Marmara Üniversitesi
Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim-Öğretim Bilgi Sistemi

Bu ders, Uluslararası İlişkilerdeki son zamanlardaki bazı temel teorik tartışmaları ve bunların dünya siyasetinin değişen doğasına pratik etkilerini araştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu doğrultuda, farklı uluslararası ilişkiler teorileri üzerinden günümüz dünya siyasetindeki çeşitli konuları ve vakaları anlamak temeli oluşturmaktadır.

-

14 hafta boyunca yoğun eğitim Materyallerin okunması ve derslere katılım beklenmektedir

Lecture Presentation Class Discussion

Yok

%30 İngilizce

Çeşitli makaleler ve kitaplardan oluşmaktadır. Okuma Listesi Week 1: Introduction Week 2: International Organizations (IOs) in World Politics: New “actors” besides states? Required: John J. Mearshiemer, "The False Promise of International Institutions", International Security, Vol. 19, No. 3, Winter, 1994/95, pp: 5-49. Michael Barnett, and Martha Finnemore. "The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations", International Organization, Vol. 53, No. 4, 1999, pp: 699-732. Recommended: B.S. Chimni, “International Institutions Today: An Imperial Global State in the Making”, European Journal of International Relations, Vol.15, No.1, 2004, pp:1-37. Week 3: United Nations (UN) in World Politics I: What kind of an “actor”? Required: Claude, Inis L. “Collective Legitimization as the Political Function of United Nations”, International Organization, Vol.20, No.3, Summer 1996, pp.367-379. Alexander Thomson, “Coercion through IOs: The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission”, International Organization, Vol.60, No.1, 2006, pp: 1-34. Recommended: Terrence L Chapman, “Audience Beliefs and International Organization Legitimacy”, International Organization, Vol.63, No.4, October 2009, pp: 733-764. Week 4: UN in World Politics II: Success or a Failure? Required:. Shashi Tharoor, “Security Council Reform: Past, Present, and Future”, Ethics & International Affairs, Vol. 25, No.4, 2011, pp: 397-406. Thomas G. Weiss, “The illusion of UN Security Council Reform”, Washington Quarterly, Vol.26, No.4, Autumn 2003, pp:147-161. Week 5: “Norms” and “Ethics” in IR: Utopia or Reality? Required: Martha Finnemore and Katherine Sikking, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change”, International Organization, Vol.52, No.4, Autumn1998, pp.887-917. Amitav Acharya, “How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism”, International Organization, Vol. 58, No. 2 (Spring, 2004), pp. 239-275 Week 6: Transnationalism and Civil Society: State Sovereignty Challenged? Keck, M. E. and Sikkink, K. “Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics.”, International Social Science Journal, 51(1999), pp: 89–101. Richard Price, “Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines”, International Organization, Vol. 52, No.3, 1998, pp: 613-44. Recommended: Price, Richard. “Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics”, (in) Richard Price (Ed.). Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2008, pp.1-53. Week 7: Questioning “Humanitarian Intervention”: A new norm of “Responsibility to Protect”? Required: Martha Finnemore, “Paradoxes in Humanitarian Intervention”, (in) Richard Price (ed.), Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2008, pp: 197-225. Gözen Ercan, Pınar. “The Responsibility to Protect: an international norm?” USAK Yearbook of International Politics and Law, Volume V (July 2012): 243-262. Week 8: Changing “Security” Concept: Issues of “New” Security Agenda Required: Barry Buzan & Lene Hansen, “Ch. 7: Widening and Deepening Security”, The Evolution of Security Studies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 187-225. Roland Paris, “Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?”, International Security, Vol. 26, No. 2, Fall, 2001, pp. 87-102. Week 9: Midterm Exam Week 10: “Crises” of Changing World Politics: Towards a “new” world order? Required: Ziya Onis, “The Age of Anxiety: The Crisis of Liberal Democracy in a Post-Hegemonic Global Order”, Acharya, A. (2017). After Liberal Hegemony: The Advent of a Multiplex World Order. Ethics & International Affairs, 31(3), 271-285. Week 11: Rising States, BRICS and MIKTA: Revisionist or Reformist Actors? Required Fabiano Mielniczuk (2013) “BRICS in the Contemporary World: Changing identities, Converging interests”, Third World Quarterly, 34:6, 1075-1090 Çolakoğlu, S. (2016). “The Role of MIKTA in Global Governance: Assessments & Shortcomings”, Korea Observer, 47( 2) , 267-290. Recommended: Gök G.O., Karadeniz R.F. (2018) ,“Analyzing “T” in MIKTA: Turkey’s Changing Middle Power Role in the United Nations”, içinde: Parlar Dal E. (eds) Middle Powers in Global Governance. Palgrave Macmillan Week 12: Locating Turkey in Changing World Politics: What kind of an “actor”? Required: Öniş, Z. , Kutlay, M. (2016). “The dynamics of emerging middle-power influence in regional and global governance: the paradoxical case of Turkey”, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 1-20 Emel Parlar Dal & Ali Murat Kurşun (2018) Turkey’s global governance strategies at the UN compared to the BRICS (2008–2014): clarifying the motivation–contribution nexus, Third World Quarterly, DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2018.1438182 Recommended Sever, Aysegul and Gonca Oguz Gok, (2016), “UN Factor in the “regional power role” and the Turkish Case in 2000s”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 29,3. Week 13: Discussion

-

• 21.yy siyasetine dair farkındalık oluşturma
• Yeni küresel tehditlere dair bilgi sahibi olma
• Liberal uluslararası düzenin geleceği hakkında bilgi sahibi olma
• Uluslararası Örgütlerin efektifliğine dair tartışma kabiliyeti kazanma
• Dünya Siyasetinde meydana gelen sorunlar hakkında fikir yürütebilme