Comprehensive
Exam in International Relations (August 2003)
This exam is a closed-book exam
(i.e., no notes/books/computer files) that is designed to test your knowledge
of and ability to synthesize the complete field of international relations. The best answers will respond directly to
the question chosen and demonstrate a broad understanding of the literature on
and processes of IR. They will show the
commonalities across and gaps between the different theoretical approaches, and
the evolution of debates in and across those approaches. They will deploy meaningful historical
evidence in support of their arguments.
Theoretical or empirical overlap between your answers will diminish the
quality of your exam. (Note as well
that citing UVa faculty, especially gratuitously, will not help your grade.)
"Majors" should answer one
question from each of the three parts of the exam. "Minors" should answer one
question from Part I, and one question from either Part II or
Part III. Majors have six hours, and
minors have four hours. You have the
choice to either type your exam, or handwrite it. If you choose the latter, make a clear photocopy and give us the
original at the end of the allotted time.
Then type up the exam word-for-word from the handwritten version
(although you can correct spelling and small grammatical mistakes) and hand in
the typed version within twenty-four hours.
Include a signed pledge that the typed version has the same words as the
handwritten version.
1. Terms such as
'unipolar', ‘multipolar’, ‘hegemonic’, and 'imperial', etc., have been used to
describe the contemporary international system. How do YOU describe the
structure and analyze the functioning of the contemporary international
system?"
2. "The US-Iraq war
demonstrates conclusively the irrelevance of international law and institutions
in world politics. Thucydides' verdict
- that the strong do what they can and the weak what they must remains valid
2500 years (or so) later." Is this really so?
3. Scholars who make
arguments about the causal importance of domestic institutions (to IR) and
international institutions are often both labeled "liberals." Does it make sense to consider both of these
groups from the same theoretical camp?
What do they share? How do they
differ? Which of the two offers more leverage in understanding international
politics?
4.
Contemporary International relations theory is frequently characterized as a
debate between realist, liberal, and constructivist schools of thought. Explain
why this debate obscures rather than clarifies international politics.
Part II: Applications to Issues
1. "World market
forces have removed states' independent capacity for economic and social policy
making. The result will be a gradual
homogenization of wages and production regimes as markets iron out differences
across countries." Discuss, using at least two policy areas.
2.
"Collective-security institutions such as the UN and OSCE and global
economic institutions such as the WTO provide the only reliable means for
ensuring cooperation in the post-Cold War world." Discuss this statement with reference to the
workings of at least two institutions (one security, one economic) after 1990.
3. Norms in international
politics, some claim, are increasingly influential. Compare and contrast the
approach to norms of two major thinkers and illustrate their approach to the
study of at least two of the following:
human rights, just war, the resolution of territorial disputes, and acts
of terror.
4.
Policymakers assert that 9-ll changed everything in international relations and
that conflict is no longer between nation states. How would different theories or schools of thought (at least two)
evaluate this claim and which is most helpful? Please discuss with reference to
two specific conflicts or types of conflict.
Part III: Regional and Area Foreign
Policies
1. "All significant
outcomes in the bilateral American-Russian relationship since the
disintegration of the USSR can be sufficiently explained by the discrepancy in
power, across virtually all dimensions, between the two countries."
Discuss with special attention to Russian foreign policy.
2. Pick ONE of the following
regions, and assess the relative persuasiveness of three different
labels for capturing its future role in international politics:
internationalism, nationalism, dependency.
a) Latin America
b) Europe
c) Africa
d) East
Asia
e) Middle
East
f) South
Asia
3.“The key to understanding Chinese
foreign policy, and the future of Asia, is 7% annual economic growth.“ Do you
agree?
4. Charles
Kupchan argues that Europe will become the next great superpower and challenger
to the United States. Do you agree?
5. "The Bush administration has created a peculiarly one
sided American hegemony that rests only on the demonstrated threat to the OECD
that the US is willing to pursue unilateral action, and to the non-OECD that it
might be the object of that unilateral action.
This kind of hegemony cannot last long." Comment, paying careful
attention to the premises of the statement.
6. Are the “new”
transnational threats really just a manifestation of time worn factors and old
problems? Agree or disagree with respect to one of the following regions:
a)
Latin America
b) Europe
c) Africa
d) East
Asia
e) Middle
East
f) South
Asia