This class analyzes the history and the stakes of American foreign policy since the 18th century. This survey will include the study of the main ideological and economic conceptions which have influenced the role of the United States in the world through the most important events of the last two centuries. We will also take into account the many actors (the President, Congress, the Secretaries of State and Defense, and the military of course) who define American foreign policy, in order to better understand the position of the United States in the world today.

The demise of the British Empire triggered a loosening of the traditional bonds between the founding nations of the Kingdom. This seminar will first examine such a process overall, before investigating the present dividing lines. This examination will start with the two Irelands: how what has become the present Republic of Ireland managed to severe all links with its neighbour, and how Northern Ireland became some entity of its own, whose displays of loyalism and unionism are first and foremost aimed at stabilizing a very un-British statu quo. Moving into Britain proper next, we shall investigate the present state of things for Scotland, whose wide-ranging devolution fails short of complete independence, then the bizarre hatred between the English and the Welsh. Last but not least, we will question the Great Divide between the tow Englands of the time.

After a first part which studies the British Isles from the angle of its geography, the second half of this seminar focuses on the politics of contemporary Britain. Two sessions are dedicated to a presentation of British political institutions (and the debates which they give rise to) and of British political parties and party systems. Questions such as the decline of the two-party system, the resilience of the monarchy or the debate over Lords reform are considered. The final three sessions examine the latest major political trends in the UK, such as the rise of Euroscepticism and the Scottish independence debate.

The current political regime of France, the Fifth Republic, was established by the 1958 Constitution. After two centuries of political and constitutional instability, the Fifth Republic is often presented by its numerous supporters as the expression of a political maturity and equilibrium between the principles of liberty and authority. Even if this judgement has to be balanced, it is undeniable that the political regime of today’s France, which is neither a "presidential regime" like the USA nor a classic "parliamentary regime" following the Westminster model, is a quite original and peculiar combination of presidentialism, democracy and rule of law. Its various components and its balance of powers will be presented and discussed in this course

In spite of (or possibly, because of) a number of common characteristics (e.g. former colonial and world powers ; great immigration countries ;comparable populations etc. ) Britain and France come across as eternal 'friendly enemies' in Europe. They are commonly described as being at odds with each other in many ways, notably as regards their handling of social issues. Their approaches to migration and, above all, integration illustrate that apparent, blatant opposition. On the one hand, Universalism, which is in keeping with the spirit of the French Revolution seems- at least, superficially- to be at odds with British differentialism. The French Republic, which arose in 1792 following the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen in 1789 was built by the people, for the people. France's republican history is thereofre primarily a political construct of a community of citizens who are equal, regardless of their social, ethnic, religious or other backgrounds. During the French Revolution, Article I of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen targeted the division of the population into antagonistic social categories. So as to transcend those categories, the representatives of the French people decided to ignore specific affiliations in order to favour universal citizenship (Article 1 « Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good. » After several returns to monarchy and the shift to the Empire under Napoleon Ist and Napoleon IIIrd in the 19th century, universalism was revived under the Third Republic (from 1870 onward), an era of democratisation and progress .The same values were to prompt the adoption of the 1905 law on the Separation of the Churches and the State. Article I of the 1958 Constitution reasserts that universalism: France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It shall ensure the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction of origin, race or religion. It shall respect all beliefs. » One may therefore easily understand the reluctance of France towards any form of quantitative ethnic monitoring (a reluctance compounded by the experience of Nazi occupation and of the Vichy Régime) or to put in place positive discrimination measures based on ethnic criteria (cf. Veil Committee's recommendation, December 2008) like those gradually introduced across the Channel from the mid 1960s onward. The French Republic perceives itself as a universal model and proclaims that it is 'one and indivisible'. As a result, the national community is supposed to be made up of equal citizens, not separate communities, the only acceptable dichotomy being between nationals and non-nationals (i.e. citizens and non-citizens).

Differentialism, on the other hand, is an anthropological concept, whereby the existence of groups and the differences between them (whether gender, social, racial, ethnic or religious differences) are on the whole taken for granted and are not really questioned. A common characteristic of differentialism is that an individual's perceived belonging to a group tends to take precedence over his / her personal, objective characteristics .Differentialism proved a great influence in the colonial context. Indeed, the British saw themselves as fundamentally different from other nations, let alone other 'races', making assimilation pointless and useless. Unlike the French and the Spanish, the British focused on the mercantile motive and were hardly interested in converting 'pagans' to Christianity or in attempting to assimilate them along 'British lines'. This partly explains why they were so quick in conquering huge territories. Indeed religious officials in India e.g. did not perceive British colonisation as a threat, because of Britain's reliance on indirect rule, which proved terribly efficient and came in sharp contrast with the so-called direct rule system used by the French, notably in Algeria.
With the beginning of mass, post-war, non-European immigration, it became obvious that Britain's attitude to colonial immigrants and their descent was still influenced by differentialism, although there emerged a 'liberal' (i.e. progressive) form of differentialism in the 1960s, characterised by the adoption of a specific race relations legislation. New Commonwealth immigrants were no longer deemed inferior, but fundamentally different from the rest of the population, which explains why British integration policies were so different from French ones.

However, 'Liberal differentialism', to quote French historian and demographer Emmanuel Todd co-existed with its traditional colonial version, epitomised by Tory frontbencher Enoch Powell, whose notorious anti-immigration 'Rivers of Blood' speech (1968) - a strong indictment of New Commonwealth immigration and of anti-discriminatory legislation - gained him considerable public support, including among the traditionally Labour-voting working classes.

Although the opposition between both integration models is relevant to a vast extent, it can prove sterile and should certainly by nuanced, as will be shown in this course, which shall investigate immigration and integration policies in a trans-Channel perspective from 1930 to present. It shall be established that despite seemingly diverging routes the integration of 'minorities' or 'populations d'origine immigrée' - the use of different terms is by itself probably revealing and will have to be addressed - has produced rather similar results across the Channel, especially in recent decades.

The aim of this course is to provide students with knowledge and insight into the complex relationship between Britain and the European Union, generally portrayed as a “wait and see” attitude on the part of the UK. After a brief reminder of the history of the EU, the focus will be on the British position regarding European policies (CAP, Euro, expansion v. integration), on its legal system, and on its political landscape.
Course Outline
Introduction: A brief history of the institutions of the EU/ a brief history of the 1973 membership

1. The changing attitudes of political parties regarding the EU
2. Britain and the Common Agricultural Policy
3. Britain and the Euro
4. The impact of membership on the English legal system
5. The impact of membership on governing the UK: parliament, regional government, local government.

Conclusion: The debate on intergovernmentalism and supranationalism . Is Britain still an “awkward” partner?

Course materials
The official websites of the EU are to be visited, in particular europa.eu
The advantages of membership for the UK are described interactively on the website www.the-eu-and-me.org.uk/
A syllabus will be handed out on the first class.

The French anthropologist and philosopher Claude Lévi-Strauss stated that “Not all poisonous juices are burning or bitter nor is everything which is burning and bitter poisonous” (Lévi-Strauss, 1974, p. 210). It would seem that sometimes in a nation's construction there might be periods of upheaval, turmoil and discontent, in which certain groups are targeted as being different, that ‘poisonous other’ that is burning and bitter by comparison to the apparent sweetness of the nation’s identity.

The issue of national identity has been at the top of the political agenda since the financial crisis of 2008 and today questions are still being asked as to how to preserve and maintain diversity and at the same time maintain a unique native culture. This single question leads to a multitude of others such as will immigrants be able to maintain their culture in the face of a dominant national culture, which presses them to identify as French or British, for example? Is it possible to promote not just one but many cultures and at the same time maintain the cultural heritage of the dominant national culture of a host country? Is the host country flexible enough to adapt and take into account the recognition needs of its migrants, or immigrant-descended populations?

Looking back into the past to one’s roots and at who one might think that they actually are, may be of relative importance to a community (on the condition that one can identify with those origins). However, those roots are just one very minor part of identity. The problem with national identities is that they are constructed upon myths and lies and they are given a disproportionate place in the nation by the State. Searching for one’s identity is perhaps part of growing into something different and it is part of what makes us who we are. But, there is no essence that can make our national identities constant, unalterably fixed. The wish to hold on to one’s identities, seeing no change possible, ultimately fixes the nation in a position in the unreal past, not the present.

Policies of assimilation and denaturalization have ensued since the boundaries have been blurred. Separating nationality from citizenship would arguably allow for greater levels of republican (at least, in France) account of politics (Arendt, 1968); citizens active participation in public affairs would mean that national identity would fall from its position of being at the forefront of a nation. Can cultural unity based upon nationality be perceived as dangerous and where national identity is enforced might it not bring about fragmentation of society into communities and groups that will organize themselves into protective entities ready to defend their own cultures? Active citizenship can only be engendered through the taking into consideration of the diverse and multiple identities of people rather than a national identity. If we cannot see our own identity in the larger group’s identity, then it is not likely to lead to inclusive empowerment.

This class will examine the differing national identities of the United Kingdom and the Republic of France. The French national identity is strong with a historic policy of assimilation, while the British national identity is weak (or has been until very recently with the latest terrorist attacks that have taken place in Manchester and in London), by comparison, dispersed and less coherent, or already under attack from other members of the kingdom of united nations that are now asking for greater recognition (Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales). National identities are currently undergoing a renaissance period of intense nationalism; without modifying national identity, nationalism will remain. National identities have the propensity to provide a common objective and goal, a pathway along which a nation marches into the future together, believing that they will accomplish acts that shall be deemed equally as great as the fabricated heroes and legends of the national identities that were devised. In the construction of a national identity, questions are raised regarding ethnic-boundary perceptions, the sense of belonging to a nation and national identification.

Women and gender-related issues have become highly salient on the international stage for a few years. The development of gender mainstreaming strategies in each and every international organization, ranging from the European Union to the World Bank, and the creation of UN Women in 2010 testify to it. Gender equality shows an unprecedented level of diffusion within national politics. Taken together, these examples suggest that gender issues have become institutionalized in international organizations and that these may well have a significant impact on nation states’ policies. Still, these developments cannot be taken for granted and many questions remain unanswered. This course deals with the analysis of the internationalization of gender-related issues, their institutionalization in the global governance structures and processes, and the limits thereof. For instance, what is the real impact of these gender-sensitive policies? How can we account for a successful and legitimate gender mainstreamed approach? What are the consequences of these policies? These questions will be addressed by examining three perspectives, namely the (1) analysis of dynamics of emergence and internationalization of gender issues, (2) the links between gender and politics at the international level and (3) the ones between gender and international security.

This class is designed and intended to aid students who are not familiar with the methodology of writing in France and in particular at Sciences Po. Structure and writing skills are the key to successful completion of a course of study in France and students will be guided in the elaboration and development of how to formulate and put forward a thesis statement correctly with a plan. The importance of building a strong foundation in the conceptualization and operationalisation of research, with the need to take into account of how to design a project that is to be presented either orally or in written format will be dealt with in a hands-on approach through activities in small groups of students. We shall focus on the predominant emphasis that should be provided in the opening sentence of the introduction, the significance of the definition of the terms to define the framework and scope of the piece that is being written as well as need to back up arguments with critical academic research references.

The course objectives in the English-speaking University Diploma are to pass along language tools that will allow students to communicate as quickly as possible in an everyday environment.
The course is in French-language medium using basic grammar as well as role-play for communicative competency, both of which are used in a progressive manner.
Diverse audio and visual aids will be used.

The course offers an overview of structural and political changes in post-Soviet Central Asia and the Caucasus. It aims to analyse the five Central Asian countries – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and the three republics of the Caucasus - Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia.

Although the majority of the countries were the largest recipients of Soviet aid, 25 years on from independence the Caucasus and Central Asia offer mixed economic and political stories. Therefore, the first part of the course will address contemporary challenges of economic transition, nation-building and political structure of the countries.
Historically considered under the framework of the “Great Game” - the struggle for domination in Central Asia and the Caucasus between the Russian empire and others (British, Ottoman), the region has revived geopolitical interests again in the XXI century. Therefore, the second part of the course provides an analysis of the rationale of powers such as Russia, China, the USA and the EU with appropriate examples of foreign-policy approaches developed towards all eight countries located in the Caucasus and Central Asia.

It will also be stressed that both Central Asian and Caucasus countries have gained significant experience and are not mere subordinates of external powers. Furthemore, the course will also question region-building and regionalization attempts within Central Asia and the Caucasus by examining organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, the Collective Security Treaty Organization and other political and economic initiatives (Great Silk Road, Connect Central Asia) developed by emerging powers.

The regulation of trade flows and the regulation of financial flows are the two fundamental components of international economic governance. This course aims at providing both the theoretical tools and the historical knowledge allowing understanding the long-term evolution of national and supranational trade and financial policies. Starting from economic theory, the course will review the arguments for and against regulation, as well as the effects of the policy tools available to policymakers: on this basis, it will analyze and compare the creation and transformation of the regimes presiding over transnational trade and financial transactions. Students will be required to become acquainted with the fundamental theoretical models of international economics and to acquire analytical skills concerning contemporary regulation regimes.

This course tackles the issue of the rise of journalism understood as a distinct set of practices and interests. Journalism emerged in the late 19th century in various western countries (France, the US and more marginally UK will be used as examples in the run of the course). But to understand this historical turning-point it is necessary to take a step back and to present the rise of a culture of printing and reading in western societies starting in the 15th century. Parallel to that major cultural shift a rise of a culture of news emerged and little by little "the world came to know about itself" (Pettegree, 2014). The (short) presentation of this long history will constitute the first part. Thus news production and news consumption did not for a long time mean "journalism" (even if the word existed). The second part of the course will focus on the changes that occurred in the 19th century on both sides of the Atlantic that gave birth to what we know as "journalism": the monopoly of a group of professional actors over the production of information. As a conclusion we will raise the open question of the future of that monopoly that dominated the 20th century.

What do people refer to when they talk about "Ireland"? Do they mean "the Republic of Ireland" or the island as a whole, including Northern Ireland as if there were no border?
In fact, over the years, the Irish Border has become softer, all the more so that today its physical manifestation is difficult to discern. However, now that the UK is leaving the EU, its only main land border with another EU member-state is shared with the Republic of Ireland. After two decades of an open border, and cross-border peacebuilding, Brexit could destabilise the Irish peace-process and the Irish economy. If the deal still has to be delineated by Brexit negotiators, the Irish Border is now back in the limelight.

Starting from these recent political developments, this course is designed to question the notion of Border(s) and use it as a stepping- stone to better understand contemporary Ireland, assuming that even though it is an island, Ireland has always been open to the world. Until 1920, its political centre was in London, i.e. beyond the Irish sea; the partition of the island into two separate countries has shaped Irish politics North and South alike; the Irish diaspora has enabled the country to maintain economic and political ties with the US on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean; Ireland's entry into the EEC and its commitment to European integration has played an important role in the modernization of Irish politics, economy and society; more recently, for the first time in its history, Ireland became a country of inward migration, welcoming people from abroad attracted by the job prospects offered by the rapid economic growth of the Celtic Tiger

The objective of this course is therefore to introduce students to contemporary Ireland and to deepen their understanding of Irish politics and society, both North and South of the Border, in order to equip them with a better understanding of the implications of a possible hardening of the Border in the context of Brexit.

The course is organised as follows:

Class 1: General introduction
This part is going to broach the main political events that marked Irish history since 1801, how the Irish people managed to progressively assert their sovereignty and how the Irish state developed; what Ireland and the Irish people look like today.

Class 2, 3, 4: Northern Ireland.
This part focuses on the development of political violence in Northern Ireland and how the Good Friday Agreement ratified in 1998, the devolution process and European integration deeply transformed and normalised Northern Irish politics. Emphasis will also be laid on the current political institutions and most recent developments in Northern Irish politics.

Class 5, 6, 7: Ireland and European integration
This part aims to illustrate the complex relationship between Irish sovereignty and European integration. It focuses on the implications of entry into the EEC; how European integration greatly contributed to the Irish economic boom and social modernization; how the Irish people perceived European integration; what role the Single Market played in improving the relationship between the North and the South and what the implications of a hard Brexit could be.

Class 8, 9, 10: Immigration to Ireland
Over the past 25 years, the Irish population has reversed its downward trend, thanks to migration from the EU or from other countries. Be they workers or asylum-seekers, the arrival of migrants has had a deep impact on Irish society as a whole, forcing the development of an Irish migration policy and challenging the notion of Irish identity.

Ongoing developments in the technological landscape have led to profound changes in the way the news industry, politicians and their constituents interact. In the digital age, the influence of the media on American politics has evolved significantly and today mainstream news organizations are facing new challenges in their attempt to cover political campaigns and policy issues. Meanwhile, the techniques used by politicians to win elections, maintain power and accomplish policy objectives are also shifting. With a specific focus on contemporary presidential elections up to and including 2016, this course looks at the nature of modern American political campaigns and takes into consideration the complex relationships between major actors such as politicians, journalists and voters. The switch from party-centered politics to candidate-centered politics, reforms in campaign finance, changes in media ownership and the decline of adversarial journalism will be among some of the issues covered.

Western Europe, far before the start of the European Integration process, has been the motherland of the progressive construction of the modern State as a mode of political organization of societies. Especially inventive, Europe invented both representative government with parliamentary regime (often called the “Westminster Model”) and modern, rational-legal public administration. As a matter of fact, the birth and growth of such a politico-administrative State have followed different paths in the various countries of Europe, ending with the development of various “trajectories of stateness”. This course is a (modest) attempt to familiarize the students with the common features and the diversity of politico-administrative structuration of Western European States – taking the EU as a space for comparison.