The Hebrew University Logo
Syllabus The Challange of Sovereignty - 13832
עברית
Print
 
close window close
PDF version
Last update 13-08-2018
HU Credits: 2

Degree/Cycle: 2nd degree (Master)

Responsible Department: History of Jewish People & Contemporary Jewry

Semester: 1st Semester

Teaching Languages: Hebrew

Campus: Mt. Scopus

Course/Module Coordinator: Irit Chen

Coordinator Email: iritchen7@gmail.com

Coordinator Office Hours: In Advance

Teaching Staff:
Prof Yfaat Weiss

Course/Module description:
The module will supply the students with basic encounter to leading texts of "Sovereignty", and especially those who deal with key components critical to the understanding of the Israeli Sovereignty.

Course/Module aims:
The course aims to provide wide theoretical, historical and contemporary knowledge regarding the notion of Sovereignty and also, encourage the implementation of the information using critical analysis in general and Israeli history.

Learning outcomes - On successful completion of this module, students should be able to:
Became familiar with the development of the Israeli concept of "Sovereignty" and the development of the status of "Jerusalem" according to the academic literature of the field.

Attendance requirements(%):
80%

Teaching arrangement and method of instruction: lectures held both by the course teacher and students

Course/Module Content:
1. הצגת הנושא ודרישות הקורס
2. מושג הריבונות והתפתחותו
3. הריבונות והתיאולוגיה הפוליטית
4. ריבונות טריטוריאלית
5. ריבונות ווסטפאלית
6. מדינות דמי
7. ריבונות בארבעה מופעים שונים
8. הרגע הריבוני
9. ירושלים
10. קורפוס ספרטום
11. אנומליות
12. מובלעת הר הצופים
13. סיכום

Required Reading:
c International Law, http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1472?rskey&eq;68VEUK&result&eq;1&prd&eq;EPIL.
2. קרל שמיט, תאולוגיה פוליטית : ארבעה פרקים על תורת הריבונות. תל אביב : הוצאת רסלינג, 2005.
3. Abdelhamid El Ouali, “Territorial Integrity: Rethinking the Territorial Sovereign Right of the Existence of the States,” Geopolitics 11:4 (2006), pp. 630–650.
4. Tuomas Forsberg, “Beyond Sovereignty, Within Territoriality: Mapping the Space of Late-Modern (Geo)Politics,” Cooperation and Conflict 31:4 (1996), pp. 355–386.
5. Rainer Grote, Art. “Westphalian System,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Pubic International Law, http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1500?rskey&eq;NfQsYX&result&eq;1&prd&eq;EPIL.
6. Leo Gross, “The Peace of Westphalia, 1648–1948,” The American Journal of International Law 42:1 (1948), pp. 20–41.
7. Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World, Cambridge Studies in International Relations Vol. 12, Cambridge 1990, Introduction and Chapters 1–2, pp. 1–49.
8. Stephen D. Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy, Princeton, New Jersey 1999, Chapter 1, pp. 3–42.
9. דימטרי שומסקי. "הציונות ומדינת הלאום : קריאה מחדש", ציון, ע"ז : תשע"ב, עמ' 223–254.
10. אורי ביאלר, "הדרך לבירה – הפיכת ירושלים למקום מושבה הרשמי של ממשלת ישראל בשנת 1949", קתדרה 35 : 1985, 191-163.
11. זכי שלום, "מאבקה של מדינת ישראל לסיכול החלטות עצרת באו"ם על בינאום ירושלים בשנות החמישים", עיונים בתקומת ישראל : מאסף לבעיות הציונות, היישוב ומדינת ישראל 3 : 1993, 97-75.
12. פולקה ברנדוט, לירושלים. ירושלים : אחיאסף, תשי"ב.
13. רות לפידות, ירושלים: היבטים משפטיים. ירושלים: מכון ירושלים לחקר ישראל, 1997.
14. Evgeny Vinokurov, A Theory of Enclaves, Lanham et al. 2007, Chapter 1, pp. 1–8.
15. Fiona McConnell, “The Fallacy and the Promise of the Territorial Trap: Sovereign Articulations of Geopolitical Anomalies,” Geopolitics 15:4 (2010), pp. 762–766.
16. Elizabeth M. Clark, “The Free City of Danzig: Borderland, Hansestadt or Social Democrcy?,” The Polish Review 42:3 (1997), pp. 259–276.
17. Bevans, Charles I. (ed.), Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States of America, Vol. 2: Multilateral 1776–1930, Washington, D. C. 1969.
18. Mason, John B., The Danzig Dilemma: A Study in Peacemaking by Compromise, Stanford 1946.
19. יאיר פז, "'עולים ויורדים בו': הזיקה הסמלית-פוליטית להר הצופים ולקמפוס האוניברסיטה העברית בתקופת המובלעת, 1948–1967", קתדרה, 163, ניסן תשע"ז, עמ' 69–104.

Additional Reading Material:
מקורות

Yehoshua Freundlich (ed.), Documents on the Foreign Policy of Israel: Israel State Archives, Vol. 1: 14 May–30 September 1948, Jerusalem 1981.
–189: M. Shertok to N. Goldmann (London), [Tel Aviv], 15 June 1948, pp. 162–164.
–192: A. Eban to S. Roseman (New York), New York, 16 June 1948, pp. 167–169.
–204: Memorandum by the Israeli Mission at the United Nations, [New York], 17 June 1948, pp.179–181.

Yehoshua Freundlich (ed.), Documents on the Foreign Policy of Israel: Israel State Archives, Vol. 2: October 1948–April 1949, Jerusalem 1984.
–11: L. Kohn to E. Elath (Washington), [Tel Aviv], 7 October 1948, pp. 35–36.
–525: M. S. Comay to M. Elisah (London), Tel Aviv, 29 April 1949, pp. 606–612.
















LITERATURE
Agnew, John, “Sovereignty Regimes: Territoriality and State Authority in Contemporary World Politics,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 95:2 (2005), pp. 437–461.
Agnew, John, “The Territorial Trap: The Geographical Assumptions of International Relations Theory,” Review of International Political Economy 1:1 (1994), pp. 53–80.
Alexandrowicz, Charles H., “New and Original States: The Issue of Reversion to Sovereignty,” International Affairs 45:3 (1969), pp. 465–480.
Alexandrowicz, Charles H., “The New States and International Law,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 3 (1974), pp. 226–233.
Berger, Stefan, “The Study of Enclaves – Some Introductory Remarks,” Geopolitics 15:2 (2010), pp. 312–328.
Besson, Samantha, Art. “Sovereignty,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1472?rskey&eq;68VEUK&result&eq;1&prd&eq;EPIL.
Bull, Hedley, “The Theory of International Politics: 1919–1969,” in: Brian Porter (ed.), The Aberystwyth Papers: International Politics 1919–1969, London 1972, pp. 30–55.
Casperson, Nina, “Degrees of Legitimacy: Ensuring Internal and External Support in the Absence of Recognition,” Geoforum 66 (2015), pp. 184–192.
Clark, Elizabeth M., “The Free City of Danzig: Borderland, Hansestadt or Social Democracy?,” The Polish Review 42:3 (1997), pp. 259–276.
Crawford, James, “The Criteria for Statehood in International Law,” The British Yearbook of International Law 48:1 (1976/1977), pp. 93–182.
Forsberg, Tuomas, “Beyond Sovereignty, Within Territoriality: Mapping the Space of Late-Modern (Geo)Politics,” Cooperation and Conflict 31:4 (1996), pp. 355–386.
Gross, Leo, “The Peace of Westphalia, 1648–1948,” The American Journal of International Law 42:1 (1948), pp. 20–41.
Grote, Rainer, Art. “Westphalian System,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Pubic International Law, http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1500?rskey&eq;NfQsYX&result&eq;1&prd&eq;EPIL.
Hinsley, Francis H., Sovereignty, New Thinker’s Library Vol. 13, London 1966.
Jackson, Robert H., Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World, Cambridge Studies in International Relations Vol. 12, Cambridge 1990.
Jeffrey, Alex, McConnell, Fiona, Wilson, Alice, “Understanding Legitimacy: Perspectives from Anomalous Geopolitical Spaces,” Geoforum 66 (2015), pp. 177–183.
Jennings, Robert Y., The Acquisition of Territory in International Law, Manchester 1963.
Jones, Reece, “Sovereignty and Statelessness in the Border Enclaves of India and Bangladesh,” Political Geography 28:6 (2009), pp. 373–381.
Karan, Pradyumna P., “The India-Pakistan Enclave Problem,” The Professional Geographer 18:1 (1966), pp. 23–25.
Kelsen, Hans, “The Essence of International Law,” in: Karl W. Deutsch, Stanley Hoffman (eds.), The Relevance of International Law: Essays in Honor of Leo Gross, Cambridge, Mass. 1968, pp. 85–92.
Kelsen, Hans, Pure Theory of Law, Translation from the Second German Edition by Max Knight, Berkeley 1967.
Kelsen, Hans, The Principles of International Law, Reprint of the First Edition New York 1952, Clark, New Jersey 2003.
Krasner, Stephen D., Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy, Princeton, New Jersey 1999.
Lauterpacht, Hersch, Recognition in International Law, Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law Vol. 3, Reprint of the First Edition Cambridge 1947, Cambridge 2013.
Mandaville, Peter G., “Territory and Translocality: Discrepant Idioms of Political Identity,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 28:3 (1999), pp. 653–673.
McConnell, Fiona, “The Fallacy and the Promise of the Territorial Trap: Sovereign Articulations of Geopolitical Anomalies,” Geopolitics 15:4 (2010), pp. 762–766.
Murphy, Alexander B., “The Sovereign State System as Political-Territorial Ideal: Historical and Contemporary Considerations,” in: Thomas J. Biersteker, Cynthia Weber (eds.), State Sovereignty as Social Construct, Cambridge Studies in International Relations Vol. 46, Cambridge 1996, pp. 81–120.
Ouali, Abdelhamid El, “Territorial Integrity: Rethinking the Territorial Sovereign Right of the Existence of the States,” Geopolitics 11:4 (2006), pp. 630–650.
Robinson, G. W. S., “Exclaves,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 49 (1959), pp. 283–295.
Rosenau, James N., “Sovereignty in a Turbulent World,” in: Lyons M. Gene, Michael Mastanduno (eds.), Beyond Westphalia? State Sovereignty and International Intervention, Baltimore, London 1995, pp. 191–227.
Schendel, Willem van, “Stateless in South Africa: The Making of the India-Bangladesh Enclaves,” The Journal of Asian Studies 61:1 (2002), pp. 115–147.
Thürer, Daniel, Art. “Failing States,” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1404?rskey&eq;HTCfHJ&result&eq;1&prd&eq;EPIL.
Vinokurov, Evgeny, A Theory of Enclaves, Lanham et al. 2007.

REVIEWS (Quasi-States)
Clark, Ian, “Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” Modern Asian Studies 26:1 (1992), pp. 202–205.
Harshe, Rajen, “Third World Underdevelopment and International Relations, Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” Social Scientist 23:7/9 (1995), pp. 75–90.
Nardin, Terry, “Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” The Journal of Asian Studies 50:4 (1991), pp. 887–888.
Pierre, Andrew J., “Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” Foreign Affairs 70:5 (1991), p. 182.
Segal, Gerald, “Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” International Affairs 68:2 (1992), p. 327.
Thornberry, Patrick, “Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 41:3 (1992), pp. 729–730.
Walker, Rob B. J., “Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 25:4 (1992), pp. 804–805.
Young, Tom, “Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World (1990),” Africa: Journal of the International African Institute 62:2 (1992), p. 304.




Course/Module evaluation:
End of year written/oral examination 50 %
Presentation 0 %
Participation in Tutorials 50 %
Project work 0 %
Assignments 0 %
Reports 0 %
Research project 0 %
Quizzes 0 %
Other 0 %

Additional information:
 
Students needing academic accommodations based on a disability should contact the Center for Diagnosis and Support of Students with Learning Disabilities, or the Office for Students with Disabilities, as early as possible, to discuss and coordinate accommodations, based on relevant documentation.
For further information, please visit the site of the Dean of Students Office.
Print