The University of California, Merced History 120R Essence of Decision: Case Studies in History

Transcription

1 The University of California, Merced History 120R Essence of Decision: Case Studies in History Course Description and Goals This course is about the art and science of decision making, using specific examples from history. The focus will be upon the study of particular historical case studies, for the purpose of learning from the successes and the failures of the past. While the major emphasis will be upon significant events affecting American foreign policy for example, the 1945 decision to drop the atomic bomb upon Japan the consequences of decisions impacting U.S. domestic policy will also be studied, such as the response to the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Since the class is a seminar, it is important that students do the readings and actively participate in discussion. Additionally, each student in the class will be responsible for helping direct one in-class discussion. A sign-up sheet for the discussion topics will be distributed at the second meeting of the class. Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs) Below are the learning outcomes for this course. Your success in achieving these will be assessed by means of your performance on the two essays, the research paper, and your participation in class discussions. You will be expected to: Recognize the processes by which societies, cultures, and institutions change over time. Describe particular historical developments and their wider historical context. Critically read, analyze, and synthesize primary and secondary sources. Use both narrative and analysis to communicate historical phenomena. Identify the various contexts that shape the construction and use of historical sources and knowledge. To support student success coherently across History coursework, these Course Learning Outcomes contribute to students development of History Program Learning Outcomes 1-4: 1. Historical Knowledge a. Place particular events in broader historical contexts, including broad patterns of historical change, structures and representations of power, and forms of identity. b. Analyze change over time. c. Explain how events of the past have influenced the present. 2. Critical Thinking a. Analyze primary sources. b. Assess the relationship between historical contexts and events, ideas and processes c. Identify and summarize an author s argument. d. Identify points of agreement and disagreement among conflicting interpretations of the past. e. Construct a well-developed thesis and a persuasive argument. 3. Research Skills a. Use the library, relevant databases and indexes, and the Internet to identify and locate sources. b. Develop bibliographies of primary and secondary sources. c. Master conventions for citations and bibliographies. d. Produce an original research paper (20-page minimum) that analyzes primary and secondary sources. 4. Written and Oral Communication Skills a. Organize an analytical essay that sustains an argument over the entire length of the paper. b. Present information in lucid, grammatically correct prose. 1

2 c. Construct paragraphs with effective topic sentences. d. Make a well-organized and clear oral presentation. Course Materials In addition to articles in the course e-reader, available on-line at UCMCROPS, the following texts are required, and are available at the UCM bookstore: Richard Neustadt, Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for Decision Makers Graham Allison & Phillip Zelikow, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis Fredrik Logevall, Choosing War: The Lost Chance for Peace and the Escalation of War in Vietnam Bob Woodward, State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III Course Requirements and Grading Every student will write two short essays [5-7 pages each] on topics to be announced in class, as well as an original research paper [10-15 pages], on a subject to be chosen after consultation with the instructor. A brief, written prospectus [1-2 pages] on the research topic will be due by Week 6 and students will also be expected to do a short in-class presentation on their research topic at the end of the course. Regarding citations and sources, see the class hand-out, Some General Tips on Historical Writing. It is a good idea to see one of the instructors early in the semester to discuss your research paper topic. Office hours for Profs. Herken and Malloy are noted above. Grading breakdown: Paper #1 20% Due February 8 Paper #2 20% Due March 8 Research paper 50% Due May 11 Participation grade 10% Academic Honesty Students and professors are governed by the Academic Honesty Policy, which is available at the Students First Center at Kolligan Library and at studentlife.ucmerced.edu. Cheating and plagiarism are serious offenses which in some cases may be grounds for suspension or dismissal. Basic guidelines to avoid these problems are outlined below, but if you are in any doubt, please consult the instructor or your Teaching Assistant. Plagiarism in written work (such as the two assigned papers) is not always easy to define. As a simple guideline, if you submit your own work, you will avoid all serious types of plagiarism. If you use a direct quotation or borrow an interpretive idea from another work, you must cite it. If you paraphrase another document, you must cite it. The basic standard: If you use any idea that did not originate in our own mind, you must cite it. Schedule January 16: Introduction Week 1: Introduction and a Sample Case Study 2

3 January 18: The Japanese-American Internment Decision, Excerpts from Greg Robinson, By Order of the President: FDR and the Internment of Japanese Americans. Executive Order 9066, February 19, Week 2: The Decision to Drop the Atomic Bomb, 1945 January 23: Initial Reactions and the Historical Debate CROPS Editorial cartoons and polls on A-bomb, America s Atomic Atrocity, The Christian Century, August 29, 1945, Henry L. Stimson, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, Harper s Magazine, February 1947, Paul Fussell, Thank God for the Atomic Bomb, Thank God for the Atomic Bomb and Other Essays. New York: Ballentine Books, 1990, Gar Alperovitz, Why We Dropped the Bomb, Barton J. Bernstein, ed., The Atomic Bomb: The Critical Issues. Boston: Little Brown, 1976, January 25: Making the Decision Minutes of the Target Committee, May John J. McCloy, Memorandum of Conversation with General Marshall, May 29, Minutes of the Interim Committee meeting, May 31, Scientific Advisory Panel, Recommendations on the Immediate Use of Nuclear Weapons, June 16, Harry S. Truman Diary, July 25, Truman letters of August 9, 11, Henry Wallace Diary, August 10, Statistics from the United States Strategic Bombing Survey, Week 3: Evaluating the Soviet Threat: January 30: Origins and Evolution of Containment George F. Kennan to Secretary of State, February 22, 1946, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, VI. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1970, Nikolai Novikov to Soviet Foreign Ministry, September 27, Harry S. Truman, Truman Doctrine Address, March 12, 1947, Public Papers of the Presidents, Harry S. Truman, Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963, Soviet comment on the Truman Doctrine, Izvestia, March 13,

4 February 1: NSC 68 and a Militarized Cold War NSC-68, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, I. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, Assorted commentaries on NSC-68 in Ernest R. May, ed., American Cold War Strategy: Interpreting NSC 68. New York: Bedford Books of St. Martin's Press, 1993, C.A. Ziegler, Intelligence Assessments of Soviet Atomic Capabilities, : Myths, Monopolies, and Maskirovka, Intelligence and National Security, v. 12, No. 4, Oct. 1997, Week 4: The Korean War, February 6: The North Korean Invasion and the U.S. Response Department of State Intelligence Estimate, June 25, 1950, FRUS, 1950, VII, Minutes of Blair House Conference, June 25-26, 1950, ibid., Evgueni Bajanov, Assessing the Politics of the Korean War, , Cold War International History Bulletin 6/7 (Winter 1995), 54, P.K. Rose, Two Strategic Intelligence Mistakes in Korea, 1950, and Commentary, Studies in Intelligence, Fall/Winter 2001, Neustadt and May, February 8: Expanding the War and Chinese Intervention [Note: First essay due by start of class today] Alexandre Y. Mansourov, Stalin, Mao, Kim, and China s Decision to Enter the Korean War, September 16-October 15, 1950, Cold War International History Bulletin 6/7 (Winter 1995), NSC 81/1, September 8, 1950, FRUS, 1950, VII, British Embassy to U.S. State Dept., October 2, 1950, ibid, Minutes of Wake Island Conference, October 15, 1950, ibid., Clubb to Rusk, November 7, 1950, ibid, Week 5: Cuba, Pt. 1: The Bay of Pigs Invasion and Aftermath February 13: The Bay of Pigs and its Aftermath McGeorge Bundy, Some Preliminary Administrative Lessons on the Cuban Expedition, April 24, USSR, Central Committee, About Some Measures of the Government of Cuba in Connection with Aggressive Actions of the United States, April 27, Richard Goodwin, Telegram from the Secretary of State for External Relations 4

5 Describing conversation between Che Guevara and Richard Goodwin, August 19, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba, March 13, Neustadt and May, February 15: Cuban Missile Crisis: Theoretical Perspectives Allison and Zelikow, Week 6: Cuba, Pt. 2: The Missile Crisis February 20: Cuban Missile Crisis: Considering the Options [Note: Prospectus due in class today] Allison and Zelikow, CROPS William Burrows, The Cuban Missile Crisis: Pictures at an Exhibition, Deep Black: Space Espionage and National Security. Random House, NY, James Hansen, Soviet Deception in the Cuban Missile Crisis, Studies in Intelligence, v. 46, 1-13 Memorandum from Malinivsky to Zakharov, September 8, Excerpts from ExComm meetings on October 16, Notes taken from transcripts of Meetings of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, October 16-17, Theodore Sorensen, Summary of ExComm, October 17, Theodore Sorenson, summary of options, October 20, February 22: Cuban Missile Crisis: Pulling Back From the Brink Allison and Zelikow, Neustadt and May, CROPS Fidel Castro to N. Khrushchev, October 26, Excerpts from ExComm Meeting on October 27, Directive from Moscow to Cuba, October 27, Dobrynin cable to the USSR Foreign Ministry, October 27, Week 7: Escalation in Vietnam, Pt. 1 February 27: From JFK to LBJ, August 1963-January 1964 Logevall, Preface (xiii-xxv),

6 CROPS Except from the McNamara-Taylor Mission Report, October 2, Kennedy and his advisors discuss withdrawal, October 2, [AUDIO] March 1: To The Gulf of Tonkin, February 1964-August 1964 Logevall, CROPS Robert McNamara, Memorandum of the President, March 16, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Russell discuss Vietnam, May 27, [AUDIO] March 6: The Fog of War (film) [Note: Second essay due at start of class today] Logevall, Week 8: Escalation in Vietnam, Pt. 2 March 8: An American Tragedy, September 1964-July 1965 Logevall, Neustadt and May, CROPS National Security Action Memorandum No. 328, April 6, Lyndon Johnson justifies escalation in Vietnam, July 7, [AUDIO] March 13: Integrating Ole Miss Week 9: LBJ, JFK and Civil Rights CROPS Excerpts from Jonathan Rosenberg and Zachary Karabell, Kennedy, Johnson, and the Quest for Justice: The Civil Rights Tapes, March 15: LBJ and the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 CROPS Excerpts from Rosenberg and Karabell, Kennedy, Johnson, and the Quest for Justice, ; ; Week 10: The Nuclear Arms Race and Arms Control March 20: The Origins of Overkill 6

7 CROPS David Allen Rosenberg, U.S. Nuclear War Planning, , Desmond Ball and Jeffery Richelson, ed., Strategic Nuclear Targeting, General Thomas S. Powers, Design for Survival. New York: Pocketbooks, David Coleman, Camelot s Nuclear Conscience, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2006, Excerpts from Stephen I. Schwartz, ed., The Atomic Audit. World Nuclear Stockpiles, 2006, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. March 22: Pulling Back from the Brink: Arms Control CROPS Gregg Herken, Counsels of War. Knopf, 1981, William Burrows, Arms Control and Acceptance of Spies in the Sky, Deep Black: Space Espionage and National Security, Neustadt and May, Week 11: Post 9/11 Foreign Policy and the War in Iraq April 3: Origins of the Bush Doctrine CROPS Statement of Principles, Project for the New American Century, June 3, The National Security Strategy of the United States, September The National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction, December Al Gore, Against A Doctrine of Pre-Emptive War, September 23, Arthur Schlesinger, Bush s Thousand Days, April 24, 2006 Terry Jones, I m Losing My Patience With My Neighbors, Mr. Bush, January 26, Woodward, April 5: War in Iraq (documentary film) Woodward, April 10: Into Iraq Week 12: The Iraq War, 2003-Present CROPS Peter Maas, Good Kills, The New York Times Magazine, April 20, Paul Wolfowitz on Intelligence Policy-Relations, Studies in Intelligence, v. 35, 7

8 1996. Woodward, April 12: Looking for an Exit? CROPS Excerpts from the Iraq Study Group report, December Highlights of the Iraq Strategy Review, National Security Council, January Woodward, Week 13: Student Presentations Week 14: Student Presentations Week 15: Student Presentations May 8: Conclusions and Wrap-up Neustadt and May, May 11: Research paper due today by 5 pm Week 16: Conclusion 8