BAEcon Accounting and Finance

Scholarships and bursaries, including the Manchester Bursary , are available to eligible home/EU students.

Some undergraduate UK students will receive bursaries of up to £2,000 per year, in addition to the government package of maintenance grants.

You can get information and advice on student finance to help you manage your money.

If states aren’t to go to war, what should they do instead? The course will provide an advanced introduction to ethical debates surrounding the alternatives to war, such as economic sanctions, providing arms to rebel groups, nonviolent resistance, cyber war, the use of private military and security companies, drone warfare, and humanitarian aid. It will be divided into two sections. The first (shorter) section will consider the prevailing political context, such as the increasing importance of the alternatives to war geopolitically and the responses to the recent crises in Myanmar, Ukraine, and Syria, and the underlying approaches, such as the responsibility to protect doctrine, Just War Theory, and pacifism. The second section will consider the ethical issues raised by each of the alternatives in turn, considering how even those perceived to be less powerful globally may use these methods. It will also consider the challenges to states in light of the rise of global authoritarianism. 

The course unit aims to:

·         Examine the ethical debates surrounding the alternatives to war in general.
Introduce the prevailing political context for these debates, such as the recent crises in Syria, Libya, and Ukraine, and the rise of global authoritarianism.

·         Consider the underlying approaches of Just War Theory, the responsibility to protect doctrine, and pacifism.

·         Consider critically the normative arguments surrounding specific alternatives:

(i) economic sanctions;

(ii) coercive diplomacy, such as naming and shaming and the cutting of diplomatic ties;

(iii) arming rebel groups and paramilitaries and funding private military and security companies;

(iv) the use of drones and cyber war

(v) positive incentives and amnesties

(vi) nonviolent resistance, including civilian peacekeeping.

Develop students' oral skills (through general discussion), team-work skills, written skills (through the assessed essay and short exam), research skills (from the use and assessment of material from an array of sources), and critical and analytical skills.

On completion of this unit successful students will be able to demonstrate:
- The ability to assess critically Just War Theory, the responsibility to protect doctrine, and pacifism, and how they inform the ethical debates surrounding the alternatives to war.
- The ability to assess critically the ethical arguments surrounding each of the particular alternatives studied.

- The ability to apply the ethical arguments and approaches studied to real and hypothetical cases.
- Oral, teamwork, written, and research skills

The course will comprise ten two-hour lectures and ten one-hour seminars. The lectures will involve a mix of traditional lecture material, interactive question and answer sessions, small tasks in break-out groups, videos, and student surveys. Seminars will be lively and interesting: they will involve (i) group work linked to role-play scenarios for the alternatives and (ii) assessment of real-world cases. As per usual, all students will be expected to have completed the required reading and to have made preparatory notes. Formative feedback will be provided through seminar exercises and informal quizzes.

The course will be assessed in three ways:

1. A 2,400-word essay: 60%
2. A short exam: 30%
3. Seminar engagement or other coursework: 10%

Politics staff will provide feedback on written work within 15 working days of submission.

Students should be aware that all marks are provisional until confirmed by the external examiner and the final examinations boards in June.

For modules that do not have examination components the marks and feedback for the final assessed component are not subject to the 15 working day rule and will be released with the examination results.

You will receive feedback on assessed essays in a standard format. This will rate your essay in terms of various aspects of the argument that you have presented your use of sources and the quality of the style and presentation of the essay. If you have any queries about the feedback that you have received you should make an appointment to see your tutor.

On assessments submitted through Turnitin you will receive feedback via Blackboard. This will include suggestions about ways in which you could improve your work in future. You will also receive feedback on non-assessed coursework, whether this is individual or group work. This may be of a more informal kind and may include feedback from peers as well as academic staff

Bellamy, A. (2014) R2P: A Defense (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Bellamy, A. and T. Dunne (eds) (2016) Oxford Handbook on the Responsibility to Protect (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Gross, M and T. Meisels (eds) (2016). Soft War: The Ethics of Unarmed Conflict (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

Fabre, C (2012) Cosmopolitan Wars (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Holmes, R. (1989) On War and Morality (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
McMahan, J. (2009) Killing in War (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Pattison, J (2014) The Morality of Private War: The Challenge of Private Military and Security Companies (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

Pattison, J (2015) "The Ethics of Diplomatic Criticism: The Responsibility to Protect, Just War Theory, and Presumptive Last Resort”, European Journal of International Relations, 21/4: 935–57.

Pattison, J (2015) “The Ethics of Arming Rebels”, Ethics & International Affairs, 29/4: 455–71.

Sharp, G. with J. Paulson (2005) Waging Nonviolent Struggle: 20th Century Practice and 21st Century Potential (Manchester, NH: Extending Horizons Books).
Walzer, M. (2015) Just and Unjust Wars, Fifth Edition (New York: BasicBooks).
Winkler, A. (1999) 'Just Sanctions', Human Rights Quarterly 21: 133-55.