Weapons of Mass Destruction in World Politics

Sharon Weiner

WRI 105
Fall 2003
Monday/Wednesday 11-12:20 pm

CLASS SCHEDULE

Week 1 Begin Essay #1 – Single Text Analysis
Monday, September 15
In-class:
Introduction to WRI 105
Weapons of Mass Destruction – Facts, myths and assumptions

Understanding the “Elements of the Academic Essay” by Gordon Harvey

Wednesday, September 17
Reading Assignment:
Course Information, Class Schedule and Assignment Sequence
for Essay #1 (also on Blackboard)
Carol Cohn, “Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 1987, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 687-718.

Writing Assignment:
Map the “Elements of the Academic Essay” onto Carol Cohn’s “Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals.” Bring to class a copy of the article with the “Elements” identified in the margins. Where possible, identify several examples of each element.
In-class:
Discuss the use of the “Elements” in Cohn’s “Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals.”

Week 2
Monday, September 22
Reading Assignment – Understanding deterrence as a national security strategy
Henry A. Kissinger, “Force and Diplomacy in the Nuclear Age,” Foreign Affairs, (April 1956), Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 349-366.
Bernard Brodie, “The Anatomy of Deterrence,” in Strategy in the Missile Age (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959), pp. 271-295.
Robert S. McNamara, “Mutual Deterrence,” in The Essence of Security: Reflections in Office (New York: Harper & Row, 1968) pp. 51-67.
McGeorge Bundy, The Future of Strategic Deterrence, Papers form the 21st Annual Conference of the IISS, Adelphi Papers No. 160 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1980), pp. 5-12.

Writing Assignment:
Pre-draft assignment #1: Based on the Kissinger, Brodie and McNamara texts, produce a one paragraph summary of the strategy of deterrence.
Pre-draft assignment #2: Using the Bundy text, state 3 arguable theses about the relationship between deterrence and the size of Soviet nuclear forces.
In-class:
Close reading of a text – in 4 groups, compare the one paragraph summaries of deterrence and produce one summary for each group. Discuss how these summaries do and do not accurately capture the theory of deterrence and the assumptions on which deterrence is based.
Thesis – in 4 groups, rank order the theses in terms of arguability. Why are some of the theses better than others? How can some be improved? What makes a thesis arguable?

Wednesday, September 24
Reading Assignment – Moral issues arising from deterrence and weapons of mass destruction
U.S. Bishops’ Pastoral Letter on War and Peace
The Russell-Einstein Manifesto (London: July 9, 1955)

Writing Assignment:

Pre-draft assignment #3: Bring to class an arguable thesis statement for Essay #1.
In-class:
In small groups, discuss thesis statements in terms of arguability and evidence. Based on what you learn, revise your thesis for Essay #1.

Exercises on Evidence.
Friday, September 26 at 5:00 pm
Draft of Essay #1 due – In 5-6 pages, make an argument about the role of morality in McNamara’s discussion of deterrence and U.S. security. Please submit your essay by email and include in the message your preferred time for our conference on your draft (Sept. 29-Oct. 1). I will contact two of you about posting your draft essays on Blackboard. We will “workshop” these essays next week.

Week 3
Monday, September 29
Reading and Writing Assignment:
Drafts of Essay #1 written by two of your colleagues. Read these and come to class prepared to comment on them using “Elements” as a guide. As part of this effort, please bring to class a letter you have written to the author of each draft – at the end of class, you will give these letters to each author. The purpose of this letter is to give the authors guidance for their revisions; in each letter, you will comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the paper using “Elements” as a guide.

In-Class:
Workshops on Essay #1 drafts.
Wednesday, October 1
Reading Assignment – Did deterrence work? Are biological weapons really weapons of mass destruction?
Susan Wright, “In Search of a New Paradigm of Biological Disarmament,” in Biological Warfare and Disarmament: New Problems/New Perspectives, Susan Wright, editor (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002), pp. 3-24.
Philip Morrison & Kosta Tsipis, “Rightful Names,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2003, pp. 77.
John Mueller, “The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons,” International Security, Fall 1988, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 3-17.
Lee Butler, “Zero Tolerance,” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, January/February, 2000, p. 20-21, 72-75.
In-class:
Exercises on Structure and Evidence

Week 4 Begin Essay #2 – Comparative Analysis
Wednesday, October 8
Revision of Essay #1 due by 5:00 pm. In the email transmitting your essay, please include a cover letter, no longer than one page, in which you restate your thesis, briefly summarize your essay and conclusions, and explain to me which parts of this essay you found most difficult to write and why.
Reading assignment – Alternative conceptions of nuclear weapons and national security
International Court of Justice, Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion handed down on July 8, 1996, the Hague.
Excerpts from Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Since 1940, Stephen I. Schwartz, editor (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 1998:
Makhijani, Schwartz and Weida, “Nuclear Waste Management and Environmental Remediation,” pp. 373-380.
Makhijani and Schwartz, “Victims of the Bomb,” pp. 395-396.
William Weida, “The Economic Implications of Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Deterrence,” pp. 519-531, 538-541.
Zia Mian, “Renouncing the Nuclear Option,” in Pakistan and the Bomb: Public Opinion and Nuclear Options, Samina Ahmed and David Cortright, editors (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1998), pp. 47-68.
“The End of Imagination,” in Arundhati Roy, The Algebra of Infinite Justice (London: Flamingo, 2002), pp. 2-37.
ß Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, Draft Report of
National Security Advisory Board on Indian Nuclear Doctrine, August 17, 1999.
In-class: Exercises on Plagiarism and Orienting.

Week 5
Monday, October 13
Writing Assignment:
Pre-draft assignment #1: Bring to class a thesis statement for Essay #2.
Pre-draft assignment #2: In 1-2 pages, write a rebuttal to the arguments offered in the article by Mian.
In-Class: Exercises on Thesis & Motive, Counter-arguments, Key Terms
Wednesday, October 15
Draft of Essay #2 due before class: Make an argument about the role played by the notion of national security in “The End of Imagination” by Roy and the Draft Report of the National Security Advisory Board on Indian Nuclear Doctrine. Your essay should be no longer than 8 pages.
Reading and Writing Assignment:
Drafts of Essay #2 written by two of your colleagues who will agree to submit these, via Blackboard, by 5:00 pm on Tuesday, October 14. Read these and come to class prepared to comment on them using “Elements” as a guide. As part of this effort, please bring to class a letter you have written to the author of each draft – at the end of class, you will give these letters to each author. The purpose of this letter is to give the authors guidance for their revisions; in each letter, you will comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the paper using “Elements” as a guide.
In-Class:
Workshops on Essay #2 drafts

Week 6

Monday, October 20
Reading and Writing Assignment:
Drafts of Essay #2. Read these and come to class prepared to comment on them using “Elements” as a guide. As part of this effort, please bring to class a letter you have written to the author of each draft – at the end of class, you will give these letters to each author. The purpose of this letter is to give the authors guidance for their revisions; in each letter, you will comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the paper using “Elements” as a guide.
In-Class:
Workshops on Essay #2 drafts
Wednesday, October 22
In-Class: Meet in Firestone lobby for session on using the library.
Friday, October 31 – Revision of Essay #2 due by 5:00 pm. In the email transmitting your essay, please include a cover letter, no longer than one page, in which you restate your thesis, briefly summarize your essay and conclusions, and explain to me which parts of this essay you found most difficult to write and why.

Week 7 Begin Essay #3 – Research Paper
Monday, November 3
Reading Assignment – Proliferation: theories and evidence
“Global Trends” and “The International Non-Proliferation Regime,” in Deadly Arsenals: Tracking Weapons of Mass Destruction, Joseph Cirincione, editor (Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2002), pp. 3-34.
Scott D. Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?”, International Security Vol. 21, No. 3 (Winter 1996/97), pp. 54-86.
“Conclusion”, in Mitchell Reiss, Bridled Ambition: Why Countries Constrain Their Nuclear Capabilities (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 1995, pp. 321-333.
In-Class:
Brainstorming on research paper topics, exercises on using Sources.
Wednesday, November 5
Reading Assignment:
“South Africa: “Castles in the Air”,” in Mitchell Reiss, Bridled Ambition: Why Countries Constrain Their Nuclear Capabilities,” pp. 7-43.
Avner Cohen, “Israel: Reconstructing a Black Box,” in Biological Warfare and Disarmament: New Problems/New Perspectives, Susan Wright, editor (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002), pp. 181-212.
Writing Assignment:
Pre-draft assignment #1: bring to class an arguable thesis statement for Essay #3.
In-class:
Group conference on thesis statements for Essay #3. Statements will be revised in class.

Week 8
Monday, November 10
Reading Assignment:
Academic Integrity at Princeton
Writing Assignment:
Pre-draft assignment #2: bring to class a 2 page outline of your research paper. The second page should also contain a list of sources.
In-Class: Sources
Wednesday, November 12
Reading Assignment:
Chapters 1 & 2 in Scott D. Sagan and Kenneth N. Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2003), pp. 3-87.
In-Class: Plagiarism, reflecting

Week 9
Monday, November 17 Begin Essay #4 – Position Paper
Reading Assignment – Controlling nuclear weapons
Text of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty
Jonathan Schell, “The Folly of Arms Control,” Foreign Affairs, Sept/Oct 2000, pp. 22-46.
Differentiation and Defense: An Agenda for the Nuclear Weapons Program, House Policy Committee, Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives, February 2003, pp. 1-16.
George Perkovich, “Bush’s Nuclear Revolution: A Regime Change in Nonproliferation,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 82, No. 2, March/April 2003, pp. 2-8.
Congressional Record, Senate, May 20, 2003, pp. S6663-6696.
In-Class:
Exercises on Stitching, Key Terms, Stance, Title
Wednesday, November 19
Writing Assignment:
Pre-draft assignment #1: In 1-2 pages, identify the main arguments made in the reading from the Congressional Record and compare and contrast the assumptions underlying these arguments.
In-Class: Public Speaking, Style

Week 10
Monday, November 24
Draft of Essay #4 (the position paper) due before class – Write an op-ed to a newspaper (either your hometown paper, the New York Times, or the Daily Princetonian) in which you explain whether or not the United States should develop low-yield nuclear weapons and why.
Please note: This week you should meet in your informal writing groups to workshop each others’ essays. We will not have individual conferences for Essay #4.
In-Class: On using government documents
Wednesday, November 26
Reading and Writing Assignment:
Drafts of Essay #4 (the position paper) written by four of your colleagues. Read these essays and come to class prepared to comment on them using “Elements” as a guide. As part of this effort, please bring to class a letter you have written to the author of each draft – at the end of class, you will give these letters to each author. The purpose of this letter is to give the authors guidance for their revisions; in each letter, you will comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the paper using “Elements” as a guide.
In-Class:
Workshops on four Essay #4s
Week 11
Monday, December 1
Presentations: You are a witness in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is considering whether to fund research into low-yield nuclear weapons. You have five minutes to explain to the Committee whether or not you think the United States should develop these weapons and to persuade the Committee to follow your advice.
Wednesday, December 3
Revision of Essay #4 (the position paper) due before class.
In-Class: Discuss presentations
Week 12
Sunday, December 7
Draft of Essay #3 (the research paper) due by 5:00 pm.
Monday, December 8
Reading and Writing Assignment:
Drafts of Essay #3 (the research paper) written by two of your colleagues. Read these essays and come to class prepared to comment on them using “Elements” as a guide. As part of this effort, please bring to class a letter you have written to the author of each draft – at the end of class, you will give these letters to each author. The purpose of this letter is to give the authors guidance for their revisions; in each letter, you will comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the paper using “Elements” as a guide.
In-Class: Workshops on Essay #3 drafts.
Wednesday, December 10
In-class: discussion of writing skills, course evaluations

January 12 Revision of Essay #3 (the research paper) and Reflection Letter both due by noon.