UW JSIS 201 Final Essay prompts
Unlock all answers in this set
Unlock answersquestion
In what ways and why was 1979 such a watershed year? Or was it? Explain.
answer
This question largely deals with Christian Caryl's book Strange Rebels and the four narratives told within, so using each of the narratives and interlinking them is paramount. Many of the events of 1979 served to shape the modern world we currently live in, with many reverberations still being felt today (current situation in the Middle East; China as a superpower). We can interpret most of the events in terms of power and legitimacy, many of which served to upset what many considered the indomitable Western order of the time. 1. The West: the rise of neoliberalism ; New trend of decreasing government intervention in the government especially in the US and UK. ; Margaret Thatcher elected as UK Prime Minister (Thatcherism), parallel to Ronald Reagan. ; the rise of corporation (globalization?); Marxists would explain that the western corporation spread to other country help to shape the wester domination 2. The Middle East: The Iranian Revolution ; the backlash against Westernization (The White Revolution by the Shah) ; the establishment of of the Islamic Republic of Iran by Khomeini ; a more religious and anti western regime 3. East Asia: Deng Xiaopeng took power ; after the death of Mao ; economic reform led to China's rapid economic growth; transformed China
question
"The problem with creating world orders is that they are usually established at the end of a major war, and reflect the balance of power at that time. They cannot predict future developments, and are not very adaptable. Therefore, world orders seldom last. Indeed, attempting to create a lasting world order is a fool's errand." Critically analyze this statement based on course materials. Indicate your personal view on this quotation, and defend your views both logically and empirically.
answer
World order can be seen as the the political, economic, and social arrangements of the world that influence interaction between countries and ensure global stability. The statement is accurate since the world order change depend on power balances. - World order is usually established by the powerful states, and power in the international system never last. Once power balance shifts, world order change as well. > Power is zero sum, it is relative in the the international system. > Differential growth rate cause power transition, rising power challenges hegemonies (WWI: Britain was more developed than Germany) - History has demonstrated over and over that world order changes > Chinese domination of the world (Tributary system demonstrates the Chinese superiority as the world order, eventually collapse after almost 2000 years) > Great Britain domination (the empire which the sun never sets); eventually had to appease and allow the US' independence - On the other hand, liberals argue that people have the ability to learn and progress in human society is possible. If liberalism spread, then democratic peace will be established and world order will last for the first time. > Democratic peace (caution, respect, interest) > collective security/ consensus
question
"Western hegemony is neither a product of nature nor is it eternal. On the contrary, at some point it will come to an end." (Martin Jacques, When China Rules the World, p.45) Do you agree or disagree with this claim? Why? In what ways might the end of western hegemony be a good thing, and in what ways might be a bad thing? Explain.
answer
Western hegemony is simply a temporary phase of the international system and it will eventually come to an end due to the inevitability of power transition. The end of western hegemony can be a good thing in terms of allowing equality in the international system. On the other hand, the end of western hegemony may lead to instability in the international system. - The inevitability of power transition > Gilpins: "The Theory of Hegemony War" demonstrate differential growth rate of power in the international system. > The history has demonstrated hegemony never last (China-tributary system, the empire on which the sun never sets- from the Spanish Empire to Great Britain) - The end of western hegemony can be good thing since it can potential allow equality in the international system rather than the domination of the west. > the west has been promoting its ideals and regulations through its domination; and developing country often have no chance to develop on the same level. (colonization history, exploiting resource and labor, protectionism, pollution and human rights regulation restrict their development) - The end of western hegemony can be a bad thing since it may lead to the instability of the international system. > Unipolarity creates more stability in the international system than that of multipolarity (Gaddis' systems theory) > Conflicts almost always create between a rising power and existing power in the international system (WWII)
question
Critically evaluate the last paragraph of a book on World order by Mark Mazower: "In the ongoing atomization of society, citizens and classes have both vanished as forces for change and given way to a world of individuals, who come together as consumers of goods or information, and who trust the internet more than they do their political representatives or the experts they watch on television. Governing institutions today have lost sight of the of the principle of politics rooted in the collective values of a res publica , even as they continue to defend the "civilization of capital." As for the rituals of international life, these are now well established. The world's heads of state flock annually to the United Nations General Assembly. There are discussions of reform and grandiose declarations of global targets, which mostly go unmet. Politicians, journalists, bankers and businessmen make their pilgrimage to the heavily guarded Alpine precinct of Davos, seeking to confirm through this triumph of corporate sponsorship that a global ruling elite exists and they belong to it. Our representatives continue to hand over power to experts and self-interested regulators in the name of efficient global governance while a skeptical and alienated public looks on. The idea of governing the world is becoming yesterday's dream."
answer
The excerpt from a book on World order by Mark Mazower convey the challenges that international system is becoming increasingly significant and threateningp. These challenges include globalization, power unbalance/inequality between people and governments, the disconnection between ideology and reality, as well as the international system being run by powerful nations and corporation. - globalization creates unprecedented challenges > technology innovation, spread of ideas and knowledge, allow people to see the inequality in the international system that were not used to be perceived > people challenge the existing power when they sees the injustice of the system - Inequality is one of the most significant issue that is only getting more severe, and it challenges the world order > the gap between the rich and poor within countries create instability > the gap between different countries is not lesser either (the powerful countries dominating the world); the gap create hostility and instability in the international system - Disconnection between ideology and and reality > human rights issues; effectiveness of foreign aid? powerful countries effort to change the situation? > environmental issues; tragedy of the commons
question
Again from Mazower (p. 395), critically comment: [Speaking about responsibility to protect] "Why Gadhafi and not Tibet? Or Gaza or Bahrain? Supporters (of R2P) say a little intervention is better than none. But that may be quite wrong, and for reasons that go beyond the obvious reproach of double standards. The main point is that the way leaders treat their people is not the only problem that counts in international affairs. A world in which violations of human rights trump the sanctity of borders may turn out to produce more wars, more massacres, and more instability. It may also be less law abiding. If the history of the past century shows anything, it is that clear legal norms, the empowering of states, and the securing of international stability more generally also serve the cause of human welfare."
answer
Responsibility to protect is the international security and human rights norm to address the failure to prevent and stop genocides, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. A state forfeits their sovereignty when they fail to protect their population against human rights violations. Intervention in foreign affairs is fundamental problematic; not only because the standard for intervention is often ambiguous, but also interventions often cause conflicts and warfare. - double standard in foreign intervention > not in Rwanda but in Iraq - problems with interventions regarding human rights violation > the inefficiency of human rights activists and approaches (treaty signing, naming and shaming, legal accountability ICC ) > human rights violation are difficult to solve (spoilers, perverse-equilibrium trap) - Intervene with state sovereignty can cause serious conflicts - What constitute human rights? > western liberalism can be viewed as human rights imperialism, it is not a universal principles
question
Was there a new world order established in 1991? Why or why not? How is the situation today systematically different than the situation in 1991? Or is it systematically different? Explain.
answer
A new world order was established in 1991 resulted from the change of power distribution in the international system. However, many would argue that the situation today is systematically different than the situation in 1991 since the balance of power shift constantly in the international system. - New world order established as the result of the end of the Cold War > power distribution changes from bipolarity to unipolarity > US domination (third wave of democratization) > Regionalism (EU) > Fukuyama - The actual practice of global governance in the sense of new collective efforts to address worldwide problems that go beyond the capacity of individual nation-states to solve > establishment of the responsibility to protect (the Gulf War -- collective effort) > establishment of international organizations (WTO, ICC) - The situation today is already systemically different from that what was established at 1991. The balance of power change constantly in the international system, and there is many rising challenges to what was established. > Rising challenges to the western/US hegemony (Huntington's The clash of civilization) > Rising Asia (rapid economic growth in Asia prove that Asian values are no lesser than Western value, as well as the the effectiveness of Asian model of development)
question
Global Trends 2030 identifies four megatrends over the next two decades (individual empowerment, diffusion of power, demographic patterns, and food, water, and energy nexus) and seven game-changers (crisis prone global economy, governance gap, potential for increased conflict, wider scope of regional instability, impact of new technologies, and the role of the United States). Thinking about the world in 2030, which megatrend do you think will be the single most important? Why? Which game-changer do you think will be the single most important? Why?
answer
food, water, and energy nexus > environmental issues potential for increased conflict > clash of the civilization
question
In 1941, Henry Luce (who owned Time Magazine and other media properties) wrote an editorial arguing that the century going forward would be "the American Century." In what ways was the period from 1941 to 2016 the American Century, and what ways was it not? On balance, would you agree that it still is the American Century?
answer
- Yes > America's determination to spread liberal democracy throughout the world in the Cold War as well as during the War on Terror > US economic domination following the WWII and remaining until today > Key player in international organizations (UN, NATO) > intellectual capitals Today is still American Century but may there are increasing challenges to the domination
question
Consider the relationship between global collective action problems and global institutions over the period from 1950 to 2000. Which major collective action problems have global institutions dealt with rather well, and which have they failed to deal with very well? What explains the results you identify. [Be sure to think about several different collective problems, and develop criteria to assess whether the collective action problems are dealt with well or not.]
answer
- well: free trade, WTO > the spread of liberal ideals; free trade > US hegemony > corporates interest - well 2: collective security > the Gulf War - not well: environmental issues > tragedy of the commons > nations behave on their best of interests > developing countries vs advanced countries; what's fair?!
question
Major powers attempted to create new world orders in 1919, 1945, and perhaps in 1991. Why did those orders breakdown so quickly? Was there a different pattern to their breakdowns? Should we draw common lessons from their breakdowns or is each case different? Explain.
answer
- World orders breakdown as the result from changes in the balance of power. -1919 > WWI ended > Treaty of Versailles - unfair treatment of Germany pushed the rise of Hitler > Appeased Hitler and allowed him to take over the Sudetenland and the Rhineland > League of Nations > Lack of enforcement, US and major powers not a part of it - 1945 > End of the World War II, people started to built new world order after WWII. > To build new world order, the United Nations Charter becomes effective > United Nations > Conflicts between US and USSR (Western countries vs. Eastern) - 1991 - shift, hasn't declined > Soviet Union dissolved, Western ideals "prevailed" at the end of the Cold War. First Gulf War. > US-focused world order > US triumphalism (which US thought was universal and right) > Failure of the prevention of nuclear-proliferation - US is so involved and has a such big monopoly - if something goes down, WO might come to an end > Common lessons: Lack of the support from the global community; Lack of legitimacy - Different lessons 1919 - LN lacked enforcement power 1945 - UN suffered from conflicts between its two most powerful members 1991 - Non-Western countries did not see US as legitimate
question
Is terrorism as experienced since 2001 an unprecedented challenge for global order? Justify your answer.
answer
Main argument: YES. Terrorism today is a newer challenge than ever seen before. Terrorism is meant to instill terror in ordinary people, who in turn demand changes in their own government; causes instability (hurts one of the 4 main elements of world order). Terrorism as a weapon to incite fear has become more prominent, beyond islamist terrorist groups - Point 1: Media is adding to the terror via horrific videos and also because a lot of attention focused on terrorism - Point 2: Deaths has increased due to terrorism - Point 3: Members are more trained and recruited more private citizens - Point 4: Nonstate actors getting more powerful - Point 5: International level more of a threat
question
This course argued that core elements of world order are predictability, stability, legitimacy and enforcement. Which of these elements was most problematic in 1919, 1945, 1991, and today? Why?
answer
Enforcement is often the most problematic element of world order.
question
How is it determined and who determines whether the world order is predictable, stable, legitimate and enforced? Why does it matter, and do the answers to these questions feedback on world order itself?
answer
- The first step to determining a new world order comes after a major global event(i.e. WWI, WWII, the fall of communism) Most "policies" in a new world aim to prevent another event like the one it spawns from - Who determines whether the world order is predictable, stable, legitimate, and enforced? -> Major states who are usually winners of the major global events (i.e., Western European countries and US after WWI and WWII) - Legitimacy of a world order is often determined by the nation states at the top of the hierarchy - the most powerful. However...when people do not think the dominant power is legitimate, how does this challenge manifest? - It matters because usually the world is more stable, and thus more developing, under an hegemonic, unipolar world order. - Does the description of a world order drive the actual power hierarchy? what is the feedback loop...self-fulfilling prophecy? Or, is the idea of a world order just a way to describe power dynamics at one point in time, that will change almost as soon as it is determined?
question
Kurlantzick puts forward a series of measures to reverse the retreat of democracy. Are they wishful thinking, or can they be made to work? What in your opinion are the most likely reasons why the retreat of democracy may be reversed and what are the biggest obstacles that need to be overcome? Explain.
answer
- Manage expectation > Russia for example as a democracy failure due to the unrealistic expectation - Prevent stagnant > keep promoting democracy through policies like the containment and appeasement > Truman doctrine, Marshall plan Keep the middle class on board > through economic methods > promise more economic opportunities
question
Consider the 6 themes that Guha presents in the introduction to his book as common characteristics of all the makers of modern Asia. If those 6 themes were dominant in all countries, how would the world order today be different? Explain.
answer
1. anticolonial revolution 2. nationalist consolidation 3. choice of political system adopted after independence 4. economic strategy 5. foreign policy 6. attitude of the postcolonial state and its leaders to traditional beliefs and customary practices
