1

POLITICS, PSYCHOLOGY and SOCIOLOGY TRIPOS

PART II 2013-14
Pol 4: Comparative Politics

Course Organiser
Pieter van Houten (pjv24@cam.ac.uk)
Department of Politics & International Studies
7 West Road

Lecturers
Chris Bickerton (cb799@cam.ac.uk)
Devon Curtis (dc403@cam.ac.uk)
Kun-Chin Lin (kcl35@cam.ac.uk)
Toby Matthiesen (mtm42@cam.ac.uk)
Aaron Rapport (ar727@cam.ac.uk)
Pieter van Houten (pjv24@cam.ac.uk)
Harald Wydra (hbw23@cam.ac.uk)

Contents
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 2
2. The lecture list .......................................................................................................................... 3
3. The essay ................................................................................................................................... 4
A. The questions ................................................................................................................. 4
B. Reading ........................................................................................................................... 6
C. Writing .......................................................................................................................... 11
D. Presentation and referencing ..................................................................................... 12
4. The courses .............................................................................................................................. 15
A. Comparative Politics .................................................................................................. 15
B. Eastern Europe: Russia and Poland compared....................................................... 18
C. Western Europe: France and Germany compared ................................................. 22
D. The Middle East: Egypt and Saudi Arabia compared ........................................... 34
E. Domestic Sources of US Foreign Policy ................................................................... 42
F. State Formation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo .................................. 47
G. The Environment and Growth in China .................................................................. 56
5. The exam ................................................................................................................................. 61


2

Please note that this course guide will be updated from time to time over the year.
This version was last updated on 25
th
February 2014.
1. Introduction

This is a broadly-focused paper that sets out to provide approaches to understanding and
explaining politics around the world today, with a specific focus on the nature and
developments of politics within states (which is what the discipline refers to as comparative
politics).

The first section of the paper is conceptual, exploring and evaluating major analytical themes in
modern politics. The lectures give an overview of some of the main themes in the study of
comparative politics. Questions of convergence and diversity are one important thread running
through these lectures: have the state, politics and forms of legitimacy become the same
everywhere, comprehensible through general theories that can be applied worldwide, or do
national and regional particularities still predominate? This section is assessed through a single,
5000-word essay written to a title chosen from a list provided, and supervised through
Michaelmas term. These questions cover a wide variety of themes and topics in comparative
politics, and allow students to focus on specific regions and countries according to their
interests.

The second section of the paper is made up of studies of particular regions and cases. The
regional studies each provide a general introduction to an area, but do this primarily through a
specific comparison between two countries. Eastern Europe is analysed through comparing the
politics of Russia and Poland, Western Europe through a comparison of France and Germany,
and the Middle East through looking at Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The case studies are of the
state-building process in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the relationship between
economic growth and the environment in China, and the domestic sources of foreign policy-
making in the United States. This section is assessed through a 2-hour exam at the end of the
year, with candidates answering two questions on different regions or cases; at least one of the
answers has to be about a region. The long essay and the exam each contribute 50% of the mark
for this paper.



3


2. The lecture list
The lectures for this paper are organised as follows:

Chris Bickerton and Pieter van Houten: Comparative Politics (12 lectures, Michaelmas)
Harald Wydra: Eastern Europe: Russia and Poland compared (6 lectures, Michaelmas)
Aaron Rapport: Domestic Sources of US Foreign Policy (4 lectures, Michaelmas)
Toby Matthiesen: The Middle East: Egypt and Saudi Arabia compared (6 lectures, Lent)
Pieter van Houten, Western Europe: France and Germany compared (6 lectures, Lent)
Devon Curtis: State Formation in Congo (4 lectures, Lent)
Kun-Chin Lin: The Environment and Growth in China (4 lectures, Lent)
Pieter van Houten: Comparative Politics again (1 seminar, Easter)

Here is the timetable in more detail, with shortened lecture titles. All lectures will be in SG1 (the
ground floor lecture room) at 7 West Road, unless otherwise stated. Full details are in section 4.

Michaelmas term
Comparative Politics Eastern Europe US foreign policy-making
10
th
Oct, 9 Introduction to paper
14
th
Oct, 12 State formation
17
th
Oct, 9 Origins of democracy
21
st
Oct, 12 Spread of democracy
24
th
Oct, 9 Authoritarian/hybrid
28
th
Oct, 12 Institutional features 29
th
Oct, 9 State traditions
31
st
Oct, 9 Parties
4
th
Nov, 12 Multi-level dynamics 5
th
Nov, 9 Nationalism 7
th
Nov, 9 US security state
11
th
Nov, 12 External influences (I) 12
th
Nov, 9 Leadership 14
th
Nov, 9 Actors
18
th
Nov, 12 External influences (II) 19
th
Nov, 9 Communism 21
st
Nov, 9 Public opinion
25
th
Nov, 12 Comparative politics 26
th
Nov, 9 Post-communism 28
th
Nov, 9 Sectoral interests
2
nd
Dec, 12 Conclusion 3
rd
Dec, 9 Legacies

Lent term
Middle East Congo China (S1)
20
th
Jan, 10 - Colonialism
21
st
Jan, 10 The Arab world 22
nd
Jan, 10 Development
22
nd
Jan, 12 Authoritarianism 27
th
Jan, 10 - Geopolitics
28
th
Jan, 10 Development 29
th
Jan, 10 Assessment
29
th
Jan, 12 Religion & state 3
rd
Feb, 10 Economy & aid
4
th
Feb, 10 Revolution 5
th
Feb, 10 Consequences
5
th
Feb, 12 Change & stability 10
th
Feb, 10 - A failed state? 12
th
Feb, 10 Failure?
Western Europe Western Europe
11
th
Feb, 10 - History 12
th
Feb, 12 - Parties

4

18
th
Feb, 10 Executives 19
th
Feb, 12 Immigration policy
25
th
Feb, 10 Economic policy 26
th
Feb, 12 EU integration

Easter term a single session on Wednesday 14
th
May, 10-12, room SG1 (7 West Road).
3. The essay

This paper is assessed by one long essay, to be submitted by noon on Monday, 20 January 2014,
as well as the two-hour exam (on this, see section 5).

The essay-based part of the paper gives you an opportunity to pursue your more particular
interests in politics. It is taken by writing one long essay over the space of Michaelmas term.
You are asked to choose a question from the list below, and to write an essay of not more than
5,000 words on it. You should consider conceptual issues, although not to the exclusion of
relevant facts. Many of the questions are very generally phrased. This allows you, in discussion
with your supervisor, to decide to answer them in a general way or to concentrate on a
particular aspect or example of the issue at hand.

The lectures on comparative politics are intended to assist you in thinking about themes that
will assist you in answering the question. You will also have a supervisor assigned to you. You
can expect to have three supervisions for this essay: the first to consider the nature and scope of
the question and your approach to it; the second, to discuss progress normally on the basis of a
written outline; the third to review a first draft. Supervisors will not read more than one draft of
the essay, and will not offer more than three supervisions. You are expected to work for the
essay during term time and supervisors will expect to give you each of the three supervisions
during term time. Other than in exceptional circumstances where your Director of Studies has
provided evidence that you have been unable to work for some period of the term, supervisors
can, and often will, refuse to read drafts during the vacation.

A. The questions
You will be asked to choose your question at the start of Michaelmas term. Please register your
first and second choice of question via the electronic survey system; the course organiser will
send an email to you with details of this after the first lecture on 10
th
October (see below). If you
do not receive an email on this day, please contact him directly on <pjv24@cam.ac.uk>. As the
preference for questions sometimes outweighs the potential for those questions to be
supervised, it is not always possible for everyone to be supervised on their first choice. You will
receive details of your supervisor by mid-day on 12
th
October at the latest; again, contact the
course organiser if you havent received details by then.

On the next page is the list of questions. After that, there is a list of suggested initial reading
material for each of these questions.

5

1. Why, how and when did states emerge as the dominant institutional form for
modern political life?
2. How important are international pressures in shaping national government
policies?
3. How does globalisation affect the domestic security of states?
4. Can domestic politics still be separated from international affairs?
5. What are the limits to the influence of non-governmental organisations?
6. Is the use of violence an effective tool for political change?
7. How far has the idea of democracy clarified the political task of building a
legitimate state? Discuss with reference to any two recent cases.
8. Why is it so hard for regimes which collapse in the face of popular challenge to
rebuild them rapidly and with any real stability?
9. Does the growing involvement of International Non-governmental Organizations
(INGOs) in global politics decrease the authority and governing capacity of
states?
10. Is the European Union a state?
11. Which factors determine whether transnational advocacy campaigns are
successful in influencing policy outcomes?
12. Does democracy promote or impede economic development?
13. Does international economic integration benefit states?
14. What are the consequences of declining trust in politicians?
15. Do democratic legislatures need to become more representative or more expert?
16. Do political parties still have distinct ideological profiles?
17. Why is corruption more prevalent in some countries than in others?
18. Does decentralisation weaken the state?
19. Can drug wars in developing countries ever succeed?
20. Why are weak states weak?
21. Do democratic and authoritarian governments show different approaches and
capacities toward environmental regulations?
22. To what extent can local governments be responsible for public debt
management?
23. Does natural resource abundance hinder development?
24. Is globalisation making the world more unequal?
25. Under what conditions can special interest groups have the most influence over a
states foreign policy?
26. Are individual leaders psychological characteristics more important for
explaining political choices than regime type?
27. Is technocratic politics compatible with democratic politics?
28. Why is representative democracy not the rule of the poor?
29. Can there still be a majority party in the United States?
30. Must one choose between multiculturalism and feminism?

6

31. Where do women make a political difference?
32. Was communism simply a great illusion?
33. How do memories shape politics?

B. Reading
For this paper, you are expected to learn how to use bibliographical searches, if you have not
done so already, and not to rely upon your supervisor to provide a full reading list. Many of the
most useful databases are listed in the faculty library guide to research in Politics:
http://mws.hsps.cam.ac.uk/sps-library/lib_research_polguide.html. Three of the most useful
databases are ProQuest (access via the link to IBSS on the library guide); http://www.jstor.org/ ;
and, for a broader range, http://scholar.google.co.uk/ . It will also be useful to familiarise
yourself with the University Library, as it is likely that some of the sources for your essay will
only be available there (and not in the SPS library).

Here are beginnings of some initial ideas on where to start with reading for each of these
questions.

1. Why, how and when did states emerge as the dominant institutional form for modern political life?
- Richard Lachmann (2010) States and Power (Polity), Chapters 1 and 2
- Hendrik Spruyt (1994) The Sovereign State and Its Competitors (Princeton UP)
- Joseph Strayer (1970) On The Medieval Origins of the Modern State (Princeton UP)
- Charles Tilly (ed) (1975) The Formation of National States in Western Europe (Princeton UP)

2. How important are international pressures in shaping national government policies?
- Peter Gourevitch (1978) The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics,
International Organization 32:4, pp. 881-911
- Stanley Hoffmann (1995) The European Sisyphus: Essays on Europe, 1964-1994 (Westview), Chapters 3 and
7
- Evans, Rueschemeyer and Skocpol (eds)(1975) Bringing the State Back In (Cambridge University Press),
Chapters 3, 6 and 7

3. How does globalisation affect the domestic security of states?
- Ulrich Beck (2002) The Terrorist Threat: World Risk Society Revisited, Theory, Culture and Society, 19:4,
pp. 39-55
- Christopher Coker (2002) 'Risk Management Goes Global', Spiked 29 April 2002
- Tarak Barkawi (2005) Globalisation and War (Rowman and Littlefield)

4. Can domestic politics still be separated from international affairs?
- Peter Gourevitch (1978) 'The Second Image Reversed: The International Sources of Domestic Politics',
International Organization 32:4, pp. 881-911
- Christopher Hill (2007) Bringing War Home: Foreign Policy-making in Multicultural Societies,
International Relations 21:3, pp. 259-83
- David Campbell (2005) The Biopolitics of Security: Oil, Empire, and the Sports Utility Vehicle,
American Quarterly, 57: 3, pp. 943-72

7


5. What are the limits to the influence of non-governmental organisations?
- Peter Willetts (2011) Non-governmental Organisations in World Politics: The Construction of Global
Governance (Routledge), see esp ch. 1, pp. 6-32, and chs. 5 and 6
- Alexander Cooley and James Ron (2002) The NGO Scramble: Organizational Insecurity and the Political
Economy of Transnational Action, International Security 27:1, pp. 5-39

6. Is the use of violence an effective tool for political change?
- Edward Luttwak, Give War a Chance, Foreign Affairs, July-August 1999
- Frantz Fanon (1961) Wretched of the Earth (Penguin Classics), ch. On Violence
- Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan (2008) Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of
Nonviolent Conflict, International Security 33:1, pp. 7-44

7. How far has the idea of democracy clarified the political task of building a legitimate state? Discuss
with reference to any two recent cases.
- John Dunn (2005) Setting the People Free: The Story of Democracy (Atlantic Books)
- Adam Przeworski (2010) Democracy and the Limits of Self-Government (Cambridge UP)

8. Why is it so hard for regimes which collapse in the face of popular challenge to rebuild them
rapidly and with any real stability?
- Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France (innumerable editions)
- Theda Skocpol (1979) States and Social Revolutions (Cambridge UP)
- Arno J Mayer (2000) The Furies: Violence and Terror in the French and Russian Revolutions (Princeton UP)

9. Does the growing involvement of International Non-governmental Organizations (INGOs) in
global politics decrease the authority and governing capacity of states?
- Jessica Matthews (1997) Power Shift, Foreign Affairs (Jan. 1997)
- Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink (1998) Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International
Politics (Cornell UP)
- Ole J. Sending and Ivar B. Neumann (2006), Governance to Governmentality: Analyzing NGOs, State
and Power, International Studies Quarterly 50, pp. 651-672
- Alexander Cooley and James Ron (2002) The NGO Scramble: Organizational Insecurity and the Political
Economy of Transnational Action, International Security 27:1, pp. 5-39

10. Is the European Union a state?
- James A. Caporaso (1996), The European Union and Forms of State: Westphalian, Regulatory or Post-
Modern?, Journal of Common Market Studies 34:1, pp. 29-52
- Noel Malcolm, The Case Against Europe, Foreign Affairs (March/April 1995)
- Joseph Weiler (ed. with Marlene Wind) (2003) European Constitutionalism Beyond the State (Cambridge
UP)
- Neil MacCormick (1999) Questioning Sovereignty: Law, State, and Nation in the European Commonwealth
(Oxford UP)

11. Which factors determine whether transnational advocacy campaigns are successful in influencing
policy outcomes?
- Margaret Keck and Kathryn Sikkink (1998) Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International
Politics (Cornell UP)
- Sidney Tarrow (2005) The New Transnational Activism (Cambridge UP)

8

- Richard Price (1998) Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines,
International Organization 52, pp. 613-644
- Emilie M. Hafner-Burton (2008) Sticks and Stones: Naming and Shaming the Human Rights
Enforcement Problem, International Organization 62:4, pp. 689-716

12. Does democracy promote or impede economic development?
- Alexander Gershenkron (1966) Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Harvard UP), Chapters 1-
2
- Mancur Olson (1993) Dictatorship, Democracy, and Development, American Political Science Review 87,
pp. 567-77
- Adam Przeworski, Alvarez, Jose Cheibub, and Limongi (2000) Democracy and Development: Political
Institutions and Well Being in the World, 1950-1990 (Cambridge UP)
- Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson (2012) Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and
Poverty (Profile Books)

13. Does international economic integration benefit states?
- Geoffrey Garrett (1998) Global Markets and National Politics: Collision Course or Virtuous Circle?,
International Organization 52:4, 787-824
- Dani Rodrik (2012) The Globalization Paradox: Why Global Markets, States, and Democracy Can't Coexist
(Oxford UP)
- Martin Wolf (2005) Why Globalization Works (Yale UP)

14. What are the consequences of declining trust in politicians?
- Colin Hay (2007) Why We Hate Politics (Polity), Ch 1
- Matthew Flinders (2012) Defending Politics: Why Democracy Matters in the 21
st
Century (Oxford UP), Chs 6-
7
- Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba (1965), The Civic Culture (Sage), Chs 1,3

15. Do democratic legislatures need to become more representative or more expert?
- Mark Henderson (2011) The Geek Manifesto: Why Science Matters (Bantam Press), Chs 1-3
- Peter Oborne (2008) The Triumph of the Political Class (Pocket Books), Chs 1,10
- Ferdinand Mount (2012) The New Few: Or a Very British Oligarchy (Simon and Schuster), part 2

16. Do political parties still have distinct ideological profiles?
- Peter Mair (2008) The challenge to party government, West European Politics 31, pp. 211-234
- Richard S. Katz and Peter Mair (2009) The cartel party thesis: a restatement, Perspectives on Politics 7,
pp.753-766
- Alan Noel and Jean-Philippe Therien (2008) Left and Right in Global Politics (Cambridge UP)

17. Why is corruption more prevalent in some countries than in others?
- Susan Rose-Ackerman (1999) Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform (Cambridge
UP)
- Daniel Treisman (2007) What Have We Learned About the Causes of Corruption from Ten Years of
Cross-National Empirical Research, Annual Review of Political Science 10, pp. 211-244
- Letitia Lawson (2009) The Politics of Anti-Corruption Reform in Africa, The Journal of Modern African
Studies 47:1, pp. 73-100

18. Does decentralisation weaken the state?

9

- Erik Wibbels (2006) Madison in Baghdad: Decentralization and federalism in comparative politics,
Annual Review of Political Science 9, pp. 165-188
- John Loughlin (2007) Reconfiguring the State: Trends in Territorial Governance in European States,
Regional and Federal Studies 17, pp.385-403
- James Mitchell (2000) Devolution and the End of Britain?, Contemporary British History 14:3, pp. 61-82
- Richard Bird, Franois Vaillancourt and Edison Roy-Cesar (2010) Is Decentralization Glue or
Solvent for National Unity?, working paper (http://aysps.gsu.edu/isp/files/ispwp1003.pdf)

19. Can drug wars in developing countries ever succeed?
- Alfred McCoy (2004) The Stimulus of Prohibition: A Critical History of Global Narcotics Trade, in
Michael K. Steinberg, Joseph J.J. Hobbs, Kent Mathewson (eds), Dangerous Harvests: Drug Plants and the
Transformation of Indigenous Landscapes (Oxford UP)
- Peter Reuter (2010) Can Production and Trafficking of Illicit Drugs be Reduced or Only Shifted?, in
Philip Keefer and Norman Loayza (eds), Innocent Bystanders: Developing Countries and the War on Drugs
(PalgraveMacMillan and the World Bank)
- Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy, Drugs and Democracy: Toward a Paradigm Shift
(http://www.drogasedemocracia.org/Arquivos/declaracao_ingles_site.pdf)
- United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, World Drug Report 2013
(http://www.unodc.org/unodc/secured/wdr/wdr2013/World_Drug_Report_2013.pdf)

20. Why are weak states weak?
- Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson (2012) Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and
Poverty (Profile Books)
- Matthew Lange (2009) Lineages of Despotism and Development: British Colonialism and State Power
(University of Chicago Press)
- Dan Slater (2010) Ordering Power: Contentious Politics and Authoritarian Leviathans in Southeast Asia
(Cambridge UP)

21. Do democratic and authoritarian governments show different approaches and capacities toward
environmental regulations?
- John D. Donahue and Joseph S. Nye (eds) (2005) Market-Based Governance (Brookings Press)
- Ragnar E. Lofstedt and David Vogel (2001) The Changing Character of Regulation: A Comparison of
Europe and the United States (with commentary), Risk Analysis 21:3, pp. 399-416
- David Shearman and Joseph Wayne Smith (2007) The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of
Democracy (Praeger)

22. To what extent can local governments be responsible for public debt management?
- William H. Riker (1964) Federalism: Origin, Operation, Significance (Little, Brown)
- Juan Amieva-Huerta (1997) Mexico, in Teresa Ter-Minassian (ed), Fiscal federalism in theory and practice
(International Monetary Fund), pp. 570-597
- Jonathan Rodden and Erik Wibbels (2002) Beyond the Fiction of Federalism: Macroeconomic
Management in Multitiered Systems, World Politics 54, pp. 494-529

23. Does natural resource abundance hinder development?
- Michael Ross (2012) The Oil Curse: How Petroleum Wealth Shapes the Development of Nations (Princeton UP)
- Macartan Humphreys, Jeffrey D. Sachs and Joseph E. Stiglitz (eds) (2007) Escaping the Resource Curse
(Columbia UP)
- Samuel R. Schubert (2006) Revisiting the Oil Curse, Development 49:3, pp. 64-70.

10


24. Is globalisation making the world more unequal?
- David Held and Ayse Kaya (eds) (2007) Global Inequality (Polity Press)
- Joseph Stiglitz (2002) Globalisation and its Discontents (Penguin)
- Anthony Payne (2005) The Global Politics of Unequal Development (PalgraveMacmillan)

25. Under what conditions can special interest groups have the most influence over a states foreign
policy?
- Simon Hix and Bjrn Hyland (2011) The Political System of the European Union (Palgrave), ch. 7
- John Newhouse, Diplomacy, Inc.: The Influence of Lobbies on US Foreign Policy, Foreign Affairs
(May/June 2009), pp. 73-92
- Jeremy Richardson (2000) Government, Interest Groups and Policy Change, Political Studies 48:5, pp.
1006-1025

26. Are individual leaders psychological characteristics more important for explaining political
choices than regime type?
- Fred I. Greenstein (1967) The Impact of Personality on Politics: An Attempt to Clear Away the
Underbrush, American Political Science Review 61:3, pp. 629-641
- Daniel L. Byman and Kenneth M. Pollack (2001) Let Us Now Praise Great Men: Bringing the Statesman
Back In, International Security 25:4, pp. 107-146
- Juliet Kaarbo (2008) Coalition Cabinet Decision Making: Institutional and Psychological Factors,
International Studies Review 10:1, pp. 57-86.

27. Is technocratic politics compatible with democratic politics?
- Walter Lippmann (1914) Drift and Mastery (Holt & Co)
- James Burnham (1941) The Managerial Revolution (Putnam)
- Ferdinand Mount (2012) The New Few: Or a Very British Oligarchy (Simon and Schuster)
- Jeffrey Sachs, 'The Next Frontier', The Economist (http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-
economics/21586512-guest-article-jeffrey-sachs-director-earth-institute-columbia)

28. Why is representative democracy not the rule of the poor?
- Aristotle, The Politics, in The Politics and the Constitution of Athens (Cambridge UP, 1996), book 6.
- John Dunn (2005) Setting the People Free: The Story of Democracy (Atlantic Books)
- Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson (2011) Winner-Takes-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer and
Turned its Back on the Middle Class (Simon Schuster), parts 1 and 3
- Ferdinand Mount (2012) The New Few: Or a Very British Oligarchy (Simon and Schuster)

29. Can there still be a majority party in the United States?
- Sean Trende (2012) The Lost Majority: Why the Future of Government Is up for Grabs and Who Will Take It
(Basingstoke: Palgrave)
- John Judis and Ruy Teixeira (2002) The Emerging Democratic Majority (New York: Scribner)
- Ruy Teixeira, Demographic Change and the Future of the Parties, Center for American Progress Action
Fund paper (http://www.americanprogressaction.org/wp-
content/uploads/issues/2010/06/pdf/voter_demographics.pdf)
- Alan Ware (2010) Political parties and the new partisanship, in Gillian Peele (ed) Developments in
American politics 6 (Basingstoke: Palgrave)

30. Must one choose between multiculturalism and feminism?

11

- Sarah Song (2007) Justice, Gender, and the Politics of Multiculturalism (Cambridge UP)
- Judith E. Tucker (2008) Women, Family, and Gender in Islamic Law (Cambridge UP)

31. Where do women make a political difference?
- The Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards, June 2013
(http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/professional-standards-in-
the-banking-industry/publications/)
- Sue Thomas (1991) The Impact of Women on State Legislative Policies, The Journal of Politics 53:4, pp.
958-976

32. Was communism simply a great illusion?
- Robert Service (2007) Comrades: A World History of Communism (Palgrave)
- Francois Furet (1999) The Passing of an Illusion (University of Chicago Press)
- Harald Wydra (2007) Communism and the Emergence of Democracy (Cambridge UP)

33. How do memories shape politics?
- Jeffrey Olick (2007) The Politics of Regret (Routledge)
- Paul Connerton (1989) How Societies Remember (Cambridge UP)
- Duncan Bell (ed.) (2006) Memory, Trauma, and World Politics (Palgrave)
C. Writing
The examiners expect an argument in answer to the question, evidence of having read the
important literature, and independent thinking. They have no fixed expectations for the nature,
direction or conclusion of answers to any of the questions set, and with the general questions
you are free to approach them in a way that particularly interest you. Many essays will use
detailed examples from past or contemporary politics through which to make their argument. If
you do use a particular example, or set of examples, to answer a general question, you need, at
the beginning of the essay, to explain why these examples are pertinent to the question.

Essays must answer the question and they must make an argument in doing do. More is needed
than a straightforward review of the literature. Equally, assertion and rhetorical flourishes
cannot substitute for arguments. Polemical writing will be penalised by the examiners. When
you make arguments, you need to explain your judgements, and you need to engage with
counter-arguments to the arguments you are making. Argue against the strongest claims of
counter-arguments, not their weakest points. You also should avoid grand generalisations.
These almost always fail to stand up to empirical scrutiny and do not advance arguments. All
students should make sure they are familiar with the Departments policy on what constitutes
plagiarism, within the Polis Guide to Long Essays, via:
http://www.polis.cam.ac.uk/courses/undergraduate/ug-part-iia.html

Developing your ability to write in an accurate, focused and compelling way is an important
part of this paper. You are expected to write clearly, to punctuate carefully, and to proof read
your essays before submitting them. Casualness in presentation of essays and syntactical and
grammatical confusion will be penalised by the examiners. Essays in which there are a

12

significant number of typographical errors and syntactical and grammatical mistakes cannot
receive a mark higher than a lower second.

The examiners reports from 2011-12 and 2012-13 contain specific comments about the respects
in which essays submitted in that year did, or did not, approach the questions in suitable ways.
These reports are contained at the end of this paper guide, and may contain useful advice for
this years cohort.

D. Presentation and referencing
All essays must be double-spaced and have page numbers. All quotations must be referenced
with page numbers, and the essay must include a full bibliography. The word limit is 5,000
words including references, titles, tables, and all other material submitted in the essay, except
for the bibliography. Essays that do not conform to these guidelines or which exceed the word
limit will be penalised. There is no leeway of 5% or 1%; the limit is 5,000 words.

Essays should adopt a consistent and suitable referencing style. There are two common
conventions for references: (1) full references in notes at the foot of the page or the end of the
document, with a bibliography at the end of the work; and (2) author-date citations in the text,
with a bibliography at the end of the work. Follow one of these, and for whichever you use,
since there is no agreed way of citing and ordering the bibliographical details in each, do make
sure that your referencing is complete and consistent.

1. The full referencing convention. If using this approach, references are included in the notes,
which should be numbered serially from 1 from the start of the essay. For references in notes,
give full details at the first mention in the chapter, at subsequent mentions in the essay, a brief
citation will do. Notwithstanding their widespread use, avoid op. cit., loc. cit., and ibid.; these can
confuse. The bibliography should include the full references in alphabetical order.

Examples:

For books -
1. Robert D. Putnam, Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in
Modern Italy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993, p. 36.
Thereafter:
2. Putnam, Making Democracy Work, pp. 12-13.

For journals -
1. Sidney Tarrow, Making social science work across space and time: a
critical reflection on Putnams Making Democracy Work, American
Political Science Review 90 (1996), pp. 389-98.
Thereafter:
2. Tarrow, Making social science work, pp. 389-98.

13


For chapters in edited volumes -
1. Maud Eduards, Sweden, in Joni Lovenduski and Jill Hills (eds), The
Politics of the Second Electorate: Women and Public Participation, Boston:
Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981, pp. 208-27.
Thereafter:
2. Eduards, Sweden, pp. 208-27.

For corporate authors -
1. Economist, Between the Caudillo and the Democrat, 17 April 1999,
pp. 39-40.
Thereafter:
2. Economist, Between the Caudillo and the Democrat, pp. 39-40.

For weblinks -
1. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (DNB), Keynes, John
Maynard, Sept 2004, www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/34310, accessed
20 July 2010.
Thereafter:
2. Oxford DNB, Keynes, John Maynard.

2. The author-date system. Footnotes and endnotes, including the references in such notes,
count towards the total number of words in Pol 4 essays; the bibliography does not. For this
reason, you may prefer to adopt the second convention - the author-date or Harvard style. In
this, references are included in the main text, and not in a footnote. There should then be a
complete list of references at the end of the dissertation, in which the items should be arranged
alphabetically by the authors surname (or where there is no author listed, by corporate author).

Examples:

For books -
In text: ... elite political culture in Italy changed dramatically over the course
of the 1970s (Putnam 1993: 33) ...
or: Putnam (1993:33) argues that elite political culture in Italy changed
dramatically over the course of the 1970s...
In bibliography:
Putnam, R. D. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.

For journals -
In text: .. although others have questioned his measurements of institutional
performance (e.g., Tarrow 1996: 389-98) ...

14

or: Tarrow (1996: 389-98) is critical of the measurements of institutional
performance that are used...
In bibliography:
Tarrow, S. 1996. Making social science work across space and time: A
critical reflection on Putnams Making democracy work. American Political
Science Review 90: 389-98.

For chapters in edited volumes -
In bibliography:
Eduards, M. 1981. Sweden. In Joni Lovenduski and Jill Hills (eds) The Politics
of the Second Electorate: Women and Public Participation. Boston: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.

For corporate authors -
In text: (Economist 1999: 39-40)
In bibliography: Economist. 1999. Between the Caudillo and the Democrat. 17
April, 39-40.

For weblinks -
In text: (Oxford Dictionary of National Biography 2004)
In bibliography:
Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. 2004. Keynes, John Maynard.
www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/34310.

In both conventions, use a single consolidated bibliography; longer works such as books
sometimes have separate bibliographies for primary and secondary sources, but this is not
advisable within a 5,000-word essay.

15


4. The courses
A. Comparative Politics
The lectures given in Michaelmas for this part of the paper are intended to give students a
general grounding in some of the core debates and themes of comparative politics. This is a
large field in the study of politics, and the lectures can touch only on some aspects.
Nevertheless, they will give a good introduction to some of the most important debates, and
provide important background to many of the questions for which assessed essays can be
written in Michaelmas term and to the regional and case studies that will be supervised in Lent
term. Although material from the lectures will not be examined specifically, these lectures are
designed to convey an approach to understanding comparative politics that may inform your
work throughout this paper, and it is highly recommended that you attend them.

The first lecture gives a general introduction to the paper (which will discuss the nature of the
paper and especially the assessed essay requirement). The remainder of the lecture series is
divided into three parts: a part on the development of the state and democracy (including its
absence and/or limitations in many cases), a part on some of the core aspects of and influences
on the politics within states, and a concluding part on the nature of the study of comparative
politics and an overview of the rest of this paper.

This course guide does not indicate specific readings for these lectures. However, there is an
extensive literature on each of the themes that are covered. If you would like to get any reading
suggestions on any of these themes, then please contact the Course Organiser. No single book
can cover all aspects of the study of comparative politics, but examples of useful overviews
which could serve as background or reference material for this paper are Rod Hague and
Martin Harrop, Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction (Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan, 9
th
ed. 2013 [or any earlier edition]) [a fairly basic but useful overview], and Carles
Boix and Susan C. Stokes (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2007) [a more advanced overview with very useful references].

The specific lecture schedule for this section is as follows:

Lecture 1: Introduction to the paper [Pieter van Houten]
This lecture introduces and provides an overview of this paper, with a specific focus on the
requirements and practicalities of the long essay. As you will be asked to make your choice of
options for both Michaelmas and (provisionally) for Lent right after the lecture, attendance at
this lecture is necessary if you wish to have a supervisor.




16

I. The elements of comparative politics: states and regime types

Lecture 2: The formation of states [Chris Bickerton]
States are fundamental units in modern politics, and comparative politics focuses on political
processes and outcomes within states (although often from a comparative perspective). This
lecture discusses how modern states formed and developed in different parts of the world. . It
looks at different theories of state formation and discusses their respective strengths and
weaknesses.

Lecture 3: The origins of democracy and authoritarianism [CB]
States vary in their regime type, with liberal or representative democracy only one although
a particularly prominent one, especially in Western countries of the types. This lecture looks at
the factors that influenced the historical development of representative democratic states and
other regime types.

Lecture 4: The development and spread of democracy [PvH]
This lecture looks at the various waves of democracies that have occurred across the world in
the past century or so. This includes a discussion of the factors that appear to have induced
these waves, the limits to the spread of democracy, and the usefulness of the concept of
democratic waves.

Lecture 5: Authoritarian and hybrid regimes [PvH]
It has become increasingly clear in recent years that not all countries are becoming democracies,
and that authoritarian and hybrid (somewhere between pure authoritarian and liberal
democratic) regimes continue to be prevalent. This lecture gives an overview of the features and
prevalence of these states, and discusses factors influencing their stability or instability.

II. The dynamics of comparative politics

Lecture 6: Constititutional and institutional features of states [PvH]
States (even those with broadly similar regime types) vary widely in their constitutional and
institutional arrangements. This lecture provides an overview of some of the most important
dimensions of institutional variation, with a particular focus on relations between executive and
parliament (e.g. presidential vs parliamentary systems) and civil-military relations.

Lecture 7: Political parties [CB]
Political parties are central actors in the politics of virtually all states. This lecture looks at the
development and nature of political parties over time, focusing in particular on the origins of
political parties and their transformation from factional groupings into modern mass parties.
The lecture looks at the role of parties in contemporary politics and asks how relevant parties
are today in light of recent social and political developments.



17

Lecture 8: Multi-level dynamics [PvH]
Governmental and political processes take place not only at the national level, but also at local,
regional, and supranational levels. This lecture looks at the resulting multi-level political
dynamics, focusing on reasons for why these dynamics seem to have become more prevalent
and important in most states and some of the variation in these dynamics across states.

Lecture 9: External influences on domestic politics (I): economic influences [CB]
It is not possible to study the domestic politics of states in isolation, as political processes and
outcomes in states are and always have been influenced by various external factors and
processes. This lecture discusses how external economic processes have influenced states in
different parts of the world (touching on issues such as colonialism and globalisation).

Lecture 10: External influences on domestic politics (II): political influences [CB]
External political factors, whether it is international institutions or other powerful states, also
influence domestic politics. This lecture discusses these influences and their varied impact on
states, in order to determine how much of national political development is the result of a
states interaction with, and place in, the international system.

III. Conclusions

Lecture 11: Comparative politics as a discipline [PvH]
This lecture presents different ways to understand and practise the study of comparative
politics, with a special focus on the debates about whether comparisons and generalisable
explanations are feasible (and if so, how to go about formulating and evaluating these). For
examples, it will refer to some of the earlier lectures.

Lecture 12: Conclusion and overview of the second half of the paper [PvH]
This lecture provides some concluding remarks on the lectures of this section, and a short
overview of the second half of this paper. This is an opportunity for students to ask questions
related to their (final) choice of modules that they will be supervised on in Lent term.



18


B. Eastern Europe: Russia and Poland compared

Supervisors:

This course introduces students into central selected themes of Russian and Polish politics. It
uses historical, political, sociological, and anthropological methods in order to address an
important range of problems in these political societies. This course will point to numerous
family resemblances related to similar patterns of social development and state tradition but
also highlight fundamental differences mainly related to formations of state, religious
orientations, commitments to democracy, or modes of extrication from communism. The
lectures start by a conceptual introduction that is attuned to historical-cultural particularities
before addressing selected case studies and, eventually, discussing comparative elements.

Essential reading:
Brown, Archie (2001) Contemporary Russian Politics. A Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Davies, Norman. God's Playground: A History of Poland (New York: Columbia University Press,
1982).
Sakwa, Richard (2008) Russian Politics and Society. 4th edition. London: Routledge.

Schoepflin, George (1993) Politics in Eastern Europe 1945-1992. Oxford: Blackwell.
Urban, Michael (2010) Cultures of Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wydra, Harald (2007) Communism and the Emergence of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Lecture 1: State traditions and state formation
Kharkhordin, Oleg (2005) Main Concepts in Russian Politics, chapter 1

Koyama, Satoshi. 2008. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as a Political Space: Its Unity
and Complexity. Acta Slavica Iaponica 15:137-152. (on camtools)

Schoepflin, George (1993) Politics in Eastern Europe. Oxford: Blackwell.

Szuecs, Jeno, Three Historical Regions of Europe, in John Keane (ed.) Civil Society and the State.
London: Verso, 291-332.

Lecture 2: Nationalism and Nation-Building


19

Beissinger, Mark (2002) Nationalism and Nationalist Mobilisation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, chapter 8.

Brock, Peter (1994) Polish Nationalism, in Peter Sugar and Ivo Lederer (eds) Nationalism in
Eastern Europe. Third printing. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 310-72.

Brown, Archie (2002) Contemporary Russian Politics. A Reader , Section 8 Russian Statehood and
the National Question, 343-66.

Brubaker, Rogers (1996) Nationalism Reframed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
chapters 2 and 4.

Richard Sakwa (2007) Russian Politics and Society, part III.

Tolz, Vera Forging the Nation: National Identity and Nation Building in Post-Communist
Russia, Europe-Asia Studies, Vol.50, No.6, 993-1022 (camtools)

Zubrzycki, Genevieve (2006) The Crosses of Auschwitz: Nationalism and Religion in Post -
Communist Poland. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Lecture 3: Leadership and Ideological Traditions

Casanova, Jos (1994) Poland: From Church of the Nation to Civil Society in Public Religions
in the Modern World (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), 92-113.

Curry, Jane, Poland: The Politics of Gods Playground, in Wolchik, Sharon L. and Curry, Jane
(2008) (eds) Central and East European Politics: From Communism to Democracy. Lanham,
MD: Rowman and Littlefield), 165-89.

Jasiewiczy, Krzysztof (1997) Walesas Legacy to the Presidency, in Taras, Ray (ed.)
Postcommunist Presidents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 130-167.

Sakwa, Richard (2007) Putin. Russias Choice. London and New York: Routledge.

Wydra, Harald (2001) Continuities in Polands Permanent Transition, chapters 2-4.

Brown, Archie (1996) The Gorbachev Factor. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

White, Stephen (1997) Russia: Presidential Leadership Under Yeltsin, Taras, Ray (ed.)
Postcommunist Presidents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 38-66.

Lecture 4: Communism: Revolution and Resistance


20

Ash, Timothy G. (1991) The Polish Revolution: Solidarity. London: Granta Books.

Bunce, Valerie (1999) Subversive Institutions: The Design and the Destruction of Socialism and the
State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kotkin, Stephen (2001) Armageddon Averted. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kubik, Jan (1994) The Power of Symbols Against the Symbols of Power. Rise of Solidarity and the Fall
of State Socialism in Poland. Penn State University Press.

Rothschild, Joseph (1993) Return to Diversity. A Political History of East Central Europe Since World
War II. 2
nd
edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wydra, Harald (2008) Revolution and Democracy: The European Experience, in Foran, John/
Lane, David/Zivkovic, Andreja, Revolution in the Making of the Modern World. London and New
York: Routledge, 27-44.

Wydra, Harald, Communism and the Emergence of Democracy, chapters 3 and 5.

Lecture 5: Post-Communism: The Rebirth of Politics and its Challenges

Holmes, Leslie (1997) Postcommunism. Durham: Duke University Press.

Zarycki, Tomasz, Politics in the Periphery: Political Cleavages in Poland Interpreted in Their
Historical and International Context, Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 52, No. 5 (Jul., 2000), pp. 851-873
(camtools).

Sanford, George (2002) Democratic Government in Poland: Constitutional Politics Since 1989.
London: Palgrave Macmillan, chaps 1, 3,4.

Michta, Andrew (1997) Democratic Consolidation in Poland after 1989, in Dawisha, Karen and
Parrot, Bruce (eds) The Consolidation of Democracy in East-Central Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 66-108.

Urban, Michael et al. (1997) The Rebirth of Politics in Russia. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, chapter 1.

Jerzy Szacki (1995) Liberalism after Communism. Budapest: Central European University Press.

Weigle, Marcia (2000) Russias Liberal Project. State-Society Relations in the Transition from
Communism. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 382-459.


21

Wydra, Harald (2007) Communism and the Emergence of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, chapter 8-9.

Lecture 6: Authoritarian Legacies and Paths to Democracy

Dryzek, John and Holmes, Leslie (2002) Post-Communist Democratisation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, Chapters 1, 6, 14, 16.

Fish, Steven (2003) Conclusion: Democracy and Russian Politics, Barany and Moser (eds)
Russian Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 215-51.

Kubik, Jan (2003) Cultural Legacies of State Socialism: History Making and Cultural-Political
Entrepreneurship in Postcommunist Poland and Russia, in Ekiert, G. and Hanson, S. (2003)
Capitalism and democracy in Central and eastern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

Michael Bernhard, Civil Society and Democratic Transition in East Central Europe, Political
Science Quarterly, Vol. 108, No. 2. (Summer, 1993), pp. 307-326.

Richard Sakwa (2007) Russian Politics and Society, part VI.

Sakwa, Richard (2004) Putin. Russias Choice. London and New York: Routledge.

Wydra, Harald (2008), Democratisation as Meaning-Formation Insights fom the Communist
Experience, International Political Anthropology Vol. 1, No. 1, 113-32. (on camtools)

Supervision essays:
Is there an Eastern European model of nationalism?
How did communist legacies influence democratisation processes in Eastern Europe?
Do transition processes weaken or strengthen state power?


22


C. Western Europe: France and Germany compared

Lecturer and supervisors:
Pieter van Houten (lecturer)
Lilia Giugni

France and Germany are at the heart of European politics. They are two of the largest states and
economies in Europe, and have been centrally involved in the political developments in
Western Europe for at least the last century and a half. They continue to be important states in
the European Union and in global politics. The governments of both states are crucial actors in
the attempts to deal with the recent economic and Eurozone crises, and to different extents
play an important role in the EUs external policies. Some knowledge and understanding of the
French and German political institutions and policies is, therefore, essential for students of
European and comparative politics.

More specifically, there are several reasons that make France and Germany good case studies in
a course on comparative politics. First, many of the general arguments and concepts in the
study of comparative politics some of which will be discussed in Section A of the paper were
based on or inspired by observations of Western European states. Therefore, France and
Germany provide good illustrations of these general arguments and concepts. Second, France
and Germany provide interesting contrasts in, among other things, their party systems, political
regimes (semi-presidential vs parliamentary), territorial organization of their states (unitary vs
federal), and their approaches to economic policy and immigration policy. The lectures will
indicate the variation between France and Germany in some institutional features and policy
areas, and how these differences and their consequences might be explained. Trying to
understand and explain these differences is interesting in itself, as well as a good illustration of
the study of comparative politics in action. Third, both are interesting cases as such, and
feature important political debates and challenges that regularly feature in the news. These
include the rise of extremist parties (especially in France), the need to reform social and welfare
policies, challenges provided by immigration pressures and how to govern increasingly diverse
societies, and the future of the European Union. This module will not cover all these topics, but
will provide some basis for understanding them better.

Students in this module will obtain basic knowledge of the French and German political
systems in general and some detailed knowledge of a few specific aspects and policy areas in
these countries. Moreover, they will learn how to apply and critically evaluate some general
comparative politics theories and concepts in specific cases. However, students are not expected
to learn and fully comprehend the political history and contemporary politics of these two
countries. This module serves as an illustration of several basic themes and arguments in
comparative politics, not as a full course in French and German politics.


23

The rest of this guide gives some suggestions for background and further reading, lists the
topics of the lectures, and indicates the questions and reading lists for supervision essays.
Students will do two supervisions for this module. The lecturer will contact the students in Lent
term about the specific supervision arrangements.

Background, general and further reading

Specific readings for the supervision essays are indicated in the last section of this guide. It is,
however, a good idea to do some background reading on the recent political history of France
and Germany (and perhaps on post-war political developments in Western Europe more
broadly). This section provides some suggestions for this (the ones indicated with a are
specifically recommended), and also lists some general texts on French and German politics
(some chapters of which may be useful for the supervision topics).

France
Robert Gildea, France since 1945 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).
Helen Drake, Contemporary France (London: Palgrave, 2011).
Anne Stevens, The government and politics of France, 3
rd
ed. (London: Palgrave, 2003).
Andrew Knapp and Vincent Wright, The government and politics of France, 4
th
ed. (London:
Routledge, 2001) [or 5
th
ed., 2007].
Nick Hewlett, Modern French politics: analysing conflict and consensus since 1945 (Cambridge:
Polity, 1998).
Pepper D. Culpepper, Peter A. Hall and Bruno Palier, eds., Changing France: the politics that
markets make (London: Palgrave, 2006).

Germany
Lothar Kettenacker, Germany since 1945 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997).
Simon Green et al, The politics of the new Germany, 2
nd
ed. (London: Routledge, 2011).
Simon Green and William E. Paterson, eds., Governance in contemporary Germany: the semi-
sovereign state revisited (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
David Broughton, Contemporary German Politics (London: Routledge, 2003).
Herbert Kitschelt and Wolfgang Streeck, eds., Germany: beyond the stable state (London: Frank
Cass, 2004). Also published as: Germany: from stability to stagnation, special issue of
West European Politics, 26, 4 (2003).

Political biographies
An interesting and enjoyable way of learning about recent French and German political history
is to read biographies of some of the main political actors. Some interesting biographies are:
Jonathan Fenby, The General: Charles de Gaulle and the France he saved (London: Simon & Schuster,
2010).
Roland Tiersky, Franois Mitterand: the last French president (London: St Martins Press, 2000).
Charles Williams, Adenauer: the father of the new Germany (London: Abacus, 2003).
Paul Hockenos, Joschka Fischer and the making of the Berlin republic: an alternative history of postwar

24

Germany (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).

More general overviews of post-war European political history
Tony Judt, Postwar: a history of Europe since 1945 (London: Pimlico, 2005). [Brilliant history of
post-war Europe, but long and dense in places.]
William I. Hitchcock, The struggle for Europe: the turbulent history of a divided continent 1945-2002
(London: Profile, 2003). [Good and very readable overview of the main events,
developments and political actors.]
Derek W. Urwin, A political history of Western Europe since 1945, 5
th
ed. (London: Longman, 1997).
[Solid and useful overview of political developments in Western Europe until the 1990s.]

Further reading

There is a large amount of literature on the contemporary politics of France and Germany. It
will not be difficult to find more material in books or journals, if students want to read beyond
the lists provided below (when preparing for the exam, for example). Students should be able to
do this themselves by looking through catalogues and such, but can ask the lecturer if they want
further guidance.

Journal articles are particularly good sources for further information (especially for recent
developments). The journals German Politics, French Politics, German Politics and Society and
French Politics, Culture and Society focus exclusively on the countries covered in this module. The
following journals also regularly or occasionally feature articles on French or German politics:
West European Politics, Journal of European Public Policy, Comparative European Politics, Perspectives
on European Politics and Society, Comparative Political Studies, European Journal of Political Research,
Government and Opposition, and Party Politics. Students may also find it interesting although
this is not essential for the module to follow current debates in French and German politics. In
addition to daily British newspapers, good sources are The Economist (www.economist.com),
and Financial Times (www.ft.com).

Lectures

This module has six lectures, which are given in weeks 4 to 6 of Lent term. This section indicates
the titles of the lectures, and gives some indication of their contents.

1. Historical background to French and German politics

This lecture introduces some of the main features of and developments in French and German
politics since World War II, which serve as background to the themes of the other lectures.
Students will receive a hand-out with basic factual information on the post-war political history
of these two countries.

2. Political parties and party systems: unstable and polarized (France) vs. stable and

25

centrist (Germany)?

For decades Germany had one of the most stable and least polarized party systems in Western
Europe, while Frances party system was much more polarized and volatile. How did this
happen, and is it still the case? Mainstream parties in both countries are increasingly
challenged. Where do these challenges come from, and what are the implications for the party
systems in these two countries?

3. Executives and parliaments (political regimes): semi-presidential vs. parliamentary

France and Germany have different political regimes, which is most obvious when considering
the formal status and role of their executives (the French president and the German Chancellor),
but also manifests itself in differences in the role and influence of their parliaments. What are
the implications of these different regimes?

4. Immigration and integration policy: republican vs. ethnic?

Immigration and the integration of immigrants into society are increasingly salient political
issues in Western Europe. What are the main differences to the approaches traditionally taken
in France (often described as a republican approach) and Germany (an ethnic approach) in
these areas? And are these differences still significant in light of developments in recent years?

5. Economic policy: statist vs. coordinated liberal?

This lecture focuses on the approaches to economic policy in France and Germany, with specific
emphasis on the role of the state in their respective economies. It has often been argued that
there are significant differences in the role of the state in these cases (a direct role in France and
a more indirect role in Germany). What exactly is this difference, and does it still exist?

6. Policies towards European integration: intergovernmental vs. supranational?

France and Germany have been key states in the development of the European Union. Their
aims and preferences for the EU (or, more broadly, their visions of Europe) have often been
said to differ, with France seeing the EU as a platform to maintain Frances European and global
role and Germany more open to the development of a supranational and post-sovereign
political system. Has there indeed been such a difference? If so, what can explain this difference
and does it still exist?

Supervisions

Students will do two supervisions for this module in the second half of Lent term. The module
lecturer will contact the students in Lent term to notify them of the specific arrangements
(timing, supervisor, etc.) of the supervisions.

26


Essay questions and reading lists are given below. For each supervision essay, students are
expected to do the Basic readings listed for their chosen question and sample some of the other
listed readings. (These other readings also provide further readings for exam preparation.) Note
that some of the books on France and Germany listed above as General reading may also have
chapters on the themes of the supervisions. So it is worth checking these books for relevant
material too.

Supervision 1: Institutional features

The first supervision focuses on some of the structural or institutional features of French and
German politics, as discussed in lectures 2 and 3. Students should choose one of the following
two questions.

1a. Is the party system in France still more fragmented than in Germany?

Basic readings
Herbert Kitschelt, European party systems: continuity and change, in Developments in West
European politics, edited by Martin Rhodes, Paul Heywood and Vincent Wright
(Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1997).
Andrew Knapp, France: never a golden age, and Susan E. Scarrow, Party decline in the
parties state?: the changing environment of German politics, in Political parties in
advanced industrial democracies, edited by Paul Webb, David Farrell and Ian Holliday
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).

France
Andrew Knapp and Frederic Sawicki, Political parties and the party system, in Development
in French politics 4, edited by Alistair Cole, Patrick Le Gals and Jonah D. Levy (London:
Palgrave, 2008).
Simon Bornschier and Romain Lachat, The evolution of the French political space and party
system, West European Politics 32, 2 (2009): 360-383.
Florence Haegel, Political parties: the UMP and the right, and Frederic Sawicki, Political
parties: the Socialist and the left, in Developments in French Politics 5, edited by Alistair
Cole, Sophie Meunier and Vincent Tiberj (London: Palgrave, 2013).
G. Grunberg, The French party system and the crisis of representation, in Changing France: the
politics that markets make, edited by Pepper D. Culpepper et al (London: Palgrave, 2006).
Andre Blais and Peter J. Loewen, The French electoral system and its effects West European
Politics 32 (2009): 345-359.
Jocelyn E. Evans, ed., The French party system (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003).

Germany
Gordon Smith, Parties and the party system, in Developments in German politics 3, edited by
Stephen Padgett, William E. Paterson and Gordon Smith (London: Palgrave, 2003).

27

Thomas Poguntke, Towards a new party system: the vanishing hold of catch-all parties in
Germany, Party Politics (forthcoming, but already available online).
Uwe Jun, Volksparteien under pressure: challenges and adaptation, German Politics, 20, 1
(2011): 200-222.
Klaus Detterbeck, Party cartel and cartel parties in Germany, German Politics 17, 1 (2008): 27-
40.
Michelle Hale Williams, Kirchheimer revisited: party polarisation, party convergence, or party
decline in the German party system, German Politics 17, 2 (2008): 105-123.
Geoffrey Roberts, German electoral politics (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006).

General
Paul Webb, Political parties, representation and politics in contemporary Europe, in
Developments in European politics 2, edited by Erik Jones, Paul Heywood, Martin Rhodes
and Ulrich Sedelmeier (London: Palgrave, 2011).
Ingrid van Biezen and Peter Mair, Political parties, in Developments in European Politics, edited
by Paul Heywood, Erik Jones, Martin Rhodes and U. Sedelmeier (London: Palgrave,
2006).
Paul Webb, David Farrell, and Ian Holliday, eds., Political parties in advanced industrial
democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), Introduction.
Alan Ware, Political parties and party systems (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996).
Peter Mair, ed., The West European party system (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990).

1b. Which is more powerful: the French President or the German Chancellor?

Basic readings
Klaus Goetz, Power at the centre: the organization of democratic systems, in Developments in
European Politics, edited by Paul M. Heywood et al (London: Palgrave, 2006).
Robert Elgie, Political leadership in liberal democracies (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1995), chapters 3
and 4.

France
Robert Elgie, The French Presidency, and Sylvain Brouard et al, The new French
parliament: changes and continuities, in Developments in French Politics 5, edited by
Alistair Cole, Sophie Meunier and Vincent Tiberj (London: Palgrave, 2013).
Jonah D. Levy and Cindy Skach, The return to a strong presidency and Bastien Francois,
Parliament and political representation, in Development in French politics 4, edited by
Alistair Cole et al (London: Palgrave, 2008).
Andrew Knapp, A paradoxical presidency: Nicolas Sarkozy, 2007-2012, Parliamentary Affairs
66, 1 (2013): 33-51.
Robert Elgie, Political institutions in contemporary France (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003),
Chs 4, 6.
David S. Bell and John Gaffney, eds., The Presidents of the French Fifth Republic (London:
Palgrave, 2013).

28

Robert Elgie, The political executive and Andrew Knapp, The Fifth Republic and checks on
executive power, in Development in French politics 3, edited by Alistair Cole et al
(London: Palgrave, 2005).
Frances political institutions at 50, special issue of West European Politics 32, 2 (2009), esp.
articles by Elgie, Grossman, Lazardeux, Sauger, Grossman & Sauger.

Germany
Klaus H. Goetz, Government at the centre, in Developments in German politics 3, edited by
Stephen Padgett, William E. Paterson and Gordon Smith (London: Palgrave, 2003).
Manfred G. Schmidt, Political institutions in the Federal Republic of Germany (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2003), Chs 2, 3.
Ludger Helms, The changing Chancellorship: resources and constraints revisited, German
Politics 10, 2 (2001): 155-168.
Clay Clemens, Explaining Merkels autonomy in the Grand Coalition: persionalisation or party
organisation?, German Politics 20, 4 (2011): 469-485.
Ludger Helms, Germany: Chancellors and the Bundestag, The Journal of Legislative Studies 10,
2-3 (2004): 98-108.
Stephen Padget et al, eds., Adenauer to Kohl: the development of the German Chancellorship (London:
Hurst, 1994).

General
Thomas Poguntke and Paul Webb, eds., The presidentialization of politics: a comparative study of
modern democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), Chs 1, 3, 10 (and maybe also
look at Ch 15).
Paul Heywood, Executive capacity and legislative limits in Developments in West European
Politics 2, edited by Paul Heywood, Erik Jones and Martin Rhodes (London: Palgrave,
2002).
Yves Mny and Andrew Knapp, Government and politics in Western Europe: Britain, France, Italy,
Germany, 3
rd
ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), Chs 5, 6.
Philip Norton, ed., Parliaments and governments in Western Europe (London: Cass, 1998).

Supervision 2: Policy areas

The second supervision focuses on a specific policy issue or area in France and Germany, as
discussed in lectures 4 to 6. Students should choose one of the following three questions.

2a. Are policies towards immigration and immigrants more restrictive in Germany than in
France?

Basic readings
Rogers Brubaker, Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press, 1992), Introduction (pp. 1-18).
Christian Joppke, European immigration policies: between stemming and soliciting still, in

29

Developments in European politics 2, edited by Erik Jones et al (London: Palgrave, 2011).

France
V. Guiradon, Different nation, same nationhood: the challenges of immigration policy, in
Changing France: the politics that markets make, edited by Pepper D. Culpepper et al
(London: Palgrave, 2006).
Patrick Simon, Contested citizenship in France: the republican politics of identity and
integration, in Developments in French Politics 5, edited by Alistair Cole, Sophie Meunier
and Vincent Tiberj (London: Palgrave, 2013).
Patrick Weil, The politics of immigration, in Developments in French politics 2, edited by
Alain Guyomarch et al (London: Palgrave, 2001).
Sally Marthaler, Nicolas Sarkozy and the politics of French immigration policy, Journal of
European Public Policy 15, 3 (2008): 382-397.
Rogers Brubaker, Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press, 1992), chapters on France.
Patrick Weil, How to be French: nationality in the making since 1789 (Durham: Duke Univerisity
Press, 2008), Ch 7.
V. Guiradon, Immigration politics and policies, in Development in French politics 3, edited by
Alistair Cole et al (London: Palgrave, 2005).
Martin A. Schain, The politics of immigration in France, Britain and the United States: a comparative
study (London: Palgrave, 2009), chapters on France.
Miriam Feldblum, Reconstructing citizenship: the politics of nationality reform and immigration in
contemporary France (New York: SUNY Press, 1999).
Stefan Vertovec and Susanne Wessendorf, eds., The multicultural backlash: European discourses,
policies and practices (London: Routledge, 2010), chapter on France.

Germany
Simon Green, Germany: a changing country of immigration, German Politics 22, 3 (2013):
333-351.
Marc Morj Howard, The causes and consequences of Germanys new citizenship law,
German Politics 17, 1 (2008): 41-62.
Simon Green, Towards an open society?: citizenship and immigration, in Developments in
German politics 3, edited by Stephen Padgett, William E. Paterson and Gordon Smith
(London: Palgrave, 2003).
Michael Minkenberg, The politics of citizenship in the new republic, West European Politics,
26, 4 (2003): 219-240.
Joyce M. Mushaben, Citizenship and migration policies under Merkels Grand Coalition,
German Politics 20, 3 (2011): 376-391 [see especially pages 380-387].
Rogers Brubaker, Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press, 1992), chapters on Germany.
Elisabeth Musch, Consultation structures in German immigrant integration politics: the
National Integration Summit and the German Islam Conference, German Politics 21, 1
(2012): 73-90.

30

Barbara Marshall, New Germany and migration in Europe (Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 2000).
Stefan Vertovec and Susanne Wessendorf, eds., The multicultural backlash: European discourses,
policies and practices (London: Routledge, 2010), chapter on Germany.

General
Christian Joppke, Transformation of immigrant integration in Western Europe: civic
integration and antidiscrimination policies in the Netherlands, France, and Germany,
World Politics 59, 2 (2007): 243-273.
V. Guiradon and E. Jileva, Immigration and asylum, in Developments in European Politics,
edited by Paul M. Heywood et al (London: Palgrave, 2006).
Christian Joppke, Beyond national models: civic integration policies for immigrants in Western
Europe, West European Politics 30 (2007): 1-22.
Terri E. Givens, Immigrant integration in Europe: empirical research, Annual Review of
Political Science 10 (2007): 67-83.
Christian Joppke, European immigration policies at the crossroads, in Developments in West
European Politics 2, edited by Paul Heywood et al (London: Palgrave, 2002).
The politics of immigration in Western Europe, special issue of West European Politics, 17, 2
(1994), relevant articles.
Rafaela M. Dancygier, Immigration and conflict in Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2011), chapters 7 and 8.
Rahsaan Maxwell, Ethnic minority migrants in Britain and France: integration trade-offs
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), relevant chapters.

2b. Where does the state play a larger role in economic policy: in France or in Germany?

Basic readings
Vivien A. Schmidt, French capitalism transformed, yet still a third variety of capitalism,
Economy and Society 32, 4 (2003): 526-554.
Stephen Padgett, Political economy: the German model under stress, in Developments in
German politics 3, edited by Stephen Padgett, William E. Paterson and Gordon Smith
(London: Palgrave, 2003).

France
Ben Clift, Economic policy, in Development in French politics 4, edited by Alistair Cole et al
(London: Palgrave, 2008).
Jonah Levy, Economic policy and policy-making, in Development in French politics 3, edited
by Alistair Cole et al (London: Palgrave, 2005).
Pepper D. Culpepper, Peter A. Hall and Bruno Palier, eds., Changing France: the politics that
markets make (London: Palgrave, 2006), Part One.
Timothy B. Smith, France in crisis?: economic and welfare policy reform, in Developments in
French Politics 5, edited by Alistair Cole, Sophie Meunier and Vincent Tiberj (London:
Palgrave, 2013).

31

Peter A. Hall, The evolution in economic policy, in Developments in French politics 2, edited by
Alain Guyomarch et al (London: Palgrave, 2001).
Peter A. Hall, Governing the economy: the politics of state intervention in Britain and France (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1986), Parts I, III, IV.

Germany
Andreas Busch, Globalisation and national varieties of capitalism: the contested viability of
the German model, German Politics 14 (2005): 125-139.
Reimut Zohnlhfer, Between a rock and a hard place: the Grand Coalitions response to the
economic crisis, German Politics, 20 (2011): 227-242.
Kenneth Dyson, The West German model revisited, in Continuity and change in German
politics, edited by Stephen Padgett and Thomas Poguntke (London: Frank Cass, 2001).
Luigi Bonatti and Andrea Fracasso, The German model and the European crisis, Journal of
Common Market Studies 51, 6 (2013): 1023-1039.
Richard Deeg, The comeback of Modell Deutschland?: the new German political economy in
the EU, German Politics 14 (2005): 332-353.
Horst Siebert, The German economy: beyond the social market (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 2005).
Christel Lane, Globalization and the German model of capitalism: erosion or survival? (London:
Routledge, 2000).

General
Erik Jones, Globalization and interdependence, and Bob Hanck, Varieties of European
capitalism and their transformation, in Developments in European politics 2, edited by
Erik Jones et al (London: Palgrave, 2011).
Waltraud Schelkle, Policymaking in hard times: French and German responses to the eurozone
crisis, in Coping with crisis: government reactions to the Great Recession, edited by Nancy
Bermeo and Jonas Pontusson (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2012).
Vivien A. Schmidt, European political economy: labour out, state back in, firm to the fore,
West European Politics, 31 (2008): 302-320.
Vivien A. Schmidt, The futures of European capitalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002),
esp. chapters 3 and 4.
Peter A. Hall and David Soskice, eds., Varieties of capitalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2001), Introduction.
Andrew Gamble, The spectre at the feast (London: Palgrave, 2009), esp. chapter 4.

2c. Have French and German European integration policies increasingly converged?

Basic readings
Stanley Hoffman, French dilemmas and strategies in the new Europe, in After the cold war,
edited by Robert Keohane, Joseph Nye and Stanley Hoffman (Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press, 1993).
Charlie Jeffery and William Paterson, Germany and European integration: a shifting of

32

tectonic plates, West European Politics, 26, 4 (2003): 59-75.

France
Richard Balme and Cornelia Woll, France: between integration and national sovereignty, in
The member states of the European Union, edited by Simon Bulmer and Christian Lequesne
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).
Christian Lequesne, A new socialist president in the Elyse: continuity and change in French
EU politics, Journal of Common Market Studies 51, Annual Review (2013): 42-54.
Helen Drake, France and the European Union, in Developments in French Politics 5, edited by
Alistair Cole, Sophie Meunier and Vincent Tiberj (London: Palgrave, 2013).
Nicholas Sauger, Attitudes towards Europe in France, and Hussein Kassim, France and the
European Union under the Chirac presidency, in Development in French politics 4, edited
by Alistair Cole et al (London: Palgrave, 2008).
Dionyssis G. Dimitrakopoulos, Anand Menon and Argyris G. Passas, France and the EU under
Sarkozy: between European ambitions and national objectives?, Modern and
Contemporary France 17, 4 (2009): 451-465.
Helen Drake, ed., French relations with the European Union (London: Routledge, 2005), Chs 1, 2, 9.
Craig Parsons, Domestic interests, ideas and integration: the French case, Journal of Common
Market Studies, 38 (2000): 45-70.
Alain Guyomarch, Howard Machin and Ella Ritchie, France in the European Union (Basingstoke:
Macmillan, 1998), chapter 1.

Germany
William E. Paterson, The reluctant hegemon?: Germany moves centre stage in the European
Union, Journal of Common Market Studies Annual Review 49 (2011): 57-75.
Jeffrey Anderson, Germany and Europe: centrality in Europe, in The member states of the
European Union, edited by Simon Bulmer and Christian Lequesne (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2005).
Simon Bulmer and William E. Paterson, Germany as the EUs reluctant hegemon?: of economic
strength and political constraints, Journal of European Public Policy 20, 10 (2013): 1387-
1405.
William E. Paterson, Does Germany still have a European vocation?, German Politics, 19, 1
(2010): 41-52.
Simon Bulmer, Charlie Jeffery and William E. Paterson, Germanys European diplomacy: shaping
the regional milieu (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000).
Adrian Hyde-Price and Charlie Jeffery, Germany in the European Union: constructing
normality, Journal of Common Market Studies 39 (2001): 689-717.
Luigi Bonatti and Andrea Fracasso, The German model and the European crisis, Journal of
Common Market Studies 51, 6 (2013): 1023-1039.
Peter J. Katzenstein, ed., Tamed power: Germany in Europe (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997),
selected chapters.

General

33

Helen Wallace, Exercising power and influence in the European Union: the roles of member
states, in The member states of the European Union, edited by Simon Bulmer and Christian
Lequesne (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).
Tanja A. Brzel, Pace-setting, foot-dragging, and fence-sitting: member state responses to
Europeanization, Journal of Common Market Studies, 40 (2002): 193-214.
Andrew Moravcsik, The choice for Europe: social purpose and state power from Messina to Maastricht
(London: UCL Press, 1998).


34


D. The Middle East: Egypt and Saudi Arabia compared

The course

Over the past sixty years, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have each been, in different ways and at
different times, the core state in the Middle East. Egypt has taken on, sometimes by consent and
sometimes to the chagrin of others, the role of political and cultural leadership in the Arab
world. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, has been the dominant economic force in the region, with its
ability to utilise its oil wealth to ensure that all states in the region have to coordinate closely
with it. Both states in their own ways exemplify the politics of the Middle East today.

They also have been remarkably different as polities and societies. Egypt has long presented
itself as the face of modernisation, with political systems harking at different times to
socialism, nationalism, liberalisation, and (now) democratisation. Saudi Arabia meanwhile has
been a highly conservative society, with many areas of public and political life dominated by a
sprawling ruling family that has been deeply resistant to what they portray as the ideological
fads that have swept the rest of the world.

The lecture series will look to compare two countries that between them have shared a region,
and which are near-neighbours, but which remain palpably distinct in their political institutions
and political culture. Students can expect to come away from this course with a good grasp of
the modern history of these two countries, and to understand their political systems, which in
Egypts case is undergoing a significant transformation with the Arab Spring.

They should also be able to draw comparisons. What explains the long experience of
authoritarianism that has dominated both countries modern histories, and it is the same type of
authoritarianism? Does religion play a similar role in garnering political legitimacy? To what
extent do they face the same economic and social challenges? What explains the different paths
that the two countries followed in 2011, with the type of popular movement that developed
rapidly in Egypt to overthrow Hosni Mubaraks government seemingly absent in Saudi Arabia?

Essay questions
Why has authoritarianism persisted for so long in Egypt and Saudi Arabia?
What explains the significance that religion has had in the politics of Egypt and Saudi
Arabia?

Lectures and reading lists

Lecture 1: The idea of the Arab world


35

It is very much worthwhile to start this course by developing a general sense of the historical
evolution and politics of the Middle East. Owen is probably the best way in for a newcomer to
the region, developing both a historical account and themes for analysis. In addition to this text,
a general historical sense of the two core countries that are being examined in this option
Egypt and Saudi Arabia is crucial. On Saudi Arabia, Al-Rasheeds account is ideal for this
purpose. Niblock is an alternative, but is less detailed. Kostiner traces Saudi history in terms of
relations between tribes and a centralising state apparatus. Oddly enough, there is no
comparable high-quality history of modern Egypt; many general histories of the Middle East as
a whole give a considerable degree of centrality to the place of Egypt in that history, and it is
perhaps best to approach Egypt through relevant sections of Gelvin (chapters 5, 9-10, 12 and 15)
and (maybe preferably) Cleveland & Bunton (the relevant sections of chapters 4-6, 11, 15-16 and
18), before moving on to literature from the second lecture about Egypt.

* Roger Owen, State, Power and Politics in the Making of the Modern Middle East (London:
Routledge, 3rd edition, 2004)

William Cleveland and Martin Bunton, A History of the Modern Middle East (Westview Press, 4th
edition, 2009) earlier editions, with Cleveland as the sole author, are also fine

Albert Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples (London: Faber & Faber, 1991)

James Gelvin, The Modern Middle East: A History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005)

* Madawi Al-Rasheed, A History of Saudi Arabia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2
nd

edition, 2010)

Tim Niblock, Saudi Arabia: Power, Legitimacy and Survival (Abingdon: Routledge, 2006)

Joseph Kostiner, Transforming dualities: tribe and state formation in Saudi Arabia, in Philip
Khoury and Joseph Kostiner, eds, Tribes and State Formation in the Middle East (Berkeley CA:
University of California Press, 1990) [C]

Lecture 2: The authoritarian mode

Middle East scholarship has developed a range of ways of explaining the persistence of
authoritarianism in the region; many of these modes of analysis will need revision in light of the
events of 2011. It is important though to understand the general argument about the region and
the specific arguments about Egypt and Saudi Arabia; Schlumberger provides the best starting
point, with chapter 2 (Heydemann) setting out general arguments, chapters 4 (Albrecht), 8
(Pioppi) and 11 (Richter) on Egypt, and chapter 15 (Aarts) a provocative short coda on Saudi
Arabia. The Posusney/Angrist is similar: chapters 1 (Posusney) and 2 (Bellin) are useful ways in
to the topic, chapter 9 (Langohr) is particularly good on Egypt, and chapter 8 (Herb) briefly on
Saudi Arabia.

36


On Saudi Arabia, the most useful texts here are two contrasting articles: the first by Glosmeyer,
the second by Al-Rasheed & Al-Rasheed (and/or see the first chapter of the authors more recent
Contesting the Saudi State, listed with lecture 6, for a more recent account of the ideology of
defensive conservatism); also see the texts with lecture 3. On Egypt, Kassem is fairly
introductory but newcomers to the topic should find it useful to read this short book as a whole.
Cook especially chapter 4 is more directly focused. Springborg is good, but dated.

* Oliver Schlumberger, ed., Debating Arab Authoritarianism: Dynamics and Durability in
Nondemocratic Regimes (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2007) [chapter 4 on C].

Marsha Pripstein Posusney and Michele Penner Angrist, eds., Authoritarianism in the Middle
East: Regimes and Resistance (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2005) [chapter 9 on C].

Maye Kassem, Egyptian Politics: The Dynamics of Authoritarian Rule (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner,
2004) [chapter 3 on C]

* Madawi Al-Rasheed and Loulouwa Al-Rasheed, The politics of encapsulation: Saudi policy
towards tribal and religious opposition, Middle Eastern Studies, 32 (1), 1996, 96120. [OL]

Iris Glosemeyer, Checks, balances and transformation in the Saudi political system, in Paul
Aarts and Gerd Nonneman, eds., Saudi Arabia in the Balance (London: Hurst & Co., 2005),
pp.214-233 [C]

Steven Cook, Ruling But Not Governing: The Military and Political Development in Egypt, Algeria,
and Turkey (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2007) [Chapter 4 on C]

Robert Springborg, Mubaraks Egypt: Fragmentation of the Political Order (Boulder, CO: Lynne
Rienner, 1989).

Lecture 3: Development and disjuncture

Discussions of the politics of Saudi Arabia revolve around its rentier character: Okrulik and
Chaudhry are both comparative accounts that include Saudi Arabia, and are generally within
the rentier paradigm. Hertog provides a well-researched critique: chapter 1 has been copied to
CamTools, but the book as a whole is worth reading, and especially chapter 8. See also Foley,
for lecture 6.

Analysis of Egypt tends to take a quite different focus of analysis: it is centrally concerned with
the programmes of economic reform or liberalisation continually announced by Egyptian
governments, their economic and political effects, and the reasons for their repeated stalling.
Although making an advanced argument, Kienle is perhaps the best one to read first: the final
chapter, copied to CamTools, brings together the overall evaluation, but the earlier material in

37

the book provides the necessary substance. Sullivan and Zaki may prompt a useful comparison.
Posusney is a bit dated, but its focus on how economic liberalisation changed relations between
the state and labour unions is still relevant. Roy and Shehata are partly technical in nature, but
both contain provocative political arguments.

* Gwenn Okruhlik, Rentier wealth, unruly law, and the rise of opposition: the political
economy of oil states, Comparative Politics, 31(3), 1999, 295315. [OL]

Kiren Aziz Chaudhry, Economic liberalization and the lineages of the rentier state, Comparative
Politics, 27(1), 1994, pp.125. [OL]

* Steffen Hertog, Princes, Brokers, and Bureaucrats: Oil and State in Saudi Arabia (Ithaca: Cornell
University Press, 2010) [chapter 1 on C]

* Eberhard Kienle, A Grand Delusion: Democracy and Economic Reform in Egypt (I.B. Tauris Publishers, 2001)
[chapter 8 on C]

Marsha Posusney, Labor and the State in Egypt: Workers, Unions and Economic Restructuring (New
York: Columbia University Press, 1997) [chapter 5 on C]

Denis J. Sullivan, The political economy of reform in Egypt, International Journal of
Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 22 (1990), pp.317-334. [OL]

Mokhlis Y. Zaki, IMF-supported stabilization programs and their critics: evidence from the
recent experience of Egypt, World Development 29/ 11 (2001), pp.1867-1883 [OL]

Delwin A. Roy, 'Egyptian emigrant labour: domestic consequences', Middle Eastern Studies, vol.
27/4 (1991), pp.551-82 [OL]

Samer Shehata, In the Bashas house: the organizational culture of Egyptian public-sector
enterprise, International Journal of Middle East Studies, 37/1 (2003), pp.10332. [OL]

Lecture 4: Religion and the state

In both countries, religion has had a significant role in shaping political discourse. The main
focus of much of the literature on Saudi Arabia is on the form of Islam adopted in that country,
which is usually referred to by outsiders and critics as Wahhabism. Piscatori, a short schematic
article, is old but still probably the best place to start. Steinberg gives a historical account of the
religious elite, but Al-Rasheeds History (lecture 1) is more thorough. The chapter from Yamani
(lecture 6) is on the younger generations views on the role of Islam in public life. Delong-Bas
provides a critical reassessment of the extent to which what is now often referred to Wahhabism
is really a product of the eighteenth-century thought of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, arguing instead
that it is a modern invention. Literature on Egypt tends to look to the parties that were in

38

opposition prior to 2011 that made particular appeal to their Islamic credentials, particularly the
Muslim Brotherhood (here, El-Ghobashy is probably the best starting point, with Wickham and
Bayat subsequently), and to some extent also the centrist New Islamist Trend (Baker).
Wickhams text is best to read in full; the chapter copied to CamTools is on the development of
Islamist networks, but other chapters are also directly useful, including the postscript, which
takes the account up to the 2000s. Clark, on the development of Islamic social welfare
organisations, helps understand the increased appeal of an Islamic identity, although it is only
indirectly about the politics of that identity.

It is also important to look to the way in which governments of Egypt since the 1970s have all
made strong claims to religious authenticity, and also how much of the opposition within Saudi
Arabia has tried to outflank the monarchy through claims to being true upholders of the
countrys religious inheritance. On Egypt, see especially al-Awadi and Bayat. On relations
between the Egyptian government and the Coptic population, see the reading with lecture 5. On
Saudi Arabia, see Lacroix on the Sahwa movement; Jones is a short, and less historically
informed, alternative. On Shia political movements in Saudi Arabia, see the section from Louer
on the uneasy compromises made with the rulers; more critical accounts follow with the
reading on lecture 5.

* James P. Piscatori, The roles of Islam in Saudi Arabias political development, in John L.
Esposito (ed.), Islam and Development: Religion and Sociopolitical Change (Syracuse University
Press, 1980), pp. 12338. [C]

Guido Steinberg, The Wahhabi ulama and the Saudi state: 1745 to the present, in Paul Aarts
and Gerd Nonneman, eds., Saudi Arabia in the Balance (London: Hurst & Co., 2005), pp.11-34.

Natana Delong-Bas, Wahhabi Islam: from Revival and Reform to Global Jihad (London: I.B. Tauris,
2007).

Stphane Lacroix, Awakening Islam: The Politics of Religious Dissent in Contemporary Saudi Arabia
(Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2011) [chapter 1 on C].

Toby Jones, Religious revivalism and its challenge to the Saudi regime, in Mohammed Ayoob
and Hasan Kosebalaban, eds, Religion and Politics in Saudi Arabia (Boulder, CO: Lynne
Rienner, 2009), pp.109-120. [C]

* Carrie Wickham, Mobilizing Islam: Religion, Activism, and Political Change in Egypt (New York:
Columbia University Press, 2003) [chapter 7 on C]

* Asef Bayat, Making Islam Democratic: Social Movements and the Post-Islamist Turn (Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 2007), chapter 5 [C].


39

Hesham Al-Awadi, In Pursuit of Legitimacy: The Muslim Brothers and Mubarak, 1982-2000
(London: IB Tauris, 2004) [chapter 7 on C]

Janine Clark, Islam, Charity, and Activism: Middle-Class Networks and Social Welfare in Egypt,
Jordan, and Yemen (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 2004), chapter 2 [C]

Raymond Baker, Islam without Fear: Egypt and the New Islamists (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 2003).

Sheri Berman, Islamism, revolution, and civil society, Perspectives on Politics, vol. 1/2 (June
2003), pp. 257-272 [OL]

Mona El-Ghobashy, The metamorphosis of the Egyptian Muslim Brothers, International Journal
of Middle East Studies 37(2005), pp.373-395 [OL].

Laurence Louer, Shiism and Politics in the Middle East (London: Hurst, 2012) [part of chapter 4 on
C]

Lecture 5: Revolution and consolidation

This lecture will look to the historical distinctiveness of the movements that, in Egypt, led to the
removal of the Mubarak regime in 2011. It also looks to the comparability of these movements
with the rebellions that Saudi Arabia has experienced in its recent past. For past uprisings, Jones
is good on Saudi Arabia. On Egypt, see Abdelrahman on the Kifaya movement, and Bayat and
Sadiki on the earlier bread riots. On the Arab Spring, see Bellin and Barani for starting points.
The final chapter in Cook and the article by Martini and Taylor are useful contrasting
perspectives on how significant the overthrow of Mubarak is for Egypts political system. Stein
is useful on the problems of consolidation. The chapter from Iskander, and the two short pieces
in Middle East Report, are on the problems of maintaining national unity in Egypt in the
aftermath of the revolution, focusing on relations between the Coptic population and the ne
government. The final five pieces on the list look to potential effects (or the absence of them) of
the Arab Spring within Saudi Arabia and the use of sectarianism as a counter-revolutionary
tool. Read the chapters in the book by Matthiesen to get a sense of how the Arab Spring
impacted on the Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia, and how Saudi Arabia reacted, both at
home and abroad.

Toby Jones, Rebellion on the Saudi periphery: modernity, marginalization and the Shia
uprising of 1979, International Journal of Middle East Studies, 38/2 (2006), pp.21333 [OL].

Maha Abdelrahman, With the Islamists? - sometimes. With the State? - never! cooperation
between the Left and Islamists in Egypt, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 36/1 (2009),
pp.37-54 [OL].


40

Asef Bayat, Activism and social development in the Middle East, International Journal of Middle
East Studies, vol. 34 (2002), pp.1-28 [OL].

Larbi Sadiki, Popular uprisings and Arab democratization, International Journal of Middle East
Studies, vol. 32 (2000), pp.71-95 [OL].

* Eva Bellin, Reconsidering the robustness of authoritarianism in the Middle East: lessons from
the Arab spring, Comparative Politics, vol. 44/2 (January 2012), pp. 127-149

Zoltan Barani, Comparing the Arab revolts: the role of the military, Journal of Democracy, vol.
22/4 (October 2011), pp.28-39, via: http://tinyurl.com/pol4vi

Steven Cook, The Struggle for Egypt: From Nasser to Tahrir Square (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2011) [chapter 7 on C]

Jeff Martini and Julie Taylor, Commanding democracy in Egypt, Foreign Affairs, vol. 90/5
(Sept/Oct 2011), via: http://tinyurl.com/pol4ii

Ewan Stein, Revolution or coup? Egypt's fraught transition, Survival: Global Politics and
Strategy, vol. 54/4 (August 2012), pp. 45-66 [OL].

Libby Iskander, Sectarian Conflict in Egypt: Coptic Media, Identity and Representation (Abingdon:
Routledge, 2012) [chapter 8 on C]

Mariz Tadros, Sectarianism and Its discontents in post-Mubarak Egypt, Middle East Report
(2011), vol. 259 [OL], via:
http://www.merip.org/mer/mer259/sectarianism-its-discontents-post-mubarak-egypt

Paul Sedra, Reconstituting the Coptic community amidst revolution, Middle East Report (2012),
vol. 265 [OL], via:
http://www.merip.org/mer/mer265/reconstituting-coptic-community-amidst-revolution

Mehran Kamrava, The Arab spring and the Saudi-led counterrevolution, Orbis, vol. 56/1
(2012), pp.96-104, via: http://tinyurl.com/pol4vii

Christopher Clary and Mara E. Karlin, Saudi Arabia's reform gamble, Survival, vol. 53/5 (Sept
2011), pp.15-20, via: http://tinyurl.com/pol4iii

* Madawi Al-Rasheed, Sectarianism as counter-revolution: Saudi responses to the Arab Spring,
Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, vol. 11/3 (December 2011), pp. 513-526, via:
http://tinyurl.com/pol4iv


41

Toby Matthiesen, A Saudi Spring? The Shia protest movement in the Eastern Province 2011-
12, Middle East Journal, vol. 66/4 (August 2012), pp. 629-659 [OL].

* Toby Matthiesen, Sectarian Gulf: Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and the Arab Spring that Wasnt
(Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2013). (Read the Preface, Chapters 2, 5, 7,
Conclusion)

Stphane Lacroix, Is Saudi Arabia immune?, Journal of Democracy, vol. 22/4 (October 2011),
pp.48-59, via: http://tinyurl.com/pol4v


Lecture 6: Change and stability

The lecture course finishes with a series of reflections on the extent to which we can understand
the future of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Middle East as a whole from an understanding of
their past. It brings out a series of arguments about the new factors that affect the politics of
these countries, and evaluates critically the extent to which the politics of the region can be seen
to be entering a new era.

Joel Beinin, Political Islam and the new global economy: the political economy of an Egyptian
social movement, CR: The New Centennial Review, 5/1 (2005), pp.11139. [OL]

Madawi Al-Rasheed, Contesting the Saudi State: Islamic Voices from a New Generation (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2006) [chapter 1 on C]

Madawi Al-Rasheed, A Most Masculine State: Gender, Politics, and Religion in Saudi Arabia
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013).

Sean Foley, The Arab Gulf States: Beyond Oil and Islam (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2010) [chapter 3
on C]

Mai Yamani, Changed Identities: The Challenge of the New Generation in Saudi Arabia (London:
RIIA, 2000) [chapter 6 on C].

Marc Lynch, Voices of the New Arab Public: Iraq, al-Jazeera, and Middle East Politics Today (New
York: Columbia University Press, 2006) [chapter 2 on C]

Maha Abdelrahman, The transnational and the local: Egyptian activists and transnational
protest networks, British Journal of Middle East Studies, 38/3 (2011), pp.407-24. [OL]



42


E. Domestic Sources of US Foreign Policy

By most measures the United States is the most powerful country in the world. The U.S. is
centrally involved with almost every important international political issue, ranging from the
international security arena to transnational issues such as climate change, economic
globalization, and human rights regimes. For these reasons, the factors which shape U.S. foreign
policy are of concern to people around the globe. This case study is designed to develop
participants understanding of the domestic factors that contribute to foreign policy-making in
the United States. The lectures within the module will familiarize students with important
literature and debates on the intellectual foundations of U.S. foreign policy; explore power-
sharing among American political institutions and their involvement in the realm of foreign
affairs; review the impact of public opinion on political elites and vice-a-versa; and review how
organized interests in US society inform and constrain foreign policy choices.

General background reading for the whole case study

David C. Hendrickson, Union, Nation, or Empire: The American Debate over International Relations,
1789-1941 (Lawrence, Kans.: University of Kansas Press, 2009)

Walter McDougal, Promised Land, Crusader State: The American Encounter with the World Since
1776 (New York: Mariner, 1998)

Walter Russell Mead, Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World
(New York: Knopf, 2001)


Lecture 1: Anti-statism and the US security state
The United States was founded in part on a suspicion of centralized power, yet has developed
the most massive national security apparatus the world has ever known. Can these elements of
US political history and government be reconciled?

Readings:
Daniel H. Deudney, The Philadelphian System: Sovereignty, Arms Control, and Balance
of Power in the American States-Union, circa 17871861, International Organization 49:2
(1995), pp. 191-228.
Aaron L. Friedberg, In the Shadow of the Garrison State: Americas Anti-Statism and Its Cold
War Strategy (Princeton University Press, 2000), chaps. 1-3.
Harold Koh, The National Security Constitution: Sharing Power after the Iran-Contra Affair
(Yale University Press, 1990), chap. 3.
Amy Zegart, Flawed by Design: The Evolution of the CIA, JCS, and NSC (Stanford
University Press, 1999), chaps. 1, 6-7.

43

Recommended:

Washingtons Farewell Address, avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

Colin Dueck, Reluctant Crusaders: Power, Culture, and Change in American Grand Strategy
(Princeton University Press, 2006), introduction, chaps. 1-2, conclusion.

Johnathan Monten, The Roots of the Bush Doctrine: Power, Nationalism, and
Democracy Promotion in U.S. Strategy, International Security, 29:4 (2005), pp. 112-56.

Chalmers Johnson, The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic
(New York: Metropolitan Books, 2004), chaps. 1-3.

Walter LeFeber, The American Age: U.S. Foreign Policy at Home and Abroad 1750 to the
Present, second edition (New York: W.W. Norton, 1989), chaps. 7-9.


Lecture 2: Presidential dominance and the institutional pendulum
The American president is commonly presumed to be the dominant actor crafting US foreign
policy. However, the balance of foreign policy powers between US political institutions might
also be conceived as a pendulum, shifting back and forth between the president and Congress
depending on political context.

Readings:
Fareed Zakaria, From Wealth to Power: The Unusual Origins of Americas World Role
(Princeton University Press, 1998), chaps. 1, 3-4.
Gordon Silverstein, Imbalance of Powers: Constitutional Interpretation and the Making of
Foreign Policy (Oxford University Press, 1996), introduction, Part III.
William G. Howell and Jon C. Pevehouse, Presidents, Congress, and the Use of Force,
International Organization 59:1 (2005), pp. 209-232.

Recommended:

Douglas A. Kriner, After the Rubicon: Congress, Presidents and the Politics of Waging Wars
(University of Chicago Press, 2010), chaps. 1-2, 4.

Richard E. Neustadt, Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents (New York: The Free
Press, 1990), chaps. 1-5.

Scott Silverstone, Divided Union: The Politics of War in the Early American Public (Cornell
University Press, 2004), chap. 2.


44

Peter Trubowitz, Politics and Strategy: Partisan Ambition and American Statecraft (Princeton
University Press, 2011), chaps. 1-2.


Lecture 3: Public opinion and government responsiveness
The US public does not possess a wealth of information about foreign policy or politics
generally. Under what conditions might the government be most likely to reflect public
preferences in its foreign policy choices?

Readings:
Ole R. Holsti, Public Opinion and Foreign Policy: Challenges to the Almond-Lippmann
Consensus, International Studies Quarterly, 36:4 (1992), pp. 439466.
John H. Aldrich, John L. Sullivan, and Eugene Borgida, Foreign Affairs and Issue
Voting: Do Presidential Candidates Waltz before a Blind Audience? American Political
Science Review 83:1 (1989), pp. 123-141.
Benjamin I. Page and Jason Barabas, Foreign Policy Gaps between Citizens and
Leaders, International Studies Quarterly 44:3 (2000), pp. 339-364.
Bruce W. Jentleson, The Pretty Prudent Public: Post-Vietnam American Opinion on the
Use of Military Force, International Studies Quarterly, 36:1 (1992), pp. 4974.
Adam J. Berinsky, Assuming the Costs of War: Events, Elites, and American Public
Support for Military Conflict, Journal of Politics 69:4 (2007), pp. 975-997.

Recommended:

Douglas C. Foyle, Counting the Public In: Presidents, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy
(Columbia University Press, 1999)

John H. Aldrich et al., Foreign Policy and the Electoral Connection, Annual Review of
Political Science, Vol. 9 (2006), pp. 477-502.

Matthew A. Baum, Sex, Lies, and War: How Soft News Brings Foreign Policy to the
Inattentive Public, American Political Science Review 96:1 (2002), pp. 91109.

Chaim Kaufman, Threat Inflation and the Failure of the Marketplace of Ideas: The
Selling of the Iraq War, International Security 29:1 (2004), pp. 4-48.


Lecture 4: Sectoral politics and interest groups
Regional, economic, and ethnic diversity leads to a variety of different organized groups in civil
society pushing and pulling US foreign policy in numerous directions.

Readings:

45

Jeff Frieden, Sectoral Conflict and Foreign Economic Policy, 1914-1940, International
Organization 42:1 (1988), pp. 59-90.
Peter Trubowitz, Defining the National Interest: Conflict and Change in American Foreign
Policy (Chicago University Press, 1998), chaps. 1, 4.
Joseph Stiglitz, Globalization and Its Discontents (New York: W.W. Norton, 2002), chap. 3.
Robert C. Lieberman, The Israel Lobby and American Politics, and John J.
Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, The Blind Man and the Elephant in the Room:
Robert Lieberman and the Israel Lobby, both in Perspectives on Politics 7:2 (2009), pp.
235-269.

Recommended:

Lawrence Jacobs and Benjamin Page, Who Influences U.S. Foreign Policy? American
Political Science Review 99:1 (2005), pp. 107-123

Michael Bailey, Judith Goldstein, and Barry R. Weingast, The Institutional Roots of
American Trade Policy: Politics, Coalitions, and International Trade, World Politics 49:3
(1997), pp. 309-338

Clyde Prestowitz, The Betrayal of American Prosperity (New York: Free Press, 2010), chaps.
2-4, 6-7.

Benjamin O. Fordham and Timothy J. McKeown, Selection and Influence: Interest
Groups and Congressional Voting on Trade Policy, International Organization 57: 3
(2003), pp. 519549.

Kevin Narizny, Both Guns and Butter, or Neither: Class Interests in the Political
Economy of Rearmament, American Political Science Review 97:2 (2003), pp. 203-220

Tony Smith, Foreign Attachments: Ethnic Groups and The Making of American Foreign Policy
(Harvard University Press, 2000), chaps. 2-3

Supervision essay questions

These questions are meant to encourage you to think about how the topics covered in lecture
and readings relate to one another. While each question focuses on some topics more than
others, all areas are fair game on the final exam. Even though the readings on the syllabus are
quite comprehensive, I have included additional selections that can prove useful to those with
the time and inclination to study them.

1) What best explains the US president's relative power over foreign policy compared to
Congress: the different Constitutional features of each branch of government or the
growth of the US security state after World War II?

46


a. Michael Nelson Person and the Office: Presidents, the Presidency, and Foreign
Policy, in James M. McCormick, ed., The Domestic Sources of American Foreign
Policy: Insights and Evidence (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2012).
b. James M. Lindsay, The Shifting Pendulum of Power: Executive-Legislative
Relations on American Foreign Policy, in McCormick, op cit.
c. Louis Fisher, Presidential War Power (Lawrence, Kans.: University Press of
Kansas, 1995), or 2
nd
/3
rd
editions.
d. Douglas T. Stuart, Creating the National Security State (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2008)

2) Is mass public opinion in the US sufficient to defeat narrow factions whose foreign
policy interests are out of line with the majoritys preferences?

a. Samuel Popkin, The Reasoning Voter (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991),
esp. chs. 1-3.
b. Richard Sobel, The Impact of Public Opinion on U.S. Foreign Policy since Vietnam:
Constraining the Colossus. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), esp. chs. 1-
2.
c. Ken Kollman, Outside Lobbying: Public Opinion and Interest Group Strategies
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998)includes chapter on US trade
policy.





47


F. State Formation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Lecturer and supervisors:
Devon Curtis (lecturer)
Carol Gallo
Marta Iniguez de Heredia

States in sub-Saharan Africa are often deemed to be flawed or imperfect models of states
elsewhere. Different terms have been used to describe Africa states, such as failed states, quasi-
states, privatised states, shadow states, rentier states, fragile states, weak states. Amid these
seemingly imperfect states, the Democratic Republic of the Congo is sometimes singled out as
a dark hole in the centre of the continent, the epitome of the shortcomings of the African state.

In this option, we will discuss the ways in which many representations of the Congo - and of
other states in Africa - may obscure more than they reveal. If these representations are
inadequate, what are some of the other ways of understanding and describing politics in
Congo, that better capture the complexity of political structures and practices in the country?
How can we understand the exercise of authority in Congo? Can we use theories of state
formation derived from the experiences of other parts of the world to help us understand
political authority in Congo? What can we learn from the Congo about the purpose of the state,
and about the relationship between the state and the international system?

This optional module will seek to understand the political trajectory of the Congo, and students
will also be encouraged to think about what the Congolese experience can contribute to theories
of the state, legitimacy, identity, and democracy. Throughout this option, students should also
reflect upon the extent to which the domestic can be seen as separate from the international in
the Congo.

Lectures (NOTE that the lecture room and times will be different each week)
1. Colonialism, identity and state formation (Mon 20 January, 10-11am, POLIS SG1 )
2. The state and the world: Independence and the cold war (Mon 3 Feb, Mill Lane Rm 7, 9-
10am)
3. Post cold war politics: democracy and economy (Mon 3 Feb, Mill Lane Rm 7, 10-11am)
4. Conflict, violence and what kind of state in the Congo? (Mon 10 Feb, 10-11am, POLIS
SG1)

Supervisions: Students will receive two supervisions for this option.

Supervision 1: How were identities in Congo shaped by colonial rule and by the Cold War?
Supervision 2: Is democracy a barrier to state consolidation in the DRC?


48


Reading:
You should begin by reading at least one general text. A good place to start is Adam
Hochschilds King Leopolds Ghost (1998), which gives a gripping account of the pre-colonial and
colonial period in the Congo. Hochschild is a journalist and his book raises important questions
about the foundations of the Congolese state, and of the international humanitarian movement
that claimed to be acting in the best interest of the Congolese. Another introductory book is
Theodore Trefons Congo Masquerade. Young and Turners book, The Rise and Decline of the
Zairian State, is a classic text on the Mobutu years. Kevin Dunns Imagining the Congo (2003)
raises key questions about the way in which Congo has been represented by outside observers
over time, and to what effect. Jason Stearns book, which focuses on the contemporary period,
has an unfortunate title (Dancing in the Glory of Monsters, 2011) but it is a compelling read and a
good introduction to the country. Stearns also writes a blog that students should read for an
analysis of current events: http://congosiasa.blogspot.com/. Another recent book by a journalist
is Michael Deibert, The Democratic Republic of the Congo: Between Hope and Despair (2013), which
offers an introduction to the country.

In the list below, the starred readings are particularly useful. In each section, I have also placed
one or two general readings that do not focus on Congo, but that will be helpful in thinking
about Congo from a comparative perspective.

Lecture 1: Colonialism, identity and state formation
We will discuss the colonial encounter, and the structures of pre-colonial political authority that existed
in the space we now call Congo. What were the legacies of colonialism? What kind of political economy
emerged? What were the consequences of colonialism on ethnicity, religion and other identities in the
Congo?

*Adam Hochschild, King Leopolds Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, Heroism in Colonial Africa.
Houghton, 1998.

*Kevin Dunn, Imagining the Congo: The International Relations of Identity, (Palgrave 2003). [E-
book]

*Crawford Young, The Colonial State in Comparative Perspective, Yale University Press, pp. 1-76.

*Mahmood Mamdani, When Victims Become Killers, Oxford: James Currey, 2001 (Read Chapter 8
on Tutsi Power in Rwanda and the Citizenship Crisis in Eastern Congo).

*Stephen Jackson, Sons of Which Soil? The Language and Politics of Autochtony in Eastern DR
Congo African Studies Review 49 (2), 2006.

*Koen Vlassenroot, Citizenship, Identity Formation and Conflict in South Kivu: The Case of
the Banyamulenge Review of African Political Economy, 93/94, 2002.

49


Marie-Benedicte Dembour, Recalling the Belgian Congo, Berghahn Books, 2008.

Joseph Conrad, The Heart of Darkness
See also: Chinua Achebe, An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrads Heart of Darkness in
Conrad, Heart of Darkness, Critical Edition (New York: Norton, 1988).

Tintin in the Congo
See also Maev Kennedy, Tintins adventures in Congo goes on trial in Belgium Guardian, 28
April 2010.
--

*Peter Ekeh, Colonialism and the Two Publics in Africa: A Theoretical Statement, Comparative
Studies in Society and History, 17: 1, 1975: 91-112.

*Pierre Englebert, Pre-Colonial Institutions, Post-Colonial States, and Economic Development
in Tropical Africa, Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 53, No. 1 (March 2000)

Lecture 2: The state and the world: Independence and the cold war
The image of President Mobutu looms large in the Western imagination. How was Mobutu shaped and
produced, and to what extent is Congolese post-colonial political development driven by this leader? What
options existed for Congo at the Independence? Was Congo merely a pawn in the Cold War? What effect
did the superpower struggle have on Congos political trajectory?

*Patrice Lumumba, Congo: My Country, New York: Praeger, 1962.

*Crawford Young and Thomas Turner, The Rise and Decline of the Zairian State, Madison:
University of Wisconsin Press, 1985. (be sure to look at chapter on the patrimonial state and
personal rule)

*Janet McGaffey The Real Economy of Zaire: The Contribution of Smuggling & Other Unofficial
Activities to National Wealth (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991). [C:
conclusion]

*B Muhuni, Mobutu and the Class Struggle in Zaire, Review of African Political Economy, 5, Jan-
Apr 1976: 94-98 [OL]

*Martin Meredith, The Fate of Africa: From the Hopes of Freedom to the Heart of Despair, New York:
Public Affairs, 2005, pp. 93-115.

*Thomas Callaghy, External Actors and the Relative Autonomy of the Political Aristocracy in
Zaire Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics 21(3), 1983.


50

*John Clark, Zaire: The Bankruptcy of the Extractive State, in Villalon and Huxtable (eds), The
African State at a Critical Juncture, Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1997.

*William Reno, Sovereignty and Personal Rule in Zaire, African Studies Quarterly, 1(3), 1997.

Michela Wrong, In the Footsteps of Mr. Kurtz: Living on the Brink of Disaster in Mobutus Congo,
New York: Harper Perennial 2002.

Matthew Stanard, The 1958 Brussels Worlds Fair and Belgian Perceptions of the Congo,
European History Quarterly, 35, 2005.

*Two-Decade Review Yields History of Covert Action in Congo (CIA covert action in the
Congo), http://blogs.fas.org/secrecy/2013/12/frus-congo/

Matthew Stanard, Selling the Congo, University of Nebraska Press, 2012.

Piero Gleijeses, Flee! The White Giants are Coming!: The United States, the Mercenaries and the
Congo, 1964-65, Diplomatic History, 18(2), 1994.

M. Schatzberg, The Dialectics of Oppression in Zaire, Indiana University Press, 1988.

*Larry Devlin, Chief of Station, Congo: Fighting the Cold War in a Hot Zone, Public Affairs, 2008. [C:
chapter 3]

Ernesto Che Guevera, edited by Richard Gott and translated by Patrick Camiller, The African
Dream: The Diaries of the Revolutionary War in the Congo, Grove Press 2001.

*Ludo de Witte, The Assassination of Lumumba, New York: Verso, 2002. [C: chapter 1]

Sergey Mazov, A Distant Front in the Cold War: The USSR in West Africa and the Congo 1956-1964,
Stanford University Press, 2010.

Susan Williams, Who Killed Hammarskjold? The UN, the Cold War and White Supremacy in Africa,
Hurst Publishers, 2011.

M Naniuzeyi, The State of the State in Congo-Zaire: A Survey of the Mobutu Regime Journal of
Black Studies, 1999.

Thomas Callaghy, The State as a Lame Leviathan: The Patrimonial Administrative State in
Africa, in Zaki Ergas (ed), The African State in Transition, New York: St Martins Press, 1987.
--


51

*Jean- Francois Bayart, Africa in the World: A History of Extraversion, African Affairs 99 (395),
2000: 217-67.

*Nicolas Van de Walle, African Economies and the Politics of Permanent Crisis, 1979-1999
(Cambridge University Press, 2001) [C, ch. 3]

Robert Jackson and Carl Rosberg, The Political Economy of African Personal Rule, in Apter
and Rosberg, Political Development and the New Realism in Sub-Saharan Africa, University of
Virginia Press, 1994.

Movies:
Mobutu, King of Zaire (directed by Thierry Michel), 1999
Lumumba (directed by Raoul Peck), 2000

Lecture 3: Post Cold War Politics: Democracy and Economy
Many people thought that the end of the Cold War offered a new opportunity for political and economic
development in Africa. What happened in Congo at this moment of transition? What are the
consequences of Congos enormous mineral wealth on the nature of the state? Is democratic reform viable
in Congo? What is the role of regional and international actors in providing opportunities and
constraints on governance in Congo?

*Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja, A Peoples History of the Congo (London: Zed Books, 2002).

*Filip Reyntjens, Democratic Republic of the Congo: Political Transition and Beyond African
Affairs, 106 (423), 2007.

*Gerard Prunier, Africas World War. Congo, the Rwandan Genocide, and the Making of a Continental
Catastrophe, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. [C: chapter 10]

*Michael Nest, Francois Grignon and Emizet Kisangani, The Democratic Republic of Congo:
Economic Dimensions of War and Peace, (Lynne Rinner, 2005). [C: chapter 3]

*Patience Kabamba, External Economic Exploitation in the DRC: 1990-2005, African Studies
Review, Volume 55, Number 1, April 2012, pp. 123-130.

*William Reno, Congo: from State Collapse to Absolutism to State Failure, Third World
Quarterly, 27 (1) February 2006).

Jason Stearns, Dancing in the Glory of Monsters: The Collapse of the Congo and the Great War of
Africa, New York: Public Affairs, 2011. [C: chapter 20]

Theodore Trefon, Congo Masquerade: The Political Culture of Aid Inefficiency and Reform Failure,
London: Zed Books, 2011. [E-book]

52


Jeffrey W Mantz, Improvisational economies: Coltan production in the eastern Congo, Social
Anthropology, Vol. 16, Issue 1, February 2008.

David Renton, David Seddon and Leo Zeilig, The Congo: Plunder and Resistance, (London: Zed
Books, 2007). [E-book]

Ingrid Samset, Conflict of Interests or Interests in Conflict? Diamonds and the War in the
DRC, Review of African Political Economy, 29, no. 93/4, 2002. [OL]

John F. Clark, The African Stakes of the Congo War (Palgrave, 2004)- see in particular Kevin Dunn,
A Survival Guide to Kinshasa: Lessons of the father, passed down to the son

Rene Lemarchand, The Dynamics of Violence in Central Africa, Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 2008.

Filip Reyntjens, The Great African War: Congo and Regional Politics, 1996-2006, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Thomas Turner, The Congo Wars: Conflict, Myth and Reality, (London: Zed Books, 2007). [C:
chapter 2]

OG Afoaku, The Possibilities of Ethnonationalism in Post-Mobutu Zaire, Western Journal of
Black Studies, 21(2), 1997: 124-133.
--

*Kevin Dunn and Timothy Shaw (eds), Africas Challenge to International Relations Theory,
Palgrave 2001. See esp chapter by Siba Grovogui, Sovereignty in Africa: Quasi-Statehood and
other myths in international theory

Lecture 4: Conflict, violence and what kind of state in the Congo?
In this concluding lecture we will ask how we can best characterise the Congolese state. Why has violent
conflict played such a prominent role in Congolese politics? What forms of legitimacy exist in Congo?
Why does the Congolese state continue to exist? Do non-traditional donors such as China offer new
political opportunity in the Congo?

*Special Issue: Neither War Nor Peace in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Profiting and
Coping amid Violence and Disorder, Review of African Political Economy, Vol. 40, Issue 135, 2013.

*Denis Tull, A reconfiguration of political order?: The state of the state in North Kivu African
Affairs, Vol. 103, No. 408, 2003. [OL]

*Jeffrey Herbst and Greg Mills, There is No Congo Foreign Policy, 18 March 2009;

53

See reply by Timothy Raeymaekers, Who Calls the Congo [OL]
See also reply by Christoph Vogel: http://africanarguments.org/2013/06/27/why-herbstmills-are-
wrong-about-congo%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cinvisible-state%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%93-by-
christoph-vogel/

*Herbert Weiss and Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja, Decentralization and the DRC, SSRN working
paper, January 2013
http://www.ssrc.org/workspace/images/crm/new_publication_3/%7Bd6c11449-2260-e211-8eac-
001cc477ec84%7D.pdf

*Vlassenroot, Koen (2013). South Kivu: Identity, Territory, and Power in the Eastern Congo. London:
Rift Valley Institute.

*Judith Verweijen, (2013) Military business and the business of the military in the Kivus,
Review of African Political Economy, 40(135), 67-82

*Marta Iiguez de Heredia, Escaping Statebuilding: Resistance and Civil Society in the
Democratic Republic of Congo, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 6:1, 2012, pp. 75-89.

*Mvemba Phezo Dizolele and Pascal K Kambale, The DRCs Crumbling Legitimacy, Journal of
Democracy Volume 23, Number 3 July 2012

*Severine Autesserre, Dangerous Tales: Dominant Narratives on the Congo and their
Unintended Consequences African Affairs, 111(442), Spring 2012.

*Pierre Englebert, A Research Note on Congos Nationalist Paradox Review of African Political
Economy, September-December 2002.

*Theodore Trefon, Public Service Provision in a Failed State: Looking Beyond Predation in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo Review of African Political Economy, 36: 119, March 2009.

*Maria Eriksson Baaz and Ola Olsson, Feeding the Horse: Unofficial Economic Activities within
the Police Force in the Democratic Republic of Congo, African Security, 4, 2011, pp. 223-241.

*Tom de Herdt, Kristof Titeca and Inge Wagemakers, Make Schools not War? Rewriting of the
Social Contract in the DRC, Development Policy Review, 30 (6) 2012, pp. 681-701.

Koen Vlassenroot and Timothy Raeymaekers, Briefing: Kivus Intractable Security
Conundrum, African Affairs 108, no. 432 (2009): 475-484.

Michael Deibert, The Democratic Republic of the Congo: Between Hope and Despair, Zed Books, 2013.


54

Paul Kirby, How is Rape a Weapon of War? Feminist International Relations, Modes of Critical
Explanations and the Study of Wartime Sexual Violence, EJIR, 2012

Severine Autesserre, Hobbes and the Congo: Frames, Local Violence, and International
Intervention, International Organization, Vol. 63, 2009: pp. 249-280 [OL]

Theodore Trefon (ed), Reinventing Order in the Congo: How People Respond to State Failure in
Kinshasa, (London: Zed Books, 2005).

Jana Hnke, Transnational Companies and Security Governance: Hybrid Practices in a Postcolonial
World (Routledge, 2013).

Zoe Marriage, Formal Peace and Informal War: Security and Development in Congo (Routledge,
2013).

Stefaan Marysse, Regress and War: The Case of the DR Congo, European Journal of
Development Research 15, no. 1 (June 2003)

Michael Niemann, War Making and State Making in Central Africa, Africa Today 53, no. 3
(Spring 2007)

Timothy Raeymaekers, Protection for Sale? War and the Transformation of Regulation on the
Congo-Ugandan Border, Development and Change, August 2010.

Timothy Raeymaekers, Post-war conflict and the market for protection: the challenges to
Congos hybrid peace, International Peacekeeping, Vol. 20, 5, November 2013-, pp. 600-617.

Timothy Raeymaekers, Why History Repeats itself in Eastern DR Congo, e-International
Relations, 20 December 2012,
http://www.e-ir.info/2012/12/20/why-history-repeats-itself-in-eastern-dr-congo/

Maria Baaz and Maria Stern, Making Sense of Violence: Voices of Soldiers in the Congo
(DRC), Journal of Modern African Studies, 46, No. 1, 2008. [OL]

Maria Eriksson Baaz and Maria Stern, NAI researcher critical of rape report (May 2011),
http://www.nai.uu.se/news/articles/nai-researcher-critical-o/

Nicholas Garrett, Sylvia Sergiou, Koen Vlassenroot, Negotiated peace for extortion: the case of
Walikale territory in eastern DR Congo Journal of Eastern African Studies 3(1) 2009.

Alexander Veit, Figuration of Uncertainty: Armed Groups and Humanitarian Military
Intervention in Ituri (DR Congo) Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, Vol. 2 No. 3, 2008.


55

Severine Autesserre, The Trouble with the Congo: Local Violence and the Failure of International
Peacebuilding, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Koen Vlassenroot and Karen Busher, The City as Frontier: Urban Development and Identity
Processes in Goma, Working Paper 61, Crisis States Research Centre, London School of
Economics, November 2009. [OL]

Stefaan Marysse and Sara Geenan, Win-win or unequal exchange? The case of the Sino-
Congolese cooperation agreements, Journal of Modern African Studies 47 (3), 2009: 371-396.

Devon Curtis, China and the Insecurity of Development in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo (DRC), International Peacekeeping, Vol. 20, No. 5, November 2013, pp. 551-569. [OL]

Kristof Titeca, Real governance beyond the failed state: negotiating the education sector in the
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), African Affairs, 110: 439 (2011): 213-231.

Mathijs van Leeuwen, Imagining the Great Lakes Region: discourses and practices of civil
society regional approaches for peacebuilding in Rwanda, Burundi, and DR Congo, Journal of
Modern African Affairs, 46, 3, 2008.

You may also want to look at news articles and reports. For instance:

Carol Jean Gallo and Christoph Vogel, UNs elite force raises the stakes in the DRC Al Jazeera,
16 July 2013, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/07/201371595015796872.html

Jason Stearns, From CNDP to M23: The evolution of an armed movement in eastern Congo
(Usalama Project), http://www.riftvalley.net/?view=publications

Jason Stearns, North Kivu: The background to conflict in North Kivu province of eastern Congo
(Usalama Project), http://www.riftvalley.net/?view=publications

Commentary on a BBC documentary about the Congo:
http://africasacountry.com/how-can-we-move-on-from-this-dark-story-about-the-congo/#more-
76875

Movies

Empire of Dust (Chinese in Katanga): http://vimeo.com/29260656

56


G. The Environment and Growth in China

Summary

Contemporary China faces an environmental crisis reaching into every aspect of life, which
would likely prove to be the Achilles heel of its aim to achieve sustainable growth. Yet it is not
singular among developing countries to face an apparent tradeoff between environmental
protection and rapid industrialization. This option addresses the following four issues:

1) Compare the developmental stage- and culturally-specific perspectives on Chinese elites
relationship to Nature through several historical periods;

2) Consider the application of green GDP accounting to present-day China;

3) Examine interest aggregation and social mobilization in local communities for and against
sidelining environmental protection, under the limitations of the authoritarian institutions;

4) Assess the regulatory framework and implementation of the pollute first, clean-up later
approach to controlling for negative externalities of growth.

Students will gain an analytical understanding of the major dilemmas in policymaking and
contentions in state-society relations in addressing environmental problems.

Supervision

Students will receive two supervisions for this option. See questions provided at the end of the
weekly reading list.


Week 1: Developmental Stage and Cultural Understanding of the Environment

Mark Elvin, 1998. "The Environmental Legacy of Imperial China." China Quarterly 156: 733-756.

Mark Elvin, 2004. The Retreat of the Elephants: An Environmental History of China. Yale University
Press.

Mark Elvin, and Liu Ts'ui jung, ed, 1998. Sediments of Time: environment and society in Chinese
history. Cambridge University Press.

Peter Ho, 2003. Maos war against nature? The Environmental impact of the grain-first

57

campaign in China. The China Journal 50: 37-59.

Nicholas K. Menzies, 1994. Forest and Land Management in Imperial China. St. Martins Press.

Rhoads Murphey, 1967. Man and Nature in China. Modern Asian Studies 1(4): 313-333.

Gregory Rohlf, 2003. "Dreams of Oil and Fertile Fields: The Rush to Qinghai in the 1950s"
Modern China 29: 455-489.

R. Keith Schoppa, 1989. Xiang Lake: nine centuries of Chinese life. Yale University Press.

Robert P. Weller and Peter K. Bol, 1998. "From Heaven-and-Earth to Nature: Chinese Concepts
of the Environment and their influence on policy implementation," in Michael B. McElroy, Chris
P. Nielsen, and Peter Lydon, ed.s, Energizing China. Harvard University Committee on
Environment.

Lynn White, Jr., 1967. Historical roots of our ecologic crisis. Science v.155 (March 10, 1967).

Question: Do you see any continuity between dynastic approaches toward the exploitation of
natural resources and Maoist and post-1978 reform era economic developmental principles?


Week 2: Environmental Assessment - Water and Grassland

Robert Louis Edmonds, ed., 2000. Managing the Chinese Environment. Oxford UP.

Elizabeth Economy, 2004. The River Runs Black: The Environmental Challenge to Chinas Future.
NY: Cornell University Press.

Ma Jun, 1999. Chinas Water Crisis. Pacific Century Press.

The Wilson Center, China Environment Forum: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/program/china-
environment-forum

Peter Ho, 2000. "China's Rangelands under Stress: A Comparative Study of Pasture Commons
in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region." Development and Change 31: 385-412.

Tony Banks, 2001. Property rights and the environment in pastoral China: Evidence from the
field. Development and Change 32(4): 717-740.

Emily Yeh, 2005. Green governmentality and pastoralism in Western China: Converting
pastures to grasslands.Nomadic Peoples 9(1): 9-29.


58

Ministry of Environmental Protection. Report on the State of the Environment in China" (SOE).
People's Republic of China, Beijing. Up to 2009: Available online at:
http://english.mep.gov.cn/standards_reports/

The World Bank Supporting Environmental Management in China:
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/EASTASIAPACIFICEXT/EXTEA
PREGTOPENVIRONMENT/0,,contentMDK:20515211~menuPK:502915~pagePK:34004173~piPK
:34003707~theSitePK:502886,00.html

UNDP China Energy and Environment:
http://www.undp.org.cn/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&catid=10&sid=8

Question: At what point in Chinas industrialisation and urbanisation will the value of water,
grassland, and other natural resources become sufficiently high to reset the calculus of
development? Or has China passed that tipping-point?


Week 3: Social and Political Consequences of Environmental Damages

Peter Ho, 2001. Greening without conflict? Environmentalism, NGOs and civil society in
China. Development and Change 32(5): 893921.

Jun Jing, 2000. Environmental Protests in Rural China, in Elizabeth J. Perry and Mark Selden,
eds., Chinese Society, Change, Conflict, and Resistance. Harvard UP: 143-60.

Susan Martens, 2006. Public participation with Chinese characteristics: citizen consumers
in Chinas environmental management. Environmental Politics 15(2): 211-230.

Andrew Mertha, 2008. Chinas Water Warriors: Citizen Action and Policy Change. Cornell
University Press.

Phillip Stalley and Dongning Yang, 2006. "An Emerging Environmental Movement in China?"
The China Quarterly 186:1: 333-56.

Benjamin Van Rooij, 2010. "The People vs. Pollution: Understanding Citizen Action against
Pollution in China." Journal of Contemporary China 19(63): 55-77.

Fengshi Wu, Fengshi. 2003. Environmental GONGO Autonomy. Journal of the Good Society 12(1):
35-45.

Guobin Yang, 2005. Environmental NGOs and Institutional Dynamics in China. The China
Quarterly 181: 4666.


59

Questions: Which social groups and with what strategies are most likely to advance their
interests on the exploitation of the environment? Would you consider their actions as
constituting a form of political liberalization?


Week 4: Government Failure or Market Failure?
Alford William P. and Yuanyuan Shen. "Limits of the Law in Addressing China's
Environmental Dilemma," in Energizing China, pp. 431-473.
HJ Albers, Scott Rozelle, G. Li, 1998. "China's forest under economic reform: timber supplies,
environmental protection and rural resource access." Contemporary Economic Policy 16(1): 22-33.

Kristen Day, ed., 2005. Chinas Environment and the Challenge of Sustainable Development. ME
Sharpe.

Robert Louis Edmonds, ed., 2000. Managing the Chinese Environment. Oxford University Press.

Abigail Jahiel, 1998. Organization of Environmental Protection in China, China Quarterly 156:
757-787.

Kenneth Lieberthal, 1997. Chinas Governing System and its Impact on Environmental Policy
Implementation. China Environment Series, Woodrow Wilson International Center.

Carlos W. Lo, Carlos W. H. and Gerald E. Fryxell, 2003. "Enforcement Styles among
Environmental Protection Officials in China." Journal of Public Policy 23(01): 81-115.

C. Lo, G. Fryxell, and W. Wong, 2006. "Effective Regulations with Little Effect? The Antecedents
of the Perceptions of Environmental Officials on Enforcement Effectiveness in China."
Environmental Management 38(3): 388-410.

C. Lo and S. Y. Tang, 2006. "Institutional Reform, Economic Changes, and Local Environmental
Management in China: The Case of Guangdong Province." Environmental Politics 15: 190-210.

Ma Xiaoying and Leonard Ortolano, 2000. Environmental regulation in China : institutions,
enforcement, and compliance. Rowman & Littlefield.

Michael Palmer, 1998. "Environmental Regulation in the People's Republic of China: The Face of
Domestic Law." China Quarterly 156: 788-808.

Barbara J. Sinkule and Leonard Ortolano, 1995. Implementing Environmental Policy in China.
Westport, CT: Praeger.


60

Bemjamin Van Rooij and C. W. Lo, 2010. "Fragile Convergence: Understanding Variation in the
Enforcement of Chinas Industrial Pollution Law." Law & Policy 32(1): 14-37.

OECD, 2006. Environmental Compliance and Enforcement in China: An Assessment of
Current Practices and Ways Forward. Available online at:
http://www.oecd.org/environment/environmentinemergingandtransitioneconomies/37867511.p
df

OECD, 2007. Environmental Performance Reviews: China. Available online at:
http://www.efchina.org/csepupfiles/report/200812095029729.8523773582758.pdf/Environmental
%20Performance%20Review%20-%20China%2007-23-07.pdf

Vermont Journal of Environmental Law, 2007. Special issue on "China in Transition: Environmental
Challenges in the Far East." VJEL 8(2). Available: http://www.vjel.org/journal/VJEL10051.html

Gerald Chan, 2004. China's compliance in global environmental affairs. Asia Pacific Viewpoint
45(1): 69-86.

A.I. Johnston, China and International Environmental Institutions: A decision rule analysis, in
Energizing China.

Question: What are the limitations of the reach of the central state in providing legal and
regulatory incentives for compliance of local governmental, businesses, and communities?


61


5. The exam
The end-of-year examination will ask questions about specific regions or cases. These questions
will often draw upon general themes of politics, using the material lectured upon in the first
section of the course. A mock exam paper is below, followed by the exam papers for 2011-12
(but note that the Section D questions for this exam are no longer relevant, and that it did not
include questions on China and on US foreign policy-making) and 2012-13 (but note that the
Section D questions are no longer relevant, and that it did not include questions on US foreign
policy-making). The Examiners reports for 2011-12 and 2012-13 conclude this section.


62

Pol 4 mock exam paper, 2013-14
Candidates should answer two questions, taking each from a different section. At least one of these
questions must be from Sections A to C. Questions from sections A to C should be answered with
reference to at least two countries, unless otherwise stated.

Section A
1. Do electoral systems determine party systems in Western Europe?
2. Has European integration increased the role and power of the executive in Western European
states?
3. Why have policies related to the integration of immigrants changed in recent years in Western
Europe?

Section B
4. Why have paths of democracy differed in Eastern Europe?
5. How have national traditions shaped the development of political parties?
6. Why had nationalism led to different political consequences across Eastern Europe?

Section C
7. What are the principal impediments to the formation of liberal market democracies in the Arab
world?
8. Why have rulers of Arab states tried to legitimise their rule so prominently through an appeal to
religious sentiment?
9. Middle Eastern states have often been referred to as fragile or failing. What does this mean,
and how accurate is this characterisation?

Section D
10. Is it more apt to describe US foreign policy-making in terms of presidential dominance or divided
institutions sharing powers?
11. Did the security institutions created in the immediate aftermath of WWII represent a
continuation or sharp disjuncture from previous US foreign policy traditions?

Section E
12. What explains Congolese nationalism?
13. Is the state in Congo anything more than a vehicle to promote the private interests of its rulers?

Section F
14. How accurate would it be to characterise Chinas long-standing policy approach as one of
economic growth first and environmental cleanup later?
15. Is local government a suitable vehicle for implementing Chinas environmental regulation?


Past exam paper: 2011-12

Section A
1. Have policies in France and Germany converged over the past two decades? Discuss
with reference to at least one specific policy area.

63

2. Why are some party systems in Western Europe more stable than others?
3. Can parliaments in Western Europe control the executive?
Section B
4. How has nationalism shaped state traditions in Eastern Europe?
5. Why did forms of authoritarian rule in Eastern Europe differ across states?
6. Can legacies of the authoritarian past explain the evolution of post-communist
democracies?
Section C
7. How similar is the authoritarian apparatus of Saudi Arabia to that of Egypt under
Mubarak?
8. Why is political opposition in the Arab world so often expressed through movements
that make a claim to religious authenticity?
9. To what extent do Arab countries experience the domination of the state over society?
Section D
10. How far did Republican success in presidential elections between 1968 and 2004 depend
on mobilising religious voters?
11. Was the 2008 presidential election unwinnable for the Republicans?
Section E
12. What accounts for the continued survival of the Congolese state?
13. In what ways has Congos historical legacy shaped its political economy?

Past exam paper: 2012-13

Section A
1. How does the type of political regime affect Western European political parties and
party systems?
2. What are the most important sources of power of political executives in Western Europe,
and how do these differ across countries?
3. Are there still significant differences in policy approach between France and Germany?
Discuss with reference to at least one specific policy area.

Section B
4. How have ideological traditions shaped nationalism in Eastern Europe?
5. How did communist regimes influence the transitions to democracy in Eastern Europe?
6. Why has there not been a single model of democracy in post-communist Eastern
Europe?


64

Section C
7. How important are economic factors in explaining major political differences between
Egypt and Saudi Arabia?
8. Why did the Arab Spring bring religious tensions to the fore in Egypt and Saudi
Arabia?
9. Can Arab states democratise without running the risk of internal conflict?

Section D
10. Was the 2008 US election proof of an emerged Democratic majority?
11. What made the Republican presidential majority in the United States from 1968, and
when did it end?

Section E
12. To what extent is the nature of the Congolese state the product of external forces?
13. When, if ever, was Congo a failed state?

Section F
14. What are the major problems in the implementation of environmental policy in China
today?
15. How can China improve on the historical pathways taken by advanced industrial
societies in managing the environmental consequences of economic growth?

65


Examiners Report for 2011-12

This was the first year of the new paper in Comparative Politics, and the first time that a paper
in Politics & International Relations had been examined through a mixed assessment process,
compromising a long essay and an exam. It was taken by 84 students in Part IIA and 4 students
in Part IIB. The same assessment process and marking standards were applied to both groups of
students.

The 5,000 word essays, submitted in Lent term, adopted a variety of approaches, and a broad
spectrum of abilities was apparent to the examiners. Most students had prepared their essays
thoroughly, drawing upon a wide range of sources, including (where appropriate) primary
materials such as official and archival documents, news reports and interview texts. It was
encouraging to see the enthusiasm and energy with which some essays were evidently
researched and written. A relatively small number of students however still treated this
component of the course in a similar way to normal supervision essays, looking at only a small
number of major academic works on the topic, and content simply to regurgitate their main
points. Such essays would normally gain no more than a mid-2.2. An associated problem was
that a few students relied exclusively upon one text or one author for an account of a case study;
all political events of any complexity are amenable to different interpretations, and one cannot
engage critically and effectively with a case unless one has explored these differences.

In terms of substance, many of the best essays were able to both address major conceptual or
theoretical issues, and to argue in detail about specific cases. Almost all of the best essays
recognised and explained a broad theoretical framework within which to situate their answers,
and were able to develop arguments and counter-arguments within this framework. The essay
was then developed through an in-depth exploration of a relatively small number of cases. A
few essays tried to use too many cases (in some essays, there were attempts to use five or more
cases), which resulted in a degree of superficiality, and some care is needed in ensuring that the
number of cases chosen is appropriate for the question. It is difficult to provide general
guidance about the essays, as the type of the question and students own preferences will
sometimes lead towards different essay structures there is no set formula for writing long
essays for this paper. Nevertheless, all the best essays for this paper managed to find a balance
between conceptual and descriptive material, and reviewed and evaluated counter-arguments.

There were a number of common problems of format, style and presentation. The most
apparent problem was that a large number of students still do not have an appropriate system
for referencing and bibliographies. A short account of how to reference is included in the paper
guide, and a more detailed version is included in the Politics & International Relations
Handbook. Many students seem to have ignored this, and instead adopted their own
anachronistic system, or indeed no system at all, for referencing and bibliographies. It really is
important that by the time students are in their second years that they learn how to organise
their references in a recognised, systematic way.

66


Whilst some essays were immaculately written, a significant number of essays contained
persistent grammatical problems. It was difficult to tell whether this was down to carelessness
or ignorance. It was clear that quite a few students do not know how to use semi-colons,
deploying them where they should be using commas. If students think this is a problem, they
should talk to their directors of studies and/or tutors urgently, as most Colleges are able to
provide remedial help. Essays which contain repeated typos and grammatical mistakes cannot
achieve a mark higher than a 2.2, so it really is worthwhile to sort this out.

The third common stylistic problem was that of quotation. Some students leaned too heavily on
extensive quotation from academic sources, with a few essays containing multiple paragraph-
length quotations. Two students copied text verbatim or near-verbatim from sources, properly
referenced but without quotation marks. This is considered plagiarism, and both students were
significantly penalised. In relation to both issues, it is important that students learn to put
arguments in their own words; there is no point in just reprinting what someone else has
written. The whole point of the essay, after all, is to encourage you to make your own
arguments in your own terms.

Essays that exceeded the word limit were penalised. In one case, a student was brought below a
class boundary for this essay, which resulted in an overall class lower than they would have
otherwise received.

Notwithstanding these problems, 14 students (all in Part IIA) obtained an average mark in the
first class range for their essays. 27 students obtained a high 2.1 (a mark of 65-69), and a 27 a low
2.1 (60-64). 18 students received 2.2s, and 2 students received 3
rd
s.

The Easter term exams produced slightly fewer 1
st
s than the essays but more high 2.1s. 12
students received a first class average, and 33 received marks in the 65-69 range. 27 received
low 2.1s, 14 received 2.2s, one student received a 3
rd
, and one student withdrew. The majority of
students demonstrated a good amount of detailed and relevant knowledge about the regions
and cases, although often this knowledge was not applied sharply enough to what exactly the
question was asking hence the high number of 2.1s.

All questions on the exam paper drew at least five responses, except for q.5, on differences in
the forms of authoritarianism that were present in Eastern Europe, which did not tempt a single
student. The most popular question was q.8, on the religious discourse of opposition
movements in the Arab world, which had all of 42 students taking it. q.11, on whether the 2008
presidential elections were unwinnable for the Republicans, and q.12, on explanations for the
survival of the Congolese state, were the next most popular, each drawing 28 responses.

Perhaps the two most common problems found in the exam scripts were those of not thinking
quite carefully enough about what the terms of the question meant, and of not considering or
weighing up alternative explanations for the phenomenon that was being asked about. In the

67

first category, an example is q.4, which asked about the effect of nationalism on state traditions
in Eastern Europe. Only one of the eight students taking this question made a serious attempt to
unpack the notion of state traditions, and evaluate the extent to which nationalism can be
considered as something external to those traditions (it was no surprise that this student
received a high 1
st
class mark). Other students used the term as if it had a clear and
unambiguous meaning, but without stopping to review the different types of activities (resilient
institutions, enduring expectations, formalised rituals?) that could be incorporated within this
notion. As a result, it was never clear what exactly they were arguing about, even by the end of
the essay.

A similar problem attached to the notion of what made an election unwinnable in q.11: some
students gave an extensive account of the reasons why the Republicans lost, and concluded that
made the election unwinnable for them. But this is to render the question meaningless. Implicit
in the question is some distinction between elections that are unwinnable and winnable
elections that are still lost and that needs to be worked through if the question is to be
answered successfully.

The second type of problem comes from those students who picked one explanatory mode and
simply pursued that unreflectively throughout the essay. This was most obviously so with q.8,
on religion and opposition in the Arab world. A large number of these essays staked the claim
at the start that governments in the Arab world have used religion heavily as a form of
legitimisation, and therefore opposition groups have to respond using a similar frame. Much of
the rest of these essays was then devoted to an account of how the Saudi and Egyptian
governments had instrumentalised religion. But this link doesnt necessarily follow, at least in
any sort of straightforward way. A governments adoption of a set of symbolic reference points
could just as straightforwardly lead to the discrediting of those symbols. Opposition
movements may deliberately adopt strategies of legitimisation that distinguish their approach
from those of a government. It would need to be explained why this has not happened, at least
to the extent it might have done, for the argument to work.

Most students who answered q.12, on the reasons for the survival of the Congolese state, were
able to distinguish different reasons, and were able to categorise those reasons (typically
bringing into their accounts the role of external interests, international assistance, the interests
of the Congolese elite and institutions, popular nationalism and everyday coping strategies).
Somewhat too often this just became a list, with a paragraph or two on each reason. The best
answers by contrast were able to weigh these accounts up against each other, for example by
working through a series of successive explanations but showing the limitations of each of them
alongside the explanation, and their intersections.

Few students need more encouragement to understand the regions and cases in depth; there
were only a small number of essays which demonstrated inadequate knowledge or made
serious factual mistakes. Focusing an essay on the question though remains a problem. It was
striking how many answers to the question on whether parliaments can control the executive in

68

Western Europe (q.3) gave general accounts of the constraints on executives, with sometimes
large sections of the essay unrelated to the role of parliaments. The question on the convergence
of policies between France and Germany (q.1) also led some students into giving accounts of the
long-standing differences of the policies of these two countries, with barely a word said about
convergence or divergence over time. q.13 on how Congos historical legacy has shaped its
political economy was answered by some students by giving a simple narrative history of
Congos economic structure. A little bit of careful thought and planning would surely have been
enough in each of these cases to make students realise that they were in danger of wasting a lot
of time on writing about matters that were not relevant for answering the essay question.

The other great waste of time came from laborious introductions that provided overviews of
essays. The number of students who expended a large of proportion of their essays explaining
all the things that their essays would argue was disappointing, even distressing. One student
wrote the first half of each of the two essays explaining what would be argued, before going on
to repeat exactly the same material in the same order in the second half of each essay. Exam
essays are inevitably short; there is no point at all in telling the reader what they will be reading
within a page or two.

The most pleasing aspect of reviewing the exam scripts was in appreciating the extent to which
students had clearly developed quite extensive knowledge, and a sense of the key debates,
about regions and countries which at the start of the year few of them had much familiarity.
Many essays brought in recent events, occurring after the latest academic literature or the last
supervisions, indicating that interests have been developed through the course that persist
beyond the lecture room. Even if it didnt always come out in the essay, it was apparent that
most students taking this paper have read and thought a lot about the complexities and
uncertainties of the politics of these diverse regions of the world.

Examiners Report for 2012-13

This was the second year this Comparative Politics paper ran in its current format, which
includes a mixed assessment process: a 5,000 word essay and a two-hour exam. This year the
paper was taken by 88 students in Part IIA and 5 students in Part IIB. The same assessment
procedures and marking standards were applied to both groups of students.

The marks for the 5,000 word essays, submitted in Lent term, were as follows: 13 students
received a mark in the first class range, 24 students received a high 2.1 (65-69), 24 students
received a low 2.1 (60-64), 27 students received 2.2s, 4 students received 3rds, and 2 students
received a Pass mark. These results are a bit weaker than last year, especially on the lower end
of the scale, where there were more 2.2 and 3rd marks than last year (and last year there were
no Pass marks).

As last year, the best essays, while applying quite different approaches, all found a good
balance between conceptual and descriptive material, and were sensible and convincing in the

69

number of cases and examples that were used. Moreover, they based their analysis on a
relatively wide variety of sources and considered different arguments and interpretations. It is
clear that many students again worked diligently on their essays and conducted a considerable
amount of research for them.

Essays which received lower marks suffered from many of the same problems as last years
weaker essays: poor writing and editing (which, if severe, limit an essay to at most a high 2.2.
mark), inconsistent referencing styles, too much reliance on quotations rather than the
candidates own words and arguments, and/or reliance on only a small number of arguments
(thus ignoring possible counter-arguments) and sources. It was also noticeable that several
essays strayed too far from the questions set and, thus, did not really provide answers to these
questions. Another common problem was that the relation between the general arguments in an
essay and the specific cases/examples was not sufficiently explained, or in some cases that
the empirical material was hardly introduced or set up at all.

Despite some excellent essays, as well as a considerable number of very competent essays, it has
to be said that the performance on these essays was overall rather disappointing. Looking at
their exam performance (in this paper as well as in other papers), many students taking this
paper should be able to do better on their essays than they did. One of the issues may be that
some students dont take this part of the assessment seriously enough. However, given the
nature of the classing criteria, especially for Part IIA students, a low mark on the essay can have
a very significantly negative effect on the possibility of receiving a good overall class. Students
taking this paper in the future should be aware of this.

The Easter term exams produced better results than the essays. 16 students received a first class
mark, and 39 students received a mark in the 65-69 range. A further 23 students received a mark
in the 60-64 range, while 15 students received 2.2 marks. The large majority of the students
showed that they had developed good knowledge and understanding of the cases and regions,
although as last year sometimes this knowledge was not applied directly enough to the
specific question (rather than the broader topic) to warrant a first class mark.

All questions received at least one answer. Most popular was the Middle East section, where 27
students answered q.7 on economic factors, 21 students answered q.8 on post-Arab Spring
religious tensions and only 7 students attempted q.9 on democratisation risks in the region. As
for the other two regional modules, the section on Eastern Europe received 21 answers (6 for
q.4 on nationalism and ideological traditions, 9 for q.5 on the influence of communist regimes on
democratic transitions, and 6 for q.6 on models of democracy), while the section on Western
Europe received 23 answers (4 for q.1 on parties and party systems, 11 for q.2 on political
executives, and 8 for q.3 on policy approaches in France and Germany). The case study on US
elections received 31 answers (23 for q.10 on the 2008 election and 8 for q.11 on the post-1968
Republican majority), while the case study on Congo received 32 answers (13 on q.12 on
external influences on the Congolese state and 19 on q.13 whether Congo can be considered a
failed state). Finally, the case study on environmental policy in China received 14 answers,

70

which were unevenly distributed (13 for q.14 on policy implementation problems and 1 for q.15
on managing the environmental consequences of economic growth).

Compared to last year (when this problem was discussed at some length in the examiners
report), there were not as many answers that failed to engage with the exact wording of the
question. Some such problems still occurred, for example, for q.3, where not all answers paid
enough attention to the word still in the question, and for q.8, where some answers provided a
general account of the role of religion in the politics of Egypt and Saudi Arabia without
considering how the Arab Spring may have influenced the extent to which religious tensions
became more salient and openly expressed than before. A few answers to q.4 also did not
sufficiently address how ideological traditions were interpreted and whether nationalism can
be seen as a phenomenon that is (at least analytically) separate from these traditions.

A more significant problem continued to be that many answers resort to just listing a list of
factors (e.g., on q.2, where some answers did not attempt to argue why some sources of power
can be seen as more important than others, and on q.14, where good answers went beyond
listing the problems to indicate what the underlying sources of these problems are) or rely on a
single and sometimes simplistic line of reasoning (e.g., in answers to q.8, where some
answers based their answer entirely on the role that religion had played in the legitimacy
strategies of the regimes in Egypt and Saudi Arabia without arguing why religion remained
important or perhaps became even more important after the Arab Spring). Furthermore,
there were again some essays that spent too much time on an introduction and/or repetitive
conclusion rather than use the time and space to further develop certain arguments or
examples.

It is clear that most students gained a good understanding of the details and complexities of the
regions and cases that they studied. The best essays managed to convey this through a close
focus on the actual question and a consideration of different arguments and points. Many of the
answers that obtained 2.1 marks provided solid accounts, but lacked some analytical focus on
specific arguments or examples. The weaker answers contained factual mistakes, did not focus
sufficiently on the questions, or only addressed a very limited set of points.