Student guide: The Ph.D. Comprehensive Examination
The culmination of your studies, the dissertation often sets the stage for your post-doctoral career.
Introduction
The comprehensive examination is a critical part of the GPIS PhD program. You should not view it simply as a bureaucratic hurdle to pass over on your way to the dissertation. Instead, before embarking on narrowly focused dissertation work, the comprehensive examination establishes that you have the broad familiarity and expertise with the field that is the mark of a doctoral education. it is the checkpoint that confirms that you are ready to pass from being a student to a scholar. The process of preparing for the comprehensive exam should help you organize and reflect on the variety of things you have learned over the past few years. While to this point, each of your seminars has been a distinct learning experience, you now have the opportunity to think about how your interdisciplinary work in international studies fits together. Preparation for the comprehensive exam should help you become better able to integrate and utilize the knowledge you have gained in your graduate study. It is also critically important for embarking on the dissertation. The best dissertations are effectively connected to the central questions and literature of the field. Unless you have developed an integrated overview of the field you will not have the necessary foundation for dissertation work.
This booklet will help give you a clear sense of the comprehensive examination process. It includes the examination questions from each of the fields over the past several years, as well as a general guide to the process and a few tips on surviving and surmounting the examination challenges.
The Comprehensive Character of the PhD Examination
It is important to note that the comprehensive PhD examination is not simply a test of your cumulative knowledge of seminar materials. It is, rather, a test of your preparation to work as an independent scholar at the highest level. By now you should be functioning like a scholar, and not just like a student. You should be aware of the major journals in your particular field and should be paying attention to them. You should know what the most important books, articles, and debates are regardless of whether they were used in your classes. It may have been a few years since you took IR theory, but it is unlikely that the scholars who work in that area have stopped pushing the field forward to wait for you to get through the comprehensive exams.
Back to contents
The written comprehensive examination process
The written comprehensive exams are usually scheduled for a Friday and Monday the weekend before the start of the new semester. You will do your major field on one day and your minor field on the other. We will try to schedule your major field for Friday and your minor field for Monday, but the order will be determined by the scheduling needs of the full set of students taking the written comprehensives on a given day. You will have six hours to complete each part of the exam (students whose first language is not English will have the option of taking one additional hour). You can take the exam either at a computer or with handwriting. GPIS will arrange for a place for you to take the exam, usually in a computer lab. The exam is closed book and no notes or other aids of any kind are allowed. For each of your fields you will be given five questions from which you will choose three to answer.
The Written Exam Grading
The exam will be graded by a committee of GPIS faculty. The committee will usually, but not always, include the directors of the relevant tracks and the director and associate director of GPIS. It will usually take about two weeks to get the written exams graded.
Passing the Written Comprehensive Exam
Different examiners may read the exams in different ways, and it is the student's responsibility to write answers that are generally accessible and appealing across the variety of GPIS faculty. Most readers will be looking for a clear and direct answer to the question, evidence of familiarity and facility with the important literature, and an ability to integrate theory and empirical cases.
In order to pass the comprehensive exam, students must not receive more than one failing evaluation from a committee member.
Failing the Written Comprehensive Exam
Our goal and expectation is that every student will pass the comprehensive examination. The exam is not designed to be a barrier. It is meant to be a straightforward assessment of the student's command of their declared fields and their preparation to move on to the challenges of writing the dissertation. Nonetheless, and precisely because the exam is conceptualized as an assessment of this preparedness to move on, it plays a very important role in your doctoral education. Students who do not demonstrate an effective grasp of the relevant literature and empirics or who do not effectively and explicitly answer the questions as asked will not pass.
Students who do not pass the written portion of the exam on the first attempt will have to retake the exam in a subsequent semester. Failure on the second attempt will prevent the student from going on to write a dissertation. At the discretion of the examination committee, the failing student may be awarded the MA degree if the performance and coursework so merit, and if they do not already have a GPIS MA.
Back to contents
The oral comprehensive examination process
Doctoral candidates are expected to be able to communicate effectively and knowledgably both in writing and orally. Thus, the comprehensive examinations have both a written and an oral component.
The oral portion of the comprehensive examination will take place about three weeks after the written. Three to five faculty members will administer the examination. The examiners will usually, but not necessarily, include the Director or Associate Director of GPIS and the track coordinators from the student's major and minor fields. The examination will last about one hour. Each examiner will have a chance to ask questions, but the format will often shift between relatively structured questioning and a more free-flowing discussion.
The discussion will center on the student's answers for the written exam (students can get a copy of their written exam from the program administrator). The scope of the exam is not, however, limited to that material. The examiners will be looking to fill in any perceived gaps in the written work, and to more generally assess the student's facility with the literature and empirical material.
Passing the Oral Comprehensive Exam
Passing the oral comprehensive exam is a matter of convincing the committee members that you have an appropriate mastery of the central material of the field and are prepared to go on to focused and independent work on a dissertation. In order to pass, you must not receive more than one negative vote from a member of the examining committee.
Failing the Oral Comprehensive Exam
Students who do not pass the oral exam will be asked to return in one month for a second oral exam. Students who do not pass on the second attempt will not be allowed to continue on for the PhD.
Back to contents
Tips for preparing for the PhD comprehensive exam
The most important preparation for the PhD comprehensive examination is the GPIS coursework you have completed. Reviewing the notes and materials from your seminars and trying to organize it around some integrative themes is essential preparation. The following pages offer some further suggestions for effective preparation for the comprehensive examination, and for ensuring a strong examination performance.
1. Take appropriate classes
In consultation with your advisor and other faculty, be sure to select a variety of classes that will give you the broad background you need for the comprehensive exam. It is particularly important that you choose classes that will help you gain both a breadth of field knowledge, and a depth of knowledge in a few critical areas. The seminar papers you write should particularly help you develop depth in a few critical areas.
2. Keep effective class notes and reading notes
You should be thinking about preparation for the comprehensive exams from the beginning of your program. Keeping your seminar and reading notes in an organized manner will allow for more effective comprehensive exam review. You will particularly want to be careful about the material in the core classes.
You may find it useful to develop reading notes at different levels of depth. There may be a set of books and articles for which you will have 2-3 page summaries. There may be a second, larger, group for which you have paragraph length descriptions. Finally you should have a third very large group for which you have a sentence for each reading that gives you the central thrust of the argument.
3. Work on exam preparation in groups
Working with others can help you share the labor of summarizing and reviewing material. You can work with others on identifying the critical literature and on developing answers to hypothetical test questions.
4. Pay particular attention to the broad literature of international relations theory that will help you in answering a wide variety of questions
Many of the questions across the different tracks will benefit from an effective understanding of the broad currents and debates of international relations theory. One of the things a graduate education should help you do is to apply general theory to a variety of specific situations. Displaying that ability on the comprehensive exam is a good idea.
5. Identify some historical periods and important episodes and issues around which you will develop a particular expertise
Alas, no one can know everything about everything. You will see in this collection of sample questions that it is relatively rare for a question to demand knowledge of a particular event or historical period. Nonetheless, you will also see that you are often called upon to identify a critical historical period or event. You will be expected to evince in-depth knowledge of some issues or areas. Effective in-depth knowledge of a few critical issue areas or historical episodes can help you generate appropriate material for a wide variety of questions.
6. Identify some important literature with which you will be particularly familiar
You need to have a good feel for a very broad range of literature. For a lot of books and articles, remembering the author and the central thrust of their argument and evidence will serve you adequately for the comprehensives. But, just as it is essential that you have a greater depth of knowledge about a few historical episodes are critical issues, you will want to have a set of books and articles that you know extremely well. You should have an identified set of readings that you are confident you can apply to a reasonable range of questions and that you know very well and can talk about with some depth and sophistication.
7. Practice for the exam
Using the material in this booklet, you should write some practice exams. At the beginning you may want to take several hours and write an answer with open book resources. By the end you should be practicing with closed notes and a two-hour clock to simulate exam conditions. Such practice will not only help you think about how you will engage in the actual task of taking the exam, but will give you collection of sample answers that may be easily adapted to the real test questions. Just be careful that you don't mistakenly provide the answer to a similar old question and miss the slightly changed terms or requirements that are likely to show up in the real test.
The process of preparing practice exams is another area where working in groups can be extremely helpful. Having a study group can give you a larger stock of practice answers and will allow you to get feedback and to discuss the appropriate sources and arguments for a given question.
Back to contents
Tips for writing an effective comprehensive exam
1. Make sure you answer the questions explicitly and clearly.
The most common comprehensive exam mistake is to not explicitly and clearly answer the question. Read the question very carefully and make sure that you offer an explicit answer to the question. Do not rely on the readers to draw out implicit answers.
2. Make appropriate reference to the literature and relevant scholarly debates.
You will not, of course, be expected to provide detailed citations. But, you should demonstrate familiarity and facility with a range of the literature. You should be able to appropriately reference the scholars whose arguments are relevant to a particular issue. You may occasionally include the name of a book or article and the date of its publication.
3. Make appropriate use of theory and of empirical and historical knowledge.
If appropriately done, it is particularly effective to use theory to inform answers on history questions and history to inform answers on theory questions.
4. Write full answers that are structured with an introduction and conclusion.
As in all writing, structure and organization are important to effective communication. Just because it is a time-limited exam is no excuse for jumbled, incoherent writing. Take the time to think through and outline your argument and its structure before you write. As in all writing, signposting, headings, and clear explicit language can help communicate your ideas. Provide a clear introduction and conclusion that can help you summarize your central point and will reassure the readers that you have, in fact, explicitly answered the question.
5. Make an argument
As a scholar prepared to embark on independent thesis work, it is important that you demonstrate an ability to effectively articulate your own views. The comprehensive exam is not just about knowing the literature. It is also about demonstrating that you can think about international issues critically and come to your own conclusions. Avoid wishy-washy answers that simply describe some of the ideas extant in the field and then conclude that they are all correct. Take a stand and defend it with appropriate theoretical, analytical, and empirical material.
6. Make choices
You will notice that most of the questions are a lot bigger than can be fully answered in the two-hours you will have on average during the written exam. You have to make choices on how you will answer so that you can display your breadth and depth of knowledge while satisfying the committee that you have effectively addressed the question. It usually helps if you can be explicit about how you are managing the question ("While there are, of course, idiosyncratic elements in the complex relationship of each President to his national security team, I will focus in this short essay on the difficult relationship between Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski and Cyrus Vance because it effectively illuminates the problems every foreign policy team must face…"). It is rarely a good strategy to try to present a broad and superficial survey of too many things ("In this essay I will discuss the relationship of each Post-WWII American president with his respective Secretaries of State and Defense…").
7. Don't make big mistakes
This, of course, is common sense, but I can't overemphasize how difficult it is to certify someone as ready to move onto writing a dissertation who fundamentally misunderstands some essential literature, or who demonstrates a wanton disregard for historical accuracy.
Back to contents
Tips for the oral examination
1. Attitude matters
Attitude is important in the oral examination, just as it will be for the remainder of your career as a scholar. As a doctoral candidate, you should be able to present your views with confidence, but without becoming defensive. The examiners are likely to push against your views and expect to see you defend them effectively, but not irrationally.
The best way to figure out the right attitude is to attend the presentations of others at research workshops, dissertation defenses, and conferences. Start paying attention to the style as well as the substance. Take note of how other scholars deal with difficult questions and criticisms. What works and what doesn't work? What makes them sound defensive? What makes them sound arrogant? What makes them sound indecisive?
2. Being nervous is inevitable
It is likely that you will be nervous. How you perform when nervous is not irrelevant to your career as a scholar. You need to demonstrate that despite being nervous you can engage in appropriate scholarly discussion.
3. We probably know more than you, but knowing everything isn't required
It is likely that all together, the three to five professors conducting the examination know some things that you don't. With some pushing, they will probably be able to find out what some of those things are. We don't expect you to know everything. We do expect you to communicate effective knowledge of a broad range of subjects, and explicit and deep knowledge of a few selected areas.
4. Practice
The best way to practice for the oral exam is to speak up and engage in discussion in your seminars, in research workshops, and at conferences. If you aren't prepared to express and defend your views in the seminar setting, it is unlikely that you will be prepared to do so in the oral exam.
5. Work with other students
Again, preparing for the comprehensive examinations with other students will help you both with the substance and with the process. Scholarly discussions of exam questions with other students will give you the chance to practice articulating and defending your views with appropriate references to the literature and empirical facts.
Back to contents
Technical instructions
(These are the instructions that come with the exam)
You have received a formatted diskette on which you must write your answers if you have opted to use word processing equipment for this examination. If not, your answers must be handwritten, each in a separate blue book, provided. If needed, you may continue an answer in another blue book, identifying properly each question. Be sure they are identified clearly.
Should you have any problems with your diskette or any computer problems at any time during the examination, report to the Proctor immediately.
Make sure to save every page you type (write).
Make a backup copy for every typed answer.
Sign the Honor Pledge.
You have been provided with blue examination books. Use these to design and outline your answers. Do not use any other paper. If you are handwriting your answers in blue books, use extra ones to design/outline answers. Only identify bluebooks you actually use.
You may take a break at any time during the examination but do not leave the building.
When you have completed the examination, print your answers (if using word processing). Make sure that every answer is identified with the number on the question sheet, both in word processing and in handwriting.
Sign your name, date and time on every sheet.
You have six hours to answer three questions. At the end of the examination period, writing must cease. Printing via computer may be done following the writing.
At the end of the allotted time put your diskette, your printed and/or handwritten answers (do not staple), any blue books or extra blue books you may have used, the signed and dated Honor Pledge, the instruction sheet and the exam questions in the envelope provided. Include any extra pages accidentally produced, noting this fact. Sign the envelope across the back flap.
Hand the entire package to the Proctor in BAL 621 (or wherever designated).
Back to contents
Guidelines to answering questions
(These are the instructions that come with the exam)
1. You must answer three questions.
2. The questions are meant to be answered in about two hours each. Allocate your time accordingly and make sure that each question has a concluding section.
3. Also make sure that you:
a. answer the questions as they are raised and not as you wish they had been raised
b. illustrate your answer with appropriate empirical examples
c. cite relevant sources
d. make proper references to important interpretative debates, when appropriate
4. Your answers will be reviewed in terms of:
a. how effectively you address each of the questions
b. how well you know and manage your facts
c. how soundly you handle and cite the literature
d. how well you have developed and organized your argument
e. the quality of your writing
Back to contents
Past Field Questions
AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY
2005
1. In his most recent book, Zbigniew Brzezinski writes: "The required co-optive global leadership calls for a conscious, strategically coherent, and intellectually demanding effort by whomever the American people choose to be their president. The president must do more than stir the American people; he must also educate them." Discuss this assessment with evidence drawn from two past U.S. presidents who can best illustrate Dr. Brzezinski's thesis - one president because he responded especially well to these implicit criteria for leadership, and the other because he responded especially poorly.
2. Examine and discuss the essential premises of the strategy of containment and the main terms of the debate that containment provoked in the early stages of the Cold War. With the perspective gained since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, assess the merits and demerits of these early arguments. As you review this debate do you find anything of relevance for the current post-9/11 security debates?
3. The Vietnam War, it is often argued, "shattered the U.S. consensus" on foreign policy. Was there a pre-Vietnam consensus? If so, define, explain, and discuss it (without, however, engaging into a discussion of the war itself). Was that consensus, however defined, shattered by the war, and if so, how and with what consequences for the rest of the Cold War? Whatever those consequences, has a new consensus emerged, and if so how and what are its main characteristics?
4. "The Cold War was a constructive aberration." Explain and discuss - why, if at all, view it as an aberration: whether and how can it be deemed constructive?
5. "What is worse than a strategy of preponderance," wrote Christopher Layne, "is a strategy of preponderance that fails for lack of will or lack of competence. Then, instead of letting History take its time to allow countervailing forces to emerge, unfinished states launch their challenge to unwilling states." Explain and discuss this statement in the related contexts of past and current U.S. foreign and security policies.
6. With the past century in the background, what do you view as the main currency of power for interstate relations in the twenty-first century? How has it evolved relative to other currencies as well as on its own terms? Does your choice point to a continued pre-eminence of the United States as a "peerless power" or does it point instead to the rise of new competitors and possible rivals? If so, how and why? Can the United States avoid a possible decline, or counter an eventual challenge from a new hegemonic bidder, or at least, minimize the consequences of a redistribution of global or regional power?
2004
1. Describe, explain, and discuss the roots and nature of America's rise to globalism after World War II and during the Cold War. Are there specific events or actors that played a decisive role in encouraging or constraining the evolution of the U.S. role in the world during those years? Is there a theoretical school that is especially useful for the understanding and projection of that role?
2. Do you find the metaphor of empire useful, misleading or irrelevant in characterizing U.S. policies since the end of the Cold War? Explain briefly whether it had lesser, greater, or equal pertinence before 1991. Does it differ significantly from other Great Power imperialism, and if so how are we to assess the role, intent, and limits of U.S. preponderance?
3. You are a senior advisor to Senator John Kerry in his bid to win the presidency of the United States. Write a memorandum that describes briefly the five priority issues he will inherit in January 2005. When introducing your memorandum, please explain whether this transition differs from other past presidential transitions, and if so how and with what consequences. When concluding your memorandum, please provide and justify specific recommendations for each of the five priorities you identify.
4. Suppose you were asked to write a book presenting an interpretative study of post World War II U.S. foreign policy. What global conclusions would you propose to develop? Suppose further that you determine that the most effective way to present your conclusions to a wider audience is to focus your study around three figures that deserve recognition for their seminal influence on the development or/and enforcement of U.S. policies. Write the book proposal accordingly.
5. Write a broad bibliographic essay on the evolution and transformation of the U.S. role in the world after World War II and during the Cold War. Can you identify gaps in the literature that remain a decade or so after the end of the Cold War?
6. Identify three EVENTS that best characterize the Cold War. Do NOT describe any of these at any length, but explain why these events are so intimately identified, in your judgment, with the Cold War and the development of U.S. policies during the Cold War years. Conclude your answer with some observations about the nature of this conflict in the broad context of history.
7. The history of transatlantic relations is a history of crises. Identify three of these CRISES during and since the Cold War. Describe them briefly, and compare them, including similarities and differences. Identify conditions that led to their resolution. What conclusions do you draw from your analysis for the current crisis in US-European relations.
8. Present and discuss the evolution of U.S. policies toward any country of your choice in Asia during any 15-year period. When introducing your discussion, please explain your choice - of the country, as well as the time period you choose to cover. When concluding your essay, please assess the legacies of that period for a related assessment of current bilateral relations.
9. What is the Vietnam syndrome - how do you define it, how do you explain it in the context of American history before the Cold War, and how do you measure its impact during the Cold War. Is it still relevant to the making of US foreign and security policies?
10. "In the manner America conducts its foreign policy, there is an open invitation to debate it and to struggle for the undisputed privilege of directing it." Explain the terms of that debate and the nature of that struggle since the end of World War II. Conclude with an assessment of the changes that have emerged in both that debate and that struggle since the events of September 11, 2001.
2003
1. Write an essay giving your personal assessment of how US policy-makers have drawn on historical lessons or apparent parallels and analogies. Write this essay on the basis of three specific examples when, in your judgment, historical understanding or memories (a) strengthened policy, (b) weakened policy, and (c) remained irrelevant. Conclude your essay with a few general comments about the role of history in the making of foreign policy.
2. You are advising a foreign head of government preparing for a summit meeting with the US president. Write a memorandum for him/her that describes the process of policy formulation in execution in the United States with particular characteristics of a specific US president of your choice.
3. As you think through the early years of the Cold War, could the Truman administration have done something differently to avoid the conflict with the Soviet Union? Could any US administration have done something differently to end that conflict earlier than was the case?
4. In his most recent book, Walter Russell Mead asks: "Why, with a record so active and glorious, is American foreign policy held in such low esteem?" With specific reference to the Cold War, do you concur with Mead's glowing assessment on both accounts: U.S. performance and foreign perceptions of that performance? Explain and discuss the fullness or limits of your agreement or disagreements. To conclude, assess the evolution of the reputation of American leadership and power since the end of the Cold War.
5. Present and discuss the evolution of U.S. policies toward a region or country of your choice during any U.S. president from 1953 to 2001. When introducing your discussion, please explain the reasons why you chose to focus on that particular administration. When concluding your essay, please assess the legacies that the administration left behind it in the region or country you chose to cover.
2002
1. "The type of order that emerges after great wars hinges on the ability of states to restrain power institutionally and bind themselves to long term commitments." Explain and discuss with explicit references to US policies after World War II. Expand your conclusions with some references to US policies since the Cold War.
2. "America has never felt at home abroad…. The reason is America's self-image-a self-image that sharply divides Americans from the rest of the world: an exceptional, or separatist, self-image that creates intolerable tensions in American foreign policy." Explain this comment. Do you agree with it-if so, on the basis of what specific evidence; if not, why? Has such self-image evolved over the years and, most of all, since the end of the cold war?
3. "Compared with the dismal record of other great powers, American foreign policy-with a handful of exceptions-looks reasonably good." In the most general terms, do you agree with this statement? As you develop your answer, please introduce examples of successful policies, as well as one or two of the "exceptions" acknowledged by the author.
4. "Relations between North America and Europe have always been beset by controversy…. There is now, however, an important qualitative difference. The early crises within the Alliance generally had to do with differing interpretations of the requirements of an agreed common security. Today, the very definition of common security and, indeed, of common purposes, is being questioned." With reference to past examples of "family disputes" during the Cold War, explain that statement. Do you agree with the author that current differences are "qualitatively" different?
5. Explain, discuss, and compare two instances during and since the Cold War when different US presidents chose to use military force outside the Western Hemisphere. Can you draw some conclusions about the use and effectiveness of military power in US foreign policy?
6. Throughout the postwar period and the Cold War years, U.S. policymakers frequently relied on historical analogies for guidance, analysis, and advocacy. With hindsight, however, many of the lessons thus invoked seemed inappropriate, irrelevant or misused. Write an essay presenting your views on the role of history during the Cold War years, and give your personal assessment of how historical "lessons" were used. Give at least one example where in your judgment historical understanding or memories hampered policy or narrowed the selection of options. Give at least two examples when such understanding or memories did in fact strengthen policy or widened the selections of options.
7. Examine the essential premises of the policies of containment and the debate that containment provoked the early stages of the Cold War. With the historical perspective gained by the end of the Cold War, assess the merits and demerits of the arguments presented in the early debate over containment.
8. Discuss briefly the nature and roots of American expansionism before World War I. Did it differ significantly from other great Power imperialism, and if so how? Do you find the metaphor of empire useful or misleading in characterizing U.S. policies during that period? Explain at greater length whether it has lesser, greater, or equal pertinence to U.S. policies since 1941 and throughout the Cold War and its aftermath.
9. Suppose you were asked to write a book presenting an interpretative study of post-World War II U.S. foreign policy. What global conclusions would you propose to develop? Suppose further that you determine that the most effective way to introduce a wide audience to your conclusions will be to develop in this volume one single figure that deserves recognition for his/her seminal influence on the development or/and enforcement of U.S. policies. Write the book proposal accordingly.
10. "American foreign policy need not resist multipolarity but it should at least define it." Explain the significance of this observation and discuss its feasibility and implications, globally or with reference to a region of your choice.
2001
1. "The mix of competition and cooperation in American-Soviet relations makes it difficult to define the period of détente precisely." Explain and discuss briefly this observation by Raymond Garthoff. Next, identify one such period of détente "precisely" and examine the mix of cooperation and competition that prevailed during that period. Last, to conclude, assess the end and consequences of that period.
2. "When it comes to foreign policy, President George W. Bush is no worse off than any one of his predecessors after seven months in office. Indeed, with the sole exception of his father, he may even be better off." Explain and discuss with specific references to the early months of previous administrations since World War II. Can you draw any conclusions from your discussion as to what can be expected for the coming three years?
3. Identify the most significant bilateral relationship the United States had during the Cold War with any country in Europe (except Russia), Asia (except Korea and any part of Indochina), Latin America (except Cuba), or Africa. Describe the nature of the relationship, and explain and justify its significance. Next, pick a decade and review that relationship in order to illustrate the earlier explanation and justification of your choice.
4. Which TWO theoretical schools can best help understand the course of inter-state relations in the twentieth century? Can these also help anticipate inter-state relations for at least parts of this century, and thus help develop suitable US policies? What, if anything, have we learned from theory and about history out of the Cold War and its aftermath?
5. Is there an American experience that shapes its foreign and security policies in ways that remain markedly different from those of other countries? Assuming that to be the case, did this experience affect US policies with consequences for the US role in the world? Having discussed these questions in general terms, turn your attention to the Cold War and explain whether and how this affected the course of US policies during the post-1945 decade. To conclude, raise questions as to whether America's international experiences in the twentieth century helped "normalize" it for the coming century.
2000
1. Which Cold War legacies do you find especially significant for the coming years? Why, and how do these legacies differ, if at all, from the legacies of other global wars? Can you identify post-Cold War developments that are the direct expression of these legacies - whether for the better or for the worse? How influential were U.S. policies in influencing these developments? If so, what form did this influence take, and how was it exerted?
2. Which theoretical schools can best anticipate and understand the course of interstate relations in the 21st century, and thus help develop suitable U.S. policies? What have we learned from theory out of the flow of the Cold War, and what has the Cold War taught us, if anything, about theory?
3. What role can the United States play in promoting the rise of democracy abroad? Is this a valid U.S. interest, and if so, how vital? Are there instances when U.S. policies acknowledged such an interest especially convincingly and decisively? Are there examples when that role was assumed readily but not fulfilled well? What conclusions do you draw from your discussion as to the nature and goals of U.S. policies, during and since the Cold War?
4. What will be the shape of any region or subregion by 2010, or any other date you deem suitable for a credible analysis of existing or emerging trends? How much unity, how much division, of what kind and between which states, at whose expense and to whose benefit? How are U.S. interests affected? What kinds of U.S. policies might permit the desired outcomes?
5. Do alliances still matter to the United States? If so, why, where, and how? If not, why not and with what consequences?
6. "In the back of all policy makers minds are hidden assumptions, biases, and prejudices that determine how they perceive reality, what facts they look at, and how they judge their importance and merits." Explain and discuss this statement with explicit reference to two senior policy makers in the United States. In each case, single out one issue that confirms or deflates the argument.
7. Review the evolution of U.S. foreign policies in any one region of the world and for any ten-year period of your choice during the second half of the twentieth century (1950-2000). Justify your choices for both the period and the region, and be sure to examine both changes and continuities relative to earlier years and in the context of the period you choose.
8. Theories are indispensable tools for human thought and action. They should, or should be able to (a) order and generalize about reality; (b) understand repeatable causal relationships among significant phenomena; (c) anticipate, and even, on occasion, predict future developments and outcomes; (d) distinguish the important from the unimportant in some consistent fashion; and (e) determine what paths are most likely to achieve stated goals at the least price. With specific references to U.S. foreign policies during the Cold War, examine and discuss how any theory or theories of your choice have satisfied at least two of these benchmarks. What conclusions do you draw from your assessment for the relevance of theory to the study of foreign policy?
9. Review and discuss the U.S. perception of nuclear weapons and their role in developing and enforcing U.S. foreign and security policies between 1957 and 1976, weighing the relative roles of Soviet behavior and allied needs, as well as domestic U.S. economic and political factors as determinants of U.S. policy and interests. In your conclusions, suggest briefly whether and how the end of the Cold War has modified these perceptions and related policies.
10. It is commonly argued that the U.S. experience in the Vietnam War "shattered the consensus" on foreign policy. Was there a pre-Vietnam consensus? If so, define and discuss it (without, however, engaging in a discussion of the war proper, or its escalation). Was the consensus shattered? If so, how and with what results? Beyond the war's impact on the U.S. consensus, review and explain, with the benefit of hindsight, the significance or impact you attribute to the war.
11. If the Cold War was about thinking the unthinkable, the post-Cold War years appear to have been about doing the undoable. So it is, for example, with regard to (a) Cyprus, (b) Jerusalem, (c) Taiwan, (d) Kashmir, and (e) Kosovo. Choose two of these five issue-areas to explain and discuss U.S. dilemmas and options. What do these issues and related policies tell us about the scope, limits, and purpose of American power?
1999
1. Review and discuss the U.S. perception of nuclear weapons and their role in developing and enforcing U.S. foreign and security policies between 1957 and 1976, weighing the relative roles of Soviet behavior and allied needs, as well as domestic U.S. economic and political factors as determinants of U.S. policy and interests. In your conclusions, suggest briefly whether and how the end of the Cold War has modified these perceptions and related policies.
2. Review, analyze, and discuss patterns of cooperation and discord, indifference and engagement between the United States and a country (other than the Soviet Union) or a region of your choice during a ten-year period of your choice (post-1950 but pre-1990). In your introduction, please be sure to explain the significance of the period selected, as well as the nature and scope of U.S. interests toward that region or country. In your discussion, please be sure to include specific events or policies and their significance.
3. Compare and explain the U.S. decision to use military force in Korea, Vietnam (as of a moment of your choice), and the Persian Gulf. How did such decisions reflect and impact the changing U.S. vision of the world, as well as America's own domestic conditions? What were their consequences on U.S. policies toward the region and elsewhere?
4. Pick two international relations theories of your choice. Review these theories briefly, and explain how each of them helps you understand or clarify any one foreign policy and security issue of your choice. (The issue you choose must involve the United States as a primary actor, or it must at least have had significant primary consequences on the United States.) Conclude with some general comments about the role and relevance of theory to the study of foreign policy.
5. Discuss the factors that have affected U.S. relations with China since the end of the Cold War. How do these relations differ from U.S. relations with other Asian states, including Japan? In turn, how do U.S. relations with China and Asia differ from U.S. relations with Russia and Europe?
6. "For the greatest part of our history, the United States was sufficiently powerful and remote from the rest of the world to sustain the assumption that, alone among other major nations of the world, we had the choice of whether or not to commit ourselves to an international role and that, if we chose to, we would be able to overcome in a definite time frame whatever challenge had elicited our involvement. As the Cold War progressed, both assumptions were proved largely wrong..." Please explain, analyze, and discuss this statement in the context of U.S. policies toward any region of the world since the end of World War II. Your analysis should show clearly how and over what time frame these assumptions were so challenged as to force (or lead) the United States away from the final answers it sought initially, and back to the imperatives it denied. Make ample use of the empirical literature used to write and develop your answer.
7. Write a bibliographic essay on the evolution and transformation of the U.S. foreign policies during the Cold War.
8. Which Cold War legacies have most clearly conditioned the early post-Cold War years, and are most likely to define the coming years? Can U.S. policies influence these legacies in ways that favor its interests, and if so, how? Have there been instances since 1989 when U.S. policies have specifically influenced the course of events in ways that are markedly different from what had been, or might have been, expected during the earlier Cold War years?
9. "There are probably no more than a half-a-dozen dates which are simultaneously landmarks in the separate histories of all regions of the world." Explain that statement. Within the limited context of the years since then end of World War II, can you single out, analyze, and discuss three dates that would qualify as such landmarks for all regions of the world? Preferably, your choices should be dates rather than events, even though, of course, these dates will inevitably relate to events. Each of your choices should be justified in terms of its universal consequences. Each of your choices, too, should be conducive to some "lessons" which you believe to be written into these dates and their consequences.
10. Which theoretical schools can help anticipate and understand the course of interstate relations in the 21st century, and thus help develop suitable U.S. policies? What have we learned from theory and/or about history, if anything, out of the events in the 20th century and/or out of the sudden, and mainly unforeseen, end of the Cold War?
As the century ends, what do you view as the main currency of power for interstate relations in the 21st century? How has it evolved during the previous decades, relative to other currencies as well as on its own terms? Does your choice point to a continued pre-eminence of the United States as "the peerless power"? If so, how and why? If not, can the United States remedy a possible decline or challenge from a new hegemonial bidder, or at least can it take any sort of action that will minimize the consequences of a redistribution of global or regional power?
Back to contents
TRANSNATIONALISM AND INTERDEPENDENCE
2005
1. States are assumed to be fundamental actors in world politics, in mainstream IR theory. Drawing on what you have learned in the Transnational and Interdependence track, and on your broader knowledge, do you believe that the power of states has decreased over time?
2. Some observers believe that the modern era is less secure than past eras. Drawing on what you have learned in the Transnational and Interdependence track, and on your broader knowledge, do you agree with that view?
3. Identify one transnational problem in world politics. Explain how critical a problem it is as compared to the other security and political problems states and human beings face in world affairs.
4. Liberals tend to have an optimistic view of the effects of interdependence in world politics, while realists differ significantly. Where do you fall in this debate and why so?
5. To what extent did September 11 herald a new era in which non-state actors would become increasingly vital in world politics? Does the rise of Al Qaeda support the realist or liberal account of world politics or is it not especially relevant to this debate?
2004
1. The issue of a "brain drain" associated with international migration from the less developed to the more developed countries has been and will continue to be debated for its implications for social and economic development in the sending countries. While the literature tends to focus on the economic consequences, the impact of "brain drain" nevertheless goes beyond economics; it carries significant implications for the overall social and political developments in the home countries. Select an appropriate developing country as an example, and discuss if and how the out-migration of significant numbers of highly educated persons in recent years may or may not affect the course of social and political democratization. In particular, will "brain drain" potentially facilitate or retard the social and political processes toward a Western-styled democratic society and why?
2. Increasing discrepancies in both demographics and standard of living between the "south" and the "north" are cited as the root causes of increasing "south-north" international migration in contemporary world. While such international flow of labor may benefit economically both the sending and the receiving countries, concerns for social consequences of international migration have led many countries in the "north" to erect barriers to labor migration. However, restrictive policies often fail to reduce the volume of legal international migration while increase the types and volumes of illegal migration. There appears to be general agreement that the ultimate solution to international migration is social and economic development in the sending countries. But scholars and policy makers differ in what the international community can do to best achieve the goals of promoting development and reducing migration. Provide an analysis of main international development aid approaches and their effectiveness in promoting development and reducing migration pressures.
3. Scholars are interested in the extent to which transnational actors can influence states, but a more interesting question for you to answer is the following: under what conditions are transnational actors most likely to influence states?
4. A large literature now deals with the relationship between interdependence and conflict. To what extent can interdependence decrease conflict between states? What contributes to this outcome? Choose a region and address this question: to what extent has interdependence contributed to conflict-avoidance?
5. After 9/11, many observers started to focus more attention on transnational threats. In the overall mix of threats to global security and the global economy, where should we rank transnational threats? How significant are they compared to the more "traditional" threats? Have changes in world politics made them more significant over time?
2003
1. Realism and neo-realism assume that little changes about the fundamentals of world politics, that continuity prevails over time. Drawing on your knowledge of transnational-interdependence field, to what extent would you agree or disagree?
2. Some scholars believe that the power of states as political units has decreased. These scholars sometimes cite a rise in interdependence and in transnational actors as a cause of this purported outcome. To what extent do you agree or disagree with their view?
3. Have global interdependence and transnationalism made cooperation easier or harder to achieve in world politics?
4. To what extent and how do transnational actors and forces (for instance, transnational religion, migration) present serious threats to the interests of state actors?
5. Has the global spread of democracy and democratic norms had a significant impact on the international system? In particular, how has democracy affected the role of transnational actors and the interdependence of states?
2002
1. Do you believe that interdependence increases cooperation in world politics?
2. In what measure have transnational actors weakened the power of states?
3. How has interdependence and transnational forces and actors impacted the interaction between weak and strong states?
4. Pick a region of the world. To what extent has interdependence and transnational forces and actors changed the politics, economics, and security of that region?
5. How, if at all, have the sources and nature of power changed in world politics?
6. To what extent were the September 11 attacks, which were carried out by a transnational terrorist organization, indicative of a profound change in international affairs toward a world where transnational actors and politics are increasingly crucial? To what extent, by contrast, was September 11 an aberration that has been exaggerated?
7. Are states any less powerful in the 21st century as actors on the world state than they were in the past? To what extent can non-state actors perform the functions that states perform?
8. An ongoing debate ensues on the extent to which the world has become more interdependent. Some observers argue that interdependence was high or even higher than it is today, in the late 19th and early 20th century. In what measure do you believe that interdependence has increased in world affairs?
9. Pick a region of the world. To what extent do you believe that interdependence is an important variable in either making the region more peaceful or more conflict-ridden? Weigh the variable of interdependence against other variables in your analysis, such as the presence of international organizations.
10. If we accept the notion that interdependence and transnationalism are increasingly vital forces in world politics, what does this imply for the effectiveness of the use of military force? Is military force less useful as an instrument of statecraft in such a world, or is this presumption mistaken?
2001
1. To what extent do you believe that transnational actors can influence the state (the regime of a country)? How do they try to exercise such influence? To what extent are transnational actors and issues important in the broader mosaic of world affairs?
2. It is frequently argued that we are living in an era of globalization. Define globalization. What are the most prominent measures or indicators of globalization? Does globalization call into question the dominant theoretical approaches (e.g., realism and neo-realism) to the study of international relations?
3. The ubiquitous assumption that interdependence has risen in world affairs, thus altering its landscape, is not unproblematic. Discuss the evidence and arguments that support that assumption, and then discuss the evidence and arguments that may cast doubt upon it. Overall, in what measure and to what extent do you believe that interdependence has risen in world affairs?
4. It is frequently argued that grand theoretical approaches (e.g., modernization and dependency) are of little use in understanding the "development" process or contemporary socio-economic conditions of the Global South. Drawing upon the experience of a region or country in the developing world which you know well, prepare an essay outlining the extent to which you agree or disagree with this argument.
5. The task at hand is to explain why the Middle East has been war prone, while Western Europe has not been war prone since World War II. One scholar asserts that a fundamental explanation is that Western Europe has become highly interdependent, unlike the Middle East. What is your evaluation of this argument, in light of other possible explanations? To what extent do you believe that interdependence decreases prospects for war (or conflict short of war)? What might be the causal connection?
1999
1. The appropriate mix between the roles of the state and the market is one critical area of controversy surrounding democracy. Some argue that democracy requires a free market economic system. Others argue that democracy requires at least a mixed economy. Write an essay describing your position in regards to this controversy and explaining how economic liberalization is impacting the scope of democracy.
2. The relevance of Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) for developing countries has been highly controversial. Identify the essential components of this package of economic liberalization measures and assess their impacts on any geographical region or country of your choice in which they have been implemented.
3. A major issue in the literature revolves around the impact that transnational actors can have in a world of nation-states. Under what conditions are transnational actors more likely to be able to affect state policies? Cite cases from various issue areas and/or regions of the world to illustrate and support your answer.
4. What is interdependence? How does it differ from interconnectedness? To what extent has interdependence risen in world affairs in the 20th century? What is asymmetrical interdependence? What are its implications? Do you believe that interdependence is a force for peace in world affairs? Under what conditions is it likely to promote peace?
5. There are many different ways in which one can think about world politics and crate a research agenda. How useful are paradigms in this endeavor? Critically examine the processes involved in paradigm creation. Which, if any, paradigm appears to offer the most fruitful research agenda, and why?
1998
1. What, in your view, is the relationship between interdependence and conflict, and between interdependence and power? Illustrate your answer with reference to the readings and by drawing on cases in world affairs.
2. To what extent has the rise of interdependence and transnationalism weakened the state as a unit in world affairs? To what extent does the state-centric model of world affairs remain salient as a fundamental explanatory guide? Draw on the readings and lecture to support your answer.
3. What is a transnational issue? Actor? Problem? Why are transnational issues difficult to ameliorate and solve? Identify one transnational problem and illustrate and buttress your answer through an analysis of it.
4. Assume a negotiation of your choice (political or business) between representatives of a European country (preferably Spain, Germany or France) and a relatively naive and inexperienced negotiator from the United States. Using examples, discuss potential problems that the U.S. negotiator might have, based on his or her cultural values, presuppositions and assumptions, some of which may not be shared by the other negotiator. Your discussion might include: the use of time or space (including nonverbal differences), assumptions about what is valued, approaches to problem solving, attitudes about individual freedom and responsibility, male/female roles, concepts that do not translate easily, and differences in rhetorical styles (including amount of information provided). Discuss U.S. cultural traits, applying what you have learned to a concrete situation.
5. International labor migration from Third World countries through "Guest Worker" programs has played an important role in meeting the labor demand generated by the post-war reconstruction of Europe. Once again, many European countries are experiencing or will experience labor shortages due to their negative population growth. To meet the labor demand, will you recommend similar "Guest Worker" programs to these countries, which they actively pursued in the '50s and '60s? Why and why not? In light of the experiences of European countries in the past, what are the pros and cons of Guest Worker programs?
Back to contents
POLITICAL ECONOMY
2003
1. It is frequently argued that we are living in an era of globalization. Define globalization. What are the most prominent measures or indicators of globalization? There is little consensus regarding the relationship between globalization and democracy. Some scholars contend that globalization increases the prospects for extending and strengthening democracy in the world while others suggest that globalization undermines democracy. Describe and evaluate the relative validity of arguments presented on each side of this debate..
2. During the past decade most countries have adopted neo-liberal, market-oriented economic reforms. Describe these reforms in detail. What explains this convergence in policy reform? Describe the various manifestations of resistance to reform by domestic groups and the forms of state response to opposition.
3. Both modernization and dependency theories have been criticized for the inability to explain socio-economic conditions and the "development" process in the South. Highlight the nature of such criticism. Drawing on the experience of a region or country in the developing world that you know well, elaborate your own argument to support or repudiate the criticism.
4. During the latter half of the twentieth century, international institutions assume greater authority over global economic affairs. Are these institutions beyond the effective management and control of national governments and thus compromise or erode the sovereignty of member nations? Explain.
5. The World Trade Organization (WTO) recently replaced the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Describe the central functions of the WTO and evaluate the relative usefulness of three alternate theoretical approaches toward explaining why this institution was established.
2000
1. Globalization has generated growing opposition from different quarters. Explain the most important issues that globalization opponents are concerned about.
2. Many dispute the claim that globalization has eclipsed the state and contend that the relevance of the state has not declined. Explain the relationships between the state and globalization.
3. The relevance of Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) for developing countries has been highly controversial. Many have, in fact, concluded that SAPs have failed. If you agree, explain why they have failed. If you disagree, explain their success. You can use any geographical region or country of your choice in your analysis.
4. In the literature on political economy of state building, some suggest that respect for human rights and collective rights is a critical step towards resolution and even prevention of ethnic conflicts. According to these scholars, respecting such rights mitigates the adverse impacts of the lack of neutrality on the part of those who control state power. Giving examples, explain why you agree or disagree with such a contention.
5. One scholar defines globalization as a new phase of capitalism which is "more universal, more unchallenged, more pure, and more unadulterated, than ever before." What would be the implications of globalization to democracy if this view represents the essence of globalization?
6. There has been a great deal of disagreement among observers about the nature of globalization's political, economic, and social impacts. Some argue that globalization advances democratization and promotes economic integration among countries. Others argue that it impedes democratization by narrowing its scope and brings about economic and social fragmentation rather than integration within and between countries. Giving examples from the experiences of specific countries, explain your position on this controversial issue.
7. There are claims that globalization signals a new form of imperialism in North-South relations. Supporting your arguments with evidence from a country or a region of your choice, explain why you agree or disagree with this contention.
8. The new global economic system seems to be plagued by periodic crisis in the financial system as evident from the financial upheavals in several East Asian and Latin American countries as well as Russia. What are some of the general factors that have triggered such upheavals? Why have the IMF-proposed remedies been so controversial?
9. The impact of globalization on the state has become a source of considerable disagreement. Some argue that globalization has eclipsed the state. Others argue that the state remains as relevant although the nature of its role may have undergone some changes. Is the state a victim of globalization or is it an agent of globalization?
1999
1. The new global economic system seems to be plagued by crisis in the financial system as evident from the financial upheavals in Mexico, many of the East Asian countries, Russia, Brazil, and several others.
What are the general factors that have triggered or contributed to such crises?
Identify the various remedies for the financial crises proposed recently by the IMF and others and examine the strengths and weaknesses of such remedies.
2. Globalization's economic, political, social, and cultural impacts have already begun to be felt worldwide. Some argue that democracy has also been impacted profoundly by globalization. If you agree with this claim, explain carefully in what ways democracy has been impacted by globalization. If you disagree, explain why you disagree.
3. The impact of globalization on the state has become a source of considerable disagreement. Some argue that globalization has eclipsed the state. Others argue that the state remains as relevant although the nature of its role may have undergone some changes. What are the sources of this disagreement? In your view, has the state been weakened by globalization?
4. The relevance of Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) for developing countries has been highly controversial. Identify the essential components of this package of economic liberalization measures and assess their impacts on any geographical region or country of your choice in which they have been implemented.
5. There are claims that globalization has fundamentally altered development theory. Supporting your position with evidence, explain why you agree or disagree with this contention.
Back to contents
CONFLICT AND COOPERATION
2005
1. "…there is an urgent need for the nations of the world to come together and reach a new consensus - both on the future of collective security and on the changes needed if the United Nations is to play its part", United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, A more secure world: Our shared responsibility. Report of the Secretary-General's High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, December 2004, ix.
Write an essay analyzing the role of international institutions and organizations in providing collective security.
2. Choose two scholars whose works over the past decade has influenced the theoretical development of the study of conflict and cooperation. Compare their impact with the contributions of two scholars during any one Cold War decade.
3. For a region of your choice, explain how states have worked together to avert developments that might have otherwise lead to a decline of or crisis in the quality of regional stability since the end of the Cold War.
4. Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction has emerged as the primary threat to international security. Explain the rise of this threat and evaluate the mechanisms in place to slow, stop, and counter the spread of WMD.
5. In an age of rising transnational threats, does deterrence have a future? Write an essay evaluating the continued utility/disutility of deterrence as part of a national security strategy.
2004
1. In 1993 Kenneth Waltz wrote "As the bipolar era draws to a close, we must ask two questions: What structural changes are in prospect? What effects may they have?" (The Emerging Structure of International Politics, International Security, Vol. 18, No. 2., pp. 44-79).
With the benefit of hindsight, write an essay answering Waltz' questions. Make sure to devote equal consideration to your analysis of structural changes and their effects upon international order.
2. In your opinion, how suitable is the present nuclear nonproliferation regime to cope with the challenges of proliferation in the 21st century? What have been the regime's traditional strengths and weaknesses? Do the nonproliferation tools developed by the international community provide effective barriers against proliferation?
Write an essay comparing the existing regime to alternative approaches including counter-proliferation, pre-emptive, and preventive use of force.
3. Choose three scholars whose work over the past decade has influenced the development of the study of conflict and cooperation. Justify your selection and discuss the contribution each scholar has made in some detail.
4. For a region of your choice, discuss the salient security issues regional actors are concerned with and explain the regional security profile as it has emerged over the past decade. In your opinion, which international relations theory(ies) best capture the regional security environment. Explain your preference(s).
5. The global threat of international terrorism has revived calls for collective security. In your opinion, are these calls misplaced or do they represent an evolution in thinking about the nature of the threat and appropriate responses? For either case, what are the implications for how international security might be organized in the future?
6. "Today's threats are far more diverse and less predictable than those of the past. States hostile to the United States and to our friends and allies have demonstrated their willingness to take high risks to achieve their goals, and are aggressively pursuing WMD and their means of delivery as critical tools in this effort. As a consequence, we require new methods of deterrence. A strong declaratory policy and effective military forces are essential elements of our contemporary deterrent posture, along with the full range of political tools to persuade potential adversaries not to seek or use WMD. The United States will continue to make clear that it reserves the right to respond with overwhelming force-including through resort to all of our options-to the use of WMD against the United States, our forces abroad, and friends and allies." National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction, December 11, 2000.
Please comment on this quote. Your answer should include your evaluation of the Bush Administration's threat assessment, the perceived requirement for new methods of deterrence, and the presumed relationship between diplomacy and force. Conclude your answer offering a perspective on the effectiveness of this strategy.
7. Explain the security strategies of three states over the past decade in a region of your choice. Your answer should include an assessment of the impact of these strategies on the region as a whole and its growing or eroding capacity for security cooperation.
8. Has the preemptive use of force against Iraq strengthened or weakened the case for collective security?
9. Choose a theory relevant to the study of conflict and cooperation and discuss how theoretical debates over the past decade have impacted upon its utility. Explain your evaluation criteria.
10. It is often said that international security has dramatically changed with the end of the Cold War and the events of 9/11. What really has changed? Your answer should include an assessment of structural as well as policy changes.
2003
1. Is it more useful to conceptualize war as a rational or an irrational phenomenon? Please answer with respect to both theory and policymaking.
2. Can legalization promote international cooperation without either the implicit or explicit threat of force behind it?
3. Are some theories of international relations better equipped than others to explain the breakdown of cooperation between states?
4. What must the international community do to stem the spread of weapons of mass destruction?
5. For a region of your choice, explain the role of major regional actors. Please answer with respect to both theory and policymaking.
6. "...it is now possible to stand back and look at the nuclear age as a particular historical epoch with certain defining characteristics of its own. It was the age in which a particular mode of strategic thinking dominated the conduct of international affairs." Philip Windsor, Strategic Thinking: An Introduction and Farewell (Lynne Rienner: London, 2002).
If this is an apt description of the nuclear age, explain what has changed and identify the salient features of the present security environment.
7. Have the events of 9/11 made collective security more or less likely?
2002
1. How, in your opinion, has the field of security studies developed since the end of the Cold War? To answer this question, please choose three scholars whose contributions to the field have decisively shaped the contents and direction of security studies. Explain your choice of scholars, review their work, and assess how and why the field has benefited.
2. Should there still be arms control? Review the major contributions of arms control to international stability during the Cold War, identify the main sources of post-Cold War instability and determine whether arms control is still a useful tool of statecraft. Specifically, your answer must include a discussion of empirical examples in support of your argument.
3. Since 9/11 there has been much debate both within the United States and internationally about the general merit and practical need of acting collectively to combat terrorism. In your opinion, how does this particular debate relate to the broader issue of thinking about security collectively? Have the events of 9/11 and the subsequent debate strengthened or weakened arguments for collective security?
4. The spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) is an international security threat of the first order. What national and international provisions are in place to stem the spread of WMD? How have these provisions evolved and what tasks do they perform? How, in your opinion, do these provisions have to develop, if at all, in order to effectively contain the WMD proliferation threat?
5. For a region of your choice, apply two different theoretical perspectives to account for security developments within the past five to seven years. Explain how each theory characterizes the regional environment and how each theory explains the rise of specific security issues. In the final analysis, which theory explains outcomes better, and why?
6. In December 2001, the Bush Administration announced the U.S. withdrawal from the 1972 ABM Treaty. Though valued by many as the cornerstone of strategic stability, the Administration has argued that the Treaty now poses a hindrance to the development of a new, post-Cold War strategic security framework. Do you agree/disagree with the Administration point of view? Your answer must include an assessment of the role played by the ABM Treaty during the Cold War, an appreciation of the developments in international security that can be seen as challenging the utility of this Treaty, and an assessment of what the foundations of international security might be in the post-ABM Treaty world.
7. Imagine yourself preparing a lecture on "Collective Security" to be delivered to an audience known to be highly skeptical. Drawing upon history and theory, how would you choose to convince your audience of the merit of the "Collective Security" concept?
8. In a global environment in which threats to security are increasingly diverse, does it still make sense to speak of deterrence as a primary pillar of security? Or, is deterrence part of an outdated Col War vocabulary that needs to be set aside? Reviewing the state of security studies, how would you answer this question?
9. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction has become a primary security concern for the international community. Imagine yourself as an advisor to the government of a nuclear aspirant. Your job is to dissuade the country's prime minister from "going nuclear." Drawing upon theory and history, how would you fashion an alternative security strategy?
10. For a region of your choice, discuss an event of lasting significance for the security environment of the region. Explain your choice of event and detail respective implications.
2001
1. "The 'great debates' that have swept through the field of international relations over the decades typically have been posed in terms of the alleged superiority of one approach over another. But the fact that these debates recur so regularly offers proof that no approach can sustain claims to monopoly on truth -- or even on useful insights." John Ruggie, "What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge," International Organization 52, 4, August 1998.
With respect to the field of security studies, what have recent theoretical debates been about? What, in your opinion, are the purposes of recent debates? What is being challenged, what defended? Do we now know more about conflict and cooperation than we did a decade ago?
2. It is generally agreed that the end of the Cold War ushered in major changes in international security. What, a decade later, can we say about these changes? Has our research agenda deepened or just broadened, or both? Is this agenda eclectic or based on organizing principles? What drives agenda setting? Is it policy, theory, or both?
3. The Bush administration believes that arms control is no longer a useful tool to manage security relations between major states. Arms control, as practiced during the Cold War, is now seen to hinder rather than advance the development of a new international security framework. Do you agree with this assessment of Cold War arms control? If yes, how can a new security framework be constructed and what might be its main stabilizing pillars? If no, how can traditional arms control be usefully brought to bear in the new security environment?
4. Is the Collective Security debate of the early 1990s over? Was the revival of collective security ideas simply part of the immediate post-Cold War enthusiasm and optimism? If so, what factors or developments put an end to it? If not, what notions of collective security are still around, and why? In your opinion, should ideas of collective security be kept on our research agendas?
5. For a region of your choice, explain the security environment and identify sources of stability and insecurity. Analyze the problems regional actors are concerned with and how these problems are being managed. Finally, present your views on how changes in the way the region is being studied and in the manner in which policies are being conducted, might improve our understanding of region-specific security requirements.
6. The ABM Treaty has been central to the debate about international security during the Cold War as well as during the decade of post-Cold War security relations. What explains the continued centrality of this treat? Why do some argue for its continued relevance while others insist on the need for its amendment or even call for abandoning this treaty? Using theory and empirical evidence, discuss the diverging perceptions of international security that characterize the ABM Treaty debate.
7. Security Studies is no longer a field dominated by realist and neorealist assumptions about international relations. New theoretical approaches have challenged the very nature of the subject and introduced new perspectives. Identify two new theoretical approaches, discuss the propositions they advance, and describe the implications for security studies if either approach were to develop as the primary theoretical tool for analyzing conflict and cooperation.
8. Is the concept of deterrence still useful for thinking about the major security challenges in the 21st century? If yes, explain the continued utility of the concept, how and where it might be successfully applied, and what conditions might need to prevail in the future for the concept's utility to erode. If no, explain the disultility of the concept and explore the conditions necessary for a potential revival of the concept.
9. Despite the ups and downs of everyday politics, the argument can be made that states have become increasingly interested in acting collectively to tackle threats to international peace and security. Is this a positive development in international relations? In light of collective state action over the past decade, discuss the pros and cons of collective security and estimate the potential for future collective security arrangements.
2000
1. The field of security studies still wrestles with basic questions of war and peace, stability and instability. While debate among scholars can advance the field and generate new ideas, theory-building in international security does not appear to have advanced sufficiently to provide answers around which scholarly consensus can build. What are your thoughts on the subject of scholarly debate in the field, theory-building, and consensus?
2. How must the notion of collective security develop in order to successfully challenge the dominance of realist theories?
3. For most of the Cold War years arms control thinking and policy were closely connected to deterrence strategies. Indeed, it can be argued that they were mutually supportive: deterrence created the need for arms control and arms control was conceived to make deterrence 'safe'. In the current security environment, some argue that deterrence no longer provides answers to security problems and that deployment of strategic defenses should be given serious consideration. If strategic defenses were to be deployed by one or several nations, what might be the role of arms control? How might arms control have to change in order to fit the new security environment? Might arms control have a stabilizing impact or be quite irrelevant?
4. What are the forces that drive proliferation of weapons of mass destruction? How might they be controlled?
5. For a region of your choice, explain the security environment and identify sources of stability and insecurity. Analyze the problems regional actors are concerned with and how these problems are being managed. Finally, present your views on how changes in the way the region is being studied and in the manner in which policies are be conducted, might improve our understanding of region-specific security requirements.
6. What is the state of the security studies field? In your answer please focus on the challenges to traditional security approaches that have developed since the end of the Cold War, as well as the responses to these challenges. Your answer must conclude with a critical evaluation of the nature of security studies ten years after the end of the Cold War.
7. How useful is the historical experience of collective security arrangements? Does the historical experience reflect negatively on the utility of the concept of collective security in imagining the future of conflict and cooperation?
8. During the Cold War nuclear arms control made a distinct contribution to international stability. In a world that is rapidly evolving, what might the role of nuclear arms control be, if any? Your answer should convey those experiences with arms control that are still relevant for today's world as well as new opportunities and constraints for arms control today.
9. Many argue that nuclear proliferation is the number one international security concern. Explain how states have responded to the challenges of proliferation and identify the policy preferences countries have shown.
1999
1. The threat of weapons of mass destruction spreading around the world has led the international community to formal and informal agreements to, at least, slow, if not halt, proliferation. How effective have efforts to create a non-proliferation regime been? How does the regime understand the nature of proliferation? Will the regime be able to successfully contain future proliferation threats or might it need to be supplemented with other, perhaps national, measures?
2. Though deterrence is an age-old concept, it gained specific meaning and relevance during the Cold War. In light of post-Cold war security problems and emerging future security concerns, is the concept of deterrence still relevant? If yes, explain its relevance. If no, explain what has taken its place.
3. The concept of collective security challenges realist understanding of state behavior. How do collective security advocates frame the security problematique? What has been the realists' response? Is there any way in which either approach to security could be "tested" to find out who is "right"?
4. What role does theory serve in advancing the field of security studies? In light of the ongoing debate over what security actually is, explain the nature of this debate and how theory is used.
5. For a region of your choice, explain the post-Cold War security environment and identify sources of stability and insecurity. Analyze the problems regional actors are concerned with and how these problems are being managed. Finally, present your views on how changes in the way the region is being studied and in the manner in which policies are being conducted, might improve our understanding of region-specific security requirements.
6. The end of the Cold War challenged traditional assumptions about security, reviving the appeal of collective security. Has the field of security studies now moved beyond these considerations or has collective security thinking carved out a permanent place in mainstream approaches?
7. Arms Control theory developed in response to the specific circumstances of the U.S. - Soviet strategic relationship. We now need a new arms control debate to develop theoretical and practical approaches to the problems caused by the spread of military technology. What should this debate be about? What theoretical and practical approaches are promising, and why?
8. Half a century of debate about the merits and demerits of nuclear disarmament has substituted for real progress towards the goal of nuclear abolition. What have been the shortcomings of this debate and how will it need to change to achieve measurable impact upon the policies of states?
9. Choose any event since 1990 to illustrate major changes in the nature of security cooperation between states.
Back to contents
COMPARATIVE AND REGIONAL STUDIES
2005
1. Both Rational-Choice and Political-Culture theories are considered prominent approaches in comparative sociopolitical studies. What are the differences and similarities between these two approaches in terms of their intellectual geneses, theoretical assumptions, and major arguments (or hypotheses)? What criticisms has each of these approaches drawn? What comments do you have on the criticisms?
2. New Institutionalism is believed to have succeeded the so-called "Old" Institutionalism in comparative sociopolitical studies. Explain the intellectual genesis, theoretical assumptions and major arguments (or hypotheses) of the New Institutionalism. In what respects is the New Institutionalism similar to and different from the Old Institutionalism? Do you think that the New Institutionalism has helped advance comparative sociopolitical studies? Why or why not?
3. The following four analytical themes have been frequently tackled in comparative sociopolitical studies. Select one of them, and explain and comment on major theoretical approaches to and findings about it. Then, discuss the future research agenda for this theme.
a. Sociopolitical change and revolution
b. Political movements and participation
c. Development and modernization
4. Since the beginning of the "third wave of democratization in the late twentieth century," which was systematically analyzed by Samuel Huntington, more and more countries in various regions have joined this "wave." Compare democratization processes in two countries, each of which must be in one geographic region (e.g., Africa, East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, Eastern Europe, or Latin America). Your comparison should focus on the sociopolitical causes, major players, and trajectories of democratization within these countries.
5. Corporatism as a theoretical approach has been commonly used by scholars in comparative studies to study the role of the government in socioeconomic development in various countries. Comment on the application of this approach to two countries, each of which must be in one geographic region (e.g., East Asia, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, Latin America, or North America). Your comments should focus on analytical hypotheses, empirical findings, and theoretical implications.
2004
Instructions: Answer three (3) of the following five questions: at least one question from each of the two parts (Parts I and II). Be sure to demonstrate knowledge of relevant scholarly literature, develop your own arguments, and provide evidence to support your positions. Please avoid excessive overlap from one response to the next.
Part I: Theoretical Perspective
1. Both Rational-Choice and Political-Culture theories are considered prominent approaches in comparative sociopolitical studies. What are the differences and similarities between these two approaches in terms of their intellectual geneses, theoretical assumptions, and major arguments (or hypotheses)? What criticisms has each of these approaches drawn? What comments do you have on the criticisms?
2. New Institutionalism is believed to have succeeded the so-called "Old" Institutionalism in comparative sociopolitical studies. Explain the intellectual genesis, theoretical assumptions and major arguments (or hypotheses) of the New Institutionalism. In what respects is the New Institutionalism similar to and different from the Old Institutionalism? Do you think that the New Institutionalism has helped advance comparative sociopolitical studies? Why or why not?
Part II: Thematic and Regional Perspectives
1. The following four analytical themes have been frequently tackled in comparative sociopolitical studies. Select one of them, and explain and comment on major theoretical approaches to and findings about it. Then, discuss the future research agenda for this theme.
Democracy and democratization
Sociopolitical change and revolution
Political movements and participation
Development and modernization
2. Corporatism as a theoretical approach has been commonly used by scholars in comparative studies to study the role of the government in socioeconomic development in various countries. Comment on the application of this approach to two countries, each of which must be in one geographic region (e.g., East Asia, Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, Latin America, or North America). Your comments should focus on analytical hypotheses, empirical findings, and theoretical implications.
3. Both the former USSR (now Russia) and China introduced socioeconomic reforms during the 1980s. Describe major differences and similarities between the two countries in their reform strategies and results. Then, explain sociopolitical factors causing such differences and similarities. Finally, predict the future of the reforms in each country.
Back to contents
