-courses/elsis
Discussing Sensitive Topics

The discipline of Politics & International Relations, and especially its subfield of
Security Studies, necessarily addresses a number of topics that some might find
sensitive or, in some cases, distressing. Global Security will treat thermonuclear
apocalypse, conventional war, terrorism, rape, and other forms of political violence,
subjugation, inequality, gender issues, diverse vulnerabilities and exploitative
practices, and other topics that some may find difficult for a variety of reasons.
We will discuss these topics frankly and openly (which is not the same as bluntly).
And we will discuss these topics sensitively – that is, with the expectation that our
cohort includes a variety of backgrounds and experiences, some of which may be
quite close to the topics in question.
You should read this Course Guide carefully and if there are any topics that you may
feel distressed by you should seek advice from the course convenor and/or your
Personal Tutor.
For more general issues you may consider seeking the advice of the Student
Counselling Service, http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/student-counselling
Tutorial Allocation
You will be automatically assigned to a Tutorial group by the beginning of week 1.
This allocation is done using Student Allocator, a tool which will randomly assign you
to a suitable tutorial group based on your timetable. The benefits of this system are
that students will be able to instantly view their tutorial group on their personal
timetable and timetable clashes will be more easily avoided.
Please check your timetable regularly in week 1 to see which group you have been
assigned. Guidance on how to view your personalised timetable can be found at:
https://www.ed.ac.uk/timetabling-examinations/timetabling/personalised-timetables/
student-timetables
Please note that there are limited spaces in tutorial groups and there will be little
room for movement. If you are unable to attend the tutorial group you have been
allocated for a valid reason, you can submit a change request by completing the
online Tutorial Change Request form. You can access the form via the Timetabling
webpages here
Data Protection Guidance for Students

In most circumstances, students are responsible for ensuring that their work with
information about living, identifiable individuals complies with the requirements of the
Data Protection Act. The document, Personal Data Processed by Students, provides
an explanation of why this is the case. It can be found, with advice on data
protection compliance and ethical best practice in the handling of information about
living, identifiable individuals, on the Records Management section of the University
website at: http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/records-management-section/
data-protection/guidance-policies/dpforstudents

Appendix 2 – Feedback sheets
Global Security Policy Brief Cover/Feedback Sheet
*Indicated fields MUST be completed by student.
*Exam number
*Course
*Policy brief title
*Word count
Marker’s name
*If you consent for the School to retain a copy of your coursework and make it available to
other students to assist them in completing their assignment, please check the box below.
Where your work is made available, it will be anonymized. Please be sure to read the full
details of our coursework retention policy here before providing your consent.
I consent to my coursework being retained for the purpose stated above ☐.
NOTE: Essay marks are reviewed by another member of staff prior to being returned
to students
This Section is for office use.
Initial Mark
Word count penalties
Lateness penalties
Adjusted Mark
Overview
Aspect of performance + Avg -
Research Effort
Understanding
Quality of Analysis
Evaluation of Options and Recommendation
Presentation
Major advice to student

Main strength(s) of
the policy brief
This and future

policy briefs could
be improved by…

SPS Student Cover Sheet/ Feedback Sheet
*Indicated fields MUST be completed by student.
*Exam number
Course
*Essay title
*Word Count
Marker’s name
* If you consent for the School to retain a copy of your coursework and make it available to other
students to assist them in completing their assessment, please check the box below. Where your work
is made available, it will be anonymized. Please be sure to read the full details of our coursework
retention policy here before providing your consent.
I consent to my coursework being retained for the purpose stated above Yes/No
This Section is for office use.
Initial Mark
Word count penalties
Late submission penalties
Adjusted Mark
Overview
Aspect of performance + Avg -
Thinking skills (criticism, analysis, interpretation, logic,
argumentation, evaluation, use of comparison,
anticipating counter-arguments, etc.)
Comprehension (accuracy in facts, details and
representation of authors’ views, breadth of reading,
grasp of major issues, etc.)
Writing skills (structure and organisation, clarity,
precision, grammar/spelling, use of illustration, style,
etc.)
Academic integrity (referencing, acknowledgement of
sources, source text placed in quotation marks with page
numbers provided, writing in ‘own voice’)
Major advice to student

Main
strength(s) of
the essay
Main
weakness(es) of
the essay
This and
future essays
could be
improved by…
Participation Assessment – Feedback Form

A grade will be awarded for each of the following categories based on these general criteria. You
will also receive more specific feedback in the comments section. The grades for each
component will then be averaged out to give you a mark for the participation element (15% of
your total mark for the course).
Student name: Marker:

Performance
Strong ↔ Weak
Absent in
Sometimes Attends
Rarely absent lectures
absent in lectures rarely _
in lectures (A) repeatedly
lectures (B) (D)
(C)
Attendance /
Promptness Rarely late
Absent/late
Always to tutorials, Absent/late to
to tutorials
prompt to some tutorials every
repeatedly.
tutorials. (A) absences. week. (D)
(C)
(B)
Almost Prepared for
Usually Almost never
always tutorial
prepared for prepared for
prepared for sometimes
tutorial with tutorial with
tutorial with with
Preparation contributions contributions
contributions contributions
derived from derived from
derived from derived from
required required
required required
readings. (B) readings. (D)
readings. (A) readings. (C)
Student
Student
proactively Student
proactively
contributes rarely
contributes Student never
by offering contributes
Level Of by offering contributes by
ideas and by offering
Engagement ideas and offering ideas ____
asking ideas and
In Class asking and asking
questions asking
questions questions. (D)
more than questions.
once per
once per (C)
class. (B)
class. (A)
Does not Does not
Listens when
always listen routinely listen
others talk,
Listens when others when others
both in small
when others talk; talk, both in
and large
talk, both in contributions small and large
Listening group
small and often group ____
Skills discussions.
large group unrelated to discussions
Incorporates
discussions. discussion Student often
or builds off
(B) and interrupts
of the ideas
contributions when others
of others. (A)
of others. (C) speak. (D)
Average ____
Marker comments:

Handbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handbook

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Politics & International Relations

Foundations in Global Security

Practical (optional post-lecture group activity and discussion)

Lauren Rogers, lrogers3@ed.ac.uk

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 2

At the end of the course, students will have:

 An understanding of how International Relations theory applies to global

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 3

Lectures & practicals

The first lecture will be held on TUESDAY 20 SEPTEMBER 2022, 14:10-15:00,

To participate actively and constructively to tutorials is key to develop your ability to

You will be automatically assigned to a Tutorial group. Your group should

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 4

Policy Brief 1500 words 35%

Essay 2500 words 50%

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 5

Other general marking criteria for coursework apply.

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 7

 Development and coherence of arguments

Other general marking criteria for coursework apply.

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 8

Listening to others is as important as talking. Listening carefully to the contributions

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 9

Readings and Resource List

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 10

 Baylis, John et al. (eds) (2013) Strategy in the Contemporary World: An

Peer-reviewed journals and other useful sources

Consider consulting non-mainstream platforms like www.opendemocracy.net/.

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 11

Rational choice games website

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 12

Week Day Date Lecture

Tuesday 27/9/22 Strategy and Victory in War

No lectures, no tutorials, course organiser will hold extended

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 13

WEEK 1 - Introduction: The concept and field of security

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 14

The changing field of security studies

WEEK 2 - Strategy and victory in war

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 15

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 16

WEEK 3 - The Thermonuclear Revolution

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 17

WEEK 4 – Securitization (the Copenhagen School)

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 18

Balzacq, Thierry (2005) ‘The Three Faces of Securitization: Political Agency,

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 19

WEEK 5 – Emancipation and everyday security (Welsh & Paris Schools)

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 20

WEEK 6 – Environmental Security (Dr Ben Coulson)

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 21

WEEK 7 – New agendas? Bioterrorism & Health Security

4. Wenham, C. (2020) What is the future of UK leadership in global health

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 22

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 23

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 24

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 25

WEEK 9 – Decolonising Security (Dr Annika Bergman Rosamond)

2022-23 PLIT10154 Foundations in Global Security 26

WEEK 10 – Gender and Security (Dr Annika Bergman Rosamond)