1 MASARYK UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND EUROPEAN STUDIES Fall 2009 Final Exam Review Sheet for United States Foreign Policy Date of Exam: Thursday, January 7th , 2010, 8-9:30 am Please bring blank sheets of paper for your essays Directions for Essays: Several of the essay questions below will appear on the Final Exam. You will be asked to answer TWO OR THREE of them in a longer essay of several pages. Be sure to address each aspect of the question. 1. Read Samuel P. Huntington's essay "The Clash of Civilizations" (Foreign Affairs. 1993. Vol. 72. pp. 22) and discuss the following: What assumptions underpin Huntington's article? How does the "clash of civilizations" manifest itself today? And, how is conflict likely changed in Huntington's view? Moreover, after the events of 9/11, Huntington argued that Muslim nations experienced, "reinvigorated civilizational identity" as a result of the Al Qaeda movement and the declaration of war by Osama Bin Laden on the West. The West, Huntington argues, has regained, "its sense of common identity in defending itself." What are the implications for Huntington's point of view for US Foreign Policy? Are Huntington's assertions correct? What are the challenges to this view? 2. The United States is no longer the hegemon it was at the end of WWII. However, the US remains a "premier power" nonetheless. Document the progressive decline of US power in the economic arena ­ from its postwar height and subsequent challenges to that supremacy. What new challenges have emerged for the United States and how has it responded? Is US primacy an accurate reflection of the US role in the world today? How do challenges to the hegemon affect international cooperation? What are likely future directions for US Foreign Policy as a result of your answers to these questions? 3. "The concern most often voiced these days is that the United States is too passive rather than too aggressive. There may well be more people in the world who now fear American weakness than who worry about American imperialism. Many Americans themselves welcome their country's diminished profile on the international stage, and see greater costs than benefits in continuing to try to be number one." Do you agree or disagree with this statement made by John Lewis Gaddis in his essay, "On Moral Equivalency and the Cold War, "Ethics and International Affairs, Vol. 10, 1996. Gaddis addresses the use of the atomic bomb in World War II and deterrence theory during the Cold War but his thoughts are just as relevant to today's world. What are the implications of Gaddis' "US First" approach to foreign policy today? Are there indeed such things as `good' and `evil' when viewing US foreign policy? See the URL at (http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/gaddis.htm) for links to the article. 2 4. The primary focus of the course has been the values that help shape American foreign policy. We have, however, discussed institutional changes (such as representative liberal democracy and the rise of transnational conflicts) that have challenged the traditional embodiments of US Foreign Policy values as if they themselves had not changed dramatically over the years. However, the United States has undergone tremendous changes since 1945. Did the hegemonic status of the United States change either its institutions or values? In what specific ways? Where has the left US Foreign Policy as a result of these specific changes? 5. US Foreign policy is long predicated on the rivalry and struggle between isolationism versus internationalism, sprinkled with elements of exceptionalism and moralism. What is isolationism? Why has America has always had a long tradition of isolationism? This tension is found even today within the realm of international realism - which often guides US Foreign Policy. Why is there tension between these two traditions? How is this tension reflected in the US Congress and among American public opinion? How does this tension reflect itself in the tenets of moralism and exceptionalism common to US Foreign Policy? 6. Why has a shift occurred from Congressional to Presidential Preeminence in War Powers? Describe post-WPR Presidential Behavior. How has this behavior affected our understanding of crises, governance, & political leadership? How have changes in Congressional-Presidential relations affected the conduct of USFP?