These are last year's questions. DO NOT USE THEM!!! -- To find the correct Study questions go to

http://faculty.washington.edu/majeski/321.2000/finalstudyqs.20.html

POLS 321 Final Exam Study Questions -- The final exam on March 15 will consist of 4 of the following 8 questions. You will be required to answer 3 of the 4 selected questions.

1. Compare and contrast the ability of the two models of decision-making (rational choice, and bureaucratic/governmental politics) to explain the U.S. decisions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. That is, what are the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two models and which one provides the best explanation of U.S. decision-making in this crisis?

2. The "hawks" and "doves" agreed on all the facts in the Cuban Missile Crisis situation. Yet, they argued for quite different solutions to the problem. How did they interpret the facts differently and what do you think explains their different interpretations?

3. Develop an articulate, detailed response that can persuade the President and other key administrations that the proposals put forward by either A). Robert Gates (Contra policy document no. 15) or B). Bud McFarlane (Iran policy document no. 60) is wrong and will produce bad consequences and that your proposal (indicating what the U.S. should accomplish and why and by what means) will provide a better solution to the problems at hand.

4. Containment, particularly as articulated in NSC-68, was the framework for U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War. By most accounts containment was a highly successful strategy and its consistent application by a series of Cold War Presidents led to a U.S. "victory" in 1989. Now that the "enemy" (Soviet Union) is gone, how appropriate is the general policy of containment in the post-cold war era? Should the U.S. develop a new policy or are aspects of containment still appropriate?

5. Why did the Reagan administration get into an arms for hostages policy with Iran? Use your skills about accounting for policymaking to answer this. Also, based upon your understanding of policymaking, do you think it plausible that some high level policymakers did not know that the arms for hostages was being implemented or that the two policies (Iran and Contra) were connected by the diversion of funds?

6. How do you account for the Bush Administration decision to use massive force in the Gulf War in 1990-1991? What combination of rationales appeared to be must persuasive and why? Was it the last war of the Cold War or the first war of the Post-Cold War? Explain.

7. Describe the four futures. What are the implications of each future if it were to hold for US foreign policy? That is how would US foreign policy change and/or remain constant?

8. President Clinton's administration is the first that has fallen completely in the Post-Cold War era. What aspects of his policy appear to be a continuation of classic cold war U.S. foreign policy? What aspects appear to be new and could be referred to as Post-Cold War policy? Use ideas and arguments from the Ikenberry, Danner, and Mandelbaum articles to supplement your argument.