Course Assignments

Objective: Publication of an "op-ed" in a major newspaper is considered an example of professional success, and perhaps even a professional requirement, in many fields. Therefore it is an important skill to master early in one's career. A number of incoming students will not be familiar with this writing format. For more information on writing an op-ed please consult the following websites:

DeWitt Wallace Center op-ed resource at Duke - A center at Duke dedicated purely to the study op-eds. Click here to find examples of op-eds and to find information on writing effective op-eds. Make sure you read Thomas Friedman's article listed in the examples section of this website.

The objectives of this assignment are three-fold: (1) to introduce students to this important writing style, (2) to give students the opportunity to practice a written assignment before official evaluation of the student's written work commences, and (3) to allow the instructors to become acquainted with students' interests and writing styles.

Assignment: Write a 750-word maximum "op-ed"-style piece on the international affairs topic of your choice. Technical requirements for the assignment as well as standards for evaluation are provided below.

Technical Requirements: As with all written assignments for this course, please include your name, course number, name of your instructor, time of your assigned section, and the date. Written assignments should be single-sided, double-spaced with one-inch margins on all sides of each sheet. They should be stapled, not paper-clipped. Since this assignment is to produce an op-ed piece which could be submitted "as-is" to a major newspaper, it should not include footnotes, endnotes or a bibliography.

Evaluation: This assignment is a course-requirement but will not be given a letter grade. Students are encouraged to produce a high-quality written product, however, as the first graded assignment for the course will be evaluated by the same standards. The following criteria will be used to determine the overall success of the op-ed:

1. Technical: Does the op-ed satisfy the requirements as set-out by the instructor(s)? (ie., does it fit within the length requirement, follow the required format, and was it submitted on time?)

2. Content: Does the piece clearly define the issue the author seeks to address? Does the author muster relevant facts to support her/his argument? Does the author acknowledge pertinent counter-arguments?

4. Over-all: Does the piece identify a clear perspective, outline a convincing argument, and suggest clear policy recommendations? Is the argument persuasive?

Choose one of the six questions below and write an essay of no more than 1200 words (5 pages). Please make sure that your essay has a focused argument, cites readings for support, considers alternative explanations and counterarguments, and answers every part of the question. Your essay must be handed in Monday, October 16^th at 2:10 pm in Altschul Auditorium (before the lecture begins). All late papers will be penalized. Your essay must

comply with standard formatting rules (1-inch margins, 12 point font, double-spaced text)
cite readings appropriately, e.g., (p.65 Friedman 1999)
state the day and time of your 6804 section
state the name of your Cordier Fellow

1) What do realist and liberal theories of international relations imply for U.S. foreign policy towards China? Which set of prescriptions would YOU rely on and why?

2) Are the most important causes of war within states or outside them? Illustrate your argument with examples of at least two twentieth century conflicts.

3) Is realist political theory distorted by selective emphasis on gender-linked perspectives? Can the same be said of liberal approaches to international relations? What empirical phenomena does Tickner's feminist perspective explain that cannot be understood within a conventional (i.e. realist or liberal) theoretical framework?

4) Discuss why you think the world would be more or less safe if two countries of your choice were to develop nuclear weapons.

6) Fareed Zakaria considers liberal autocracies as less dangerous to both their neighbors and their own citizens than illiberal democracies. Do you agree with this assessment or not? Make sure to address possible counterarguments to your position and why you find them unconvincing

Choose one of the six questions below and write an essay of no more than (5 pages). Please make sure that your essay has a focused argument, cites readings for support, considers alternative explanations and counterarguments, and answers every part of the question. Your essay must be handed in Monday, November 13th at 2:10 pm in Altschul Auditorium (before the lecture begins). All late papers will be penalized. Your essay must

1. Is war still necessary for state formation? Explain your answer with reference to at least two cases.

2. "The balance of power between the state and other elements of society has been shifting for the past quarter-century. The rise of fluid capital markets, information technology, global media, the end of communism, the inefficiencies of government regulation all point in the same direction against the autonomy and power of the state." (The Economist, Special Issue 1999)

A number of political economists have argued that globalization has undermined the strength, autonomy, and capacity of the state. What developmental role, if any, can or should the state play in the current context of globalization and financial liberalization?

3. Is seeking further trade and financial liberalization abroad in the interests of the United States and/or the global economy?

4. Is globalization resulting in the convergence of domestic political institutions? What are the factors that might prevent or slow down convergence, and which of them are the most salient in your view?

5. Does third world growth hurt first world prosperity? Present the arguments for both sides in the debate. Which argument do you find more convincing and why?

6. Should labor and environmental standards be included in multilateral trade agreements? What are some alternative ways of promoting environmental and labor standards abroad, and would these alternatives be more effective in your view?

Two three-member teams will constitute each debate. The instructor will select each team's participants. Debate questions will be distributed one week in advance of the debate. Each team will know the question to be debated, but their particular stance as well as presentation order will be determined with a coin toss immediately preceding the debate. Each debate will last a total of 30 minutes. Time limits will be strictly observed. The structure of the debate is as follows:

Each team will receive a group grade. Grades will be distributed according to the following criteria:

Overall, teams will be graded not only on the content of their presentations but also on the clarity and persuasiveness of their presentations. In presenting evidence and in making your arguments cite readings and authors for support.

Clearly, one of the most important parts of this exercise is working well as a group. Successful teams will adopt a division of labor that plays to their strengths. The first debater of each group will have ample time to prepare a well thought out presentation. The second debater, and especially the third, will have to think on their feet to refute and respond to the opposition's arguments, claims, and evidence on short notice. The division of labor you adopt will also play an instrumental role in how effectively you prepare for the debate. Remember that most of the real work will take place prior to the debate while you are researching, holding mock debates amongst the members of your own group, and writing responses. Careful preparation is essential to effective presentation.

2) Should economic sanctions be employed to bring human rights violators into line?

3) Are states and state policy primarily responsible for the formation of national identity?

6) Will a ‘clash of civilizations’ be the defining characteristic of the post-cold war era?

7) Has the international human rights network successfully challenged conceptions of sovereignty?