International Relations
A new textbook (together with Vlad Zubok from Temple University) is underway. We hope to finish this four-year marathon in 2012. These are a few opening sentences from the book's preface:
Borders, borders, borders…. If you fly across any continent you will not be able to see countries’ borders unless they are clearly marked by oceans or rivers. Borders between countries, like fences around houses, are human inventions. They are products of bargains, disputes, wars, and new agreements. Borders appeared as a result of the struggle for territories and the rights to control them. Kings, princes, emirs, and shahs outlined their territorial possessions through negotiations but more often with their swords. Disputes were endless and each new war produced new land configurations. Within the established borders governing authorities established their states. They began to pursue agreements formalizing the borders and promising not to change them in the future. Some of such agreements stood for centuries while others did not last even a few days.
Although today many old borders have disappeared, new ones have emerged. In 1992, the European Union was born as a prototype of a community of sovereign countries in which the significance of borders was diminished. Yet after the collapse of the Soviet Union a year earlier, 15 new countries have emerged and, along with this, tens of thousands of miles of new borders. About two decades ago, the border between East and West Germany had been eliminated. Yet North and South Koreas continue to be separated by a web of barbed wire an impenetrable field of landmines.
Almost every aspect of human life is influenced by the presence of these infinite borders-fences. Our basic rights and obligations often depend on the positions of these fences. People’s basic rights, freedom, marital status, employment, prosperity, religion, and even dignity are so often determined by the borders within which they have to live. Borders do not only separate. Linguistic and cultural similarities among groups living within the same borders let people identify themselves as nationalities. The vast majority of people on earth today are nationals of a particular state. This status brings certain rights, privileges, as well as restrictions. If you decide to travel with your American passport to any country of the European Union or United Kingdom, you can do it practically at any time. Russians or Indians, however, are required to apply for a visa, a legal permission to enter. They wait for such permission like thousands of Jordanians, Syrians, Afghanis, Bolivians, or nationals of many other countries. Not everyone is granted a visa.
Some people rejoice when a border-fence is eliminated. In Romania and Bulgaria in 2006, big crowds were dancing in the streets at night when their countries were voluntarily limiting their sovereignty, eliminating border checkpoints, and joining the European Union. Others demand to be fenced off from their neighbors, like ethnic groups in Kosovo, Turkey, Abkhazia, Ossetia, and some other places. Some fences are disputed like the one, 20-feet tall, that Israel has built to separate itself from Palestinian towns and villages.
Even democracies are not always open to one another. Just look at the U.S.-Mexican border for example. Mexico is a democracy with competing parties and free presidential and parliamentary elections. Yet, Mexicans must obtain a visa to enter the United States. Many are rejected and try to cross the border illegally. American public opinion has been supportive of limiting the flow of undocumented aliens and strengthening the US-Mexico border. However, on the U.S. northern border with prosperous Canada, travel is significantly easier.
It is anyone’s guess about the future of today’s borders. They may remain there for centuries. The world might eventually find its comfort zone within some new fences. New countries will appear on the global map. Or you may see the borders vanish. But before the changes take place, whatever they are, we will have to deal with the reality of today’s borders and most importantly the countries they represent. Welcome to the field of international relations.
Character assassination is a deliberate damage of an individual’s reputation. Most notable victims of character assassination are political leaders, officials, celebrities, scientists, athletes and other public figures. “Character assassins” target private lives, behavior, values, and identity of other people. Their biographical details are altered or fabricated. Intimate features become public. Achievements are questioned. Good intentions are doubted. Using exaggerations, mockery, allegations, lies, insinuations, and slander, the attackers try to hurt their victims morally and emotionally in the eyes of public opinion. To give some examples from recent American history, political opponents of U.S. President Richard Nixon commonly and deliberately portrayed him as a reclusive, paranoid, and aloof conspirator. Ronald Reagan was an ignorant cowboy, warmonger, or absent-minded old man. Bill Clinton’s opponents scorned him as a slick Willy, womanizer and liar. George W. Bush was stupid. Barack Obama repeatedly appeared in sarcastic attacks as a messiah or a lecturing professor unable to govern.
Martijn Icks (University of Dusseldorf, Germany) and I began our cooperation just two years ago when we asked our international colleagues to join us and discuss character assassination. We gathered the first international seminar on character assassination in Heidelberg, Germany. Twenty-five scholars from eleven countries debated the “art of smear and defamation in history and today” and the result of the discussion has exceeded our expectations. Several academic publications are in the works. Visit our site and see us on Facebook!
Read more about the seminar and future events planned by The International Society for the Study of Character Assassination (ISSCA): http://characterattack.wordpress.com/
Look up for us on Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Character-Assassination/228910893798951
In October 2011 twenty scholars gathered at George Mason University to discuss the entire range of the revolutionary era. This seminar was open to students, faculty, and the general public. During an open exchange of opinions, we reviewed many ground-breaking, but also violent events of the past, and discussed their impact on today’s global developments. We also discussed the most recent revolutions and ongoing rapid social transitions. What is revolution? Do counter-revolutions always follow? How do revolutions differ from one another? Were there any successful nonviolent revolutions? Did the 1991 Russian revolution fail? How can we understand the “Arab Spring” of 2011? We are planning to conduct a similar event in 2012 and publish the materials.
of the 20th Century and Today
This project focuses on several individual factors affecting domestic and foreign policy. I pay close attention to the most prominent leaders of the 20th and 21st century, their personalities, motivations, experiences, and identities—all in the context of these leaders’ key decisions and policies. Thisis a comparative and cross-disciplinary study of political leadership based on an intersection of research in the fields of political science, international relations, and political psychology.

Russian Politics and Government. London / New York: Macmillan
Reviews:
"Eric Shiraev's years of experience teaching the subject shines through in this coherent, well-documented and highly-readable text." --Ariel Choen, Senior Research Fellow, The Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, Washington DC., USA
"A masterful, critical assessment of both the realities
of Russia on the ground and the nature of the Russian state." --Blair
Ruble, Director of the Kennan Institute at The Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars, Washington DC
"A comprehensive and multi-dimensional analysis of Russian developments
and actions." --Alan G. Whittaker, Professor, National Defense
University, Washington DC

A History of Psychology: A Global Perspective. LA: Sage
Preview
This text provides a fresh and engaging perspective on psychology’s history, covering the discipline’s development around the world and highlighting its interdisciplinary nature. It offers comprehensive coverage of both classical and contemporary systems of thought, connects psychology to evolving society and culture from ancient times to today, and provides scores of contemporary applications that draw students into the topic. Clarity of coverage, illustrative examples, visual aids, and critical thinking questions make this text enjoyable for instructor and student alike.
Counting Every Vote: The Most Contentious Elections in American History
What would have happened if Aaron Burr, rather than Jefferson, had become president? What if Nixon had defeated Kennedy in 1960? What if Al Gore had become president in 2001 instead of George W. Bush? Using six cases, we argue that engaging in this counterfactual exercise provides an excellent opportunity to revisit history, learn from its lessons, and relate to contemporary elections. Publisher: Potomac Books (co-authored with Robert Dudley)
The fourth edition of Cross-Cultural Psychology (with Dr. David Levy). Used in more than 130 universities in North America and around the world. In 2009, this book has been released in India. A Chinese edition has been published in 2010 (translated).
Cross-Cultural Psychology
The Soviet Union: Internal and External Perspectives on Soviet Society
Publisher: Palgrave, New York. Co-authored with Vladimir Shlapentokh and Eero Carroll
This book is our attempt to make a small contribution to social sciences and history. This is a brief study of how people perceived, explained, and interpreted information available to them about the social and political developments in a country that no longer exists. We chose the Soviet Union as an example to demonstrate to our readers how different observers at different times looked at the same society, the same political institutions, and the same facts, and yet perceived everything they saw so differently. Which of these perceptions were accurate, correct?
An article in Harvard International Review about Russia's reactions to Obama's electoral victory:
http://www.harvardir.org/articles/1811/
Contact:
Email: eshiraev@cox.net or eshiraev@gmu.edu
Home office telephone: 703 250 8923 Fairfax Station, Virginia, USA