Political Science 407                        Mercer/International security
First exam                              February 12, 2003

Instructions: Write clearly. Quantity doesn't mean quality. Think before you write. Budget your time. The short answers are worth a total of 10 points, the essay questions are worth 15 points each. The exam totals to 40 points. You have eighty minutes. Good luck.

PART I
Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Spend no more than five minutes on each question. Each question is worth only two points.

1. What are the effects of offense dominance on peacetime stability?

2.What is Waltz's point in discussing the stag-hunt story? How is it relevant to international politics?

3. What does it mean to say that people are more theory than data driven? What's the significance for understanding international politics?

4. List and explain the three parts to a credible threat. List two tactics that help make a threat credible.

5. Is the U.S. Army interested in conducting OOTW? Why might it matter?

6. According to Luttwak ("Give War a Chance"), what is the problem with disinterested interventions?

7. Would Stanley Milgram ("Obedience") be more likely to make a situational or dispositional explanation for My Lai? Why? Give one alternative explanation for My Lai.



PART II.
Essay Questions. Answer TWO questions from the three below. Be sure to refer to class readings when appropriate. Answer two questions. Each question is worth 15 points.

1. Kenneth Waltz posed the following question: "Should the states that are already good (that is, democratic) seek ways of making other states better, and thus make it possible for all men (and women) to enjoy the pleasures of peace?"
      First, what is the assumption behind this statement? Second, how would Waltz answer his own question? Third, critique his answer.

2. Provide an explanation of the genocide in Rwanda that draws on the international, state, and individual levels of analysis.

3. Which is easier, deterrence or compellence? Define the concepts and use current events to illustrate your answer.

Political Science 407                        Mercer/International security
Final exam                              March 18, 2003


Instructions: Write clearly. Quantity doesn't mean quality. Think before you write. Budget your time. Be careful not to use the same arguments or the same evidence for different questions. The short answers are worth a total of 10 points, the essay questions are worth 10 points each. The exam totals to 40 points. You have 110 minutes. Good luck.

PART I

Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Spend no more than five minutes on each question. Each question is worth only two points.


1. To what does "dual use" refer? In what context is it important?

2. What are three limitations of intelligence.

3. What are two criticisms of the Nuclear Posture Review found in the readings?

4. Robert Jervis argues that "Statesmen's beliefs about nuclear weapons create, rather than merely describe, the world they live in." What does he mean by this? Give some examples.

5. What is the stability-instability paradox? Give examples from India and Pakistan.

6. Why are CBW effective on the battlefield even when they are not used? Be specific.

7. Define national security as we did in class. What are two implications of this definition?


PART II.

Essay Questions. Answer TWO questions from the three below. Refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 10 points.

ESSAY QUESTIONS

8. In a remarkable coincidence, both Denmark and North Korea tested nuclear weapons this morning. Is this development something to be concerned about? What are the competing arguments for and against the slow, managed spread of nuclear weapons?

9. General Jack D. Ripper famously said: "An incredible threat cannot deter. And a threat to commit suicide, except under the most extreme conditions, will always be incredible. The President needs options. And suicide is not an option." Do you agree or disagree? To address this question, put the quotation in the context of the debate between MAD and NUTs, explain the competing arguments, and explain why you view one as better than the other.     

10. Identify two competing explanations for the causes of terrorism. Suggest two appropriate solutions given those causes. Be sure to draw from appropriate course readings.




PART III: Question Eleven is Required (ten points)

11. President Bush recently said: "Mercer's polisci 407 course is caught in a time-warp. The terrorist attacks on 9/11 changed everything. Containment and deterrence have become irrelevant."
      First, should Mercer revise his course to focus primarily on the individual level of analysis, and neglect the second and third images, in order to better address the terrorist threat? Why?
Second, do you agree with President Bush that deterrence is dead and the key to solving the terrorist threat can be found in what Schelling would call ‘brute force'? Be sure to address, either to endorse or rebut, alternative ways of addressing terrorism. Rely on both current events, lectures, and course readings.

Political Science 407, first exam                  Mercer/International conflict, 2/11/04

Instructions: Write clearly. Quantity doesn't mean quality. Think before you write. Budget your time. The short answers are worth a total of 20 points, the essay questions are worth a total of 20 points. The exam totals to 40 points. You have eighty minutes. Good luck.

PART I
Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Spend no more than six minutes on each question. Each question is worth four points. Answer FIVE questions.

1.What is a security dilemma? And at what level or levels of analysis is it?

2. Explain and illustrate how arguments that rely on thin rationality can easily become circular.

3. What is an "irrevocable commitment" and why would one make it? Give an illustration from history or current affairs.

4. What does the term "crisis stability" mean?

5. Does Sagan ("The Origins of the Pacific War") view the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as rational? Explain his reasoning.

6.What is a confirmatory attribution? Why might it be important?

7.What is the debate over the appropriate level-of-analysis for studying suicide bombers?


Begin the essay questions no later than 8:30

PART II.

Essay Questions. Answer TWO questions from the three below. Be sure to refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 10 points.


1. What happened at My Lai? How might Stanley Milgram (who produced the video we saw in class) explain it? How would you critique this explanation? What general lessons do you draw from it about levels-of-analysis?



2. Some scholars think offensive military doctrines are best, some think defensive doctrines are best. First, explain why you think offense or defense is best (for a status-quo power). Second, offer the two best critiques of your position.



3. You have just been assigned to write a TOP SECRET memo explaining the risks of ethnic conflict erupting in Iraq. Explain the general theoretical reasons, with evidence from Iraq or elsewhere, for why some people believe ethnic conflict is likely.

Political Science 407                        Mercer/International security
Final exam                              March 16, 2004


Instructions: Write clearly. Quantity doesn't mean quality. Think before you write. Budget your time. Be careful not to use the same arguments or the same evidence for different questions. The short answers are worth a total of 10 points, the essay questions are worth 10 points each. The exam totals 40 points. You have 110 minutes. Good luck.


PART I

Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Spend no more than five minutes on each question. Each question is worth only two points.

1. Enriched uranium was recently discovered in Iran. Explain why even proponents of nuclear spread find that troubling?

2. If war breaks out over Kashmir, does this support the stability-instability paradox? Why?

3. Does the war on terrorism require value trade-offs? Give examples.

4. What role has Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani been playing in Iraq? Be sure to specify the three major groups in Iraq.

5. What is the Nuclear Posture Review's recommendation concerning mini-nukes? Briefly explain why you agree or disagree.

6. Of Eqbal Ahmad's recommendations for addressing terrorism, discuss two that you think might be most effective.

7. Which political party won the recent national election in Spain? Why did they win? Provide one probable important consequence of this election.

Begin essay questions by 9:00
PART II.

Essay Questions. Answer TWO questions from the three below. Refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 10 points.
     
8. How is al-Qaeda similar to and different from drug cartels? What are the implications of these differences and similarities for enforcement efforts? Draw on lecture and on Michael Kenney's article, "From Pablo to Osama," to answer this question.

9. Should the United States threaten the use of nuclear weapons against states that use CBW against the U.S. military? Address this question by presenting the best arguments for each position.

10. "MAD accepts the nuclear revolution, NUTS rejects it, and that explains their different views on escalation dominance." Explain this statement.

REQUIRED: Answer question 11.

11. How should we study international security? Should we focus on the individual, on the state, or on the international level of analysis? Pick any country you like, pick any event you like (current or more historical) and discuss by example the implications of focusing on each of these levels of analysis. What does each level catch, what does each miss?

Political Science 407, first exam                                Mercer/International conflict, 11/4/04

Instructions: Write clearly. Quantity doesn't mean quality. Think before you write. Budget your time. The short answers are worth a  total of 20 points, the essay questions are worth a total of 20 points. The exam totals to 40 points. You have eighty minutes. Good luck.

PART I

Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Spend no more than eight minutes on each question. Each question is worth four points.

1. Gopnik discusses two kinds of inevitabilisms: mention one of them and critique it.

2. Group think and intelligence assessment.

3. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" Would Waltz agree and why?

4. What is prospect theory? 

5. Offense/defense balance before WWI and its consequences.

6. Under what conditions is it appropriate to use the individual level of analysis?

7. Does the Human Rights Watch report on Abu Ghraib emphasize more dispositional or more situational explanations and why?

PART II.

Essay Questions.  Answer TWO questions from the three below.  Be sure to refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 10 points. 

 8. Provide three different explanations, one from each level of analysis, to explain the conflict in Darfur. Then, critique two of these explanations. Cite class readings where appropriate.

9. "Compared to dictatorships, democracies simply cannot conduct effective, realpolitik, foreign policy. Not that we want to live in a dictatorship, but we must recognize that a value trade-off exists between foreign policy effectiveness and democracy." Do you agree? Be sure to present the best positions on both sides of the argument.

10. Which is easier: extended or immediate deterrence? Why? To address this question, first, define your terms. Second, discuss why you think one is easier or harder than the other. Third, discuss three tactics states might use to overcome the problems you just identified. 

Political Science 407                                       Mercer/International conflict

Final exam, 10:30-12:20                                 December 15, 2004

 Instructions: Write clearly. Quantity doesn't mean quality. Think before you write. Budget your time. Be careful not to use the same arguments or the same evidence for different questions. The short answers are worth a  total of 10 points, the essay questions are worth 10 points each. The exam totals 40 points. You have 110 minutes. Good luck.

 PART I

 Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Spend no more than five minutes on each question. Each question is worth only two points.

 1. After the 9/11 attacks, who gave the shoot-down order and with what consequence?

2. What is the stability-instability paradox?

3. What is the "fallacy of the last move"?

 4. List two reforms of the CIA that Dennis Gormley ("The Limits of Intelligence") advocates.

 5. Who created the "anger brigades" and for what reason?

 6. What is nuclear Wilsonianism?

 7.  Is Sokolsky a MAD or a NUTs theorist? Illustrate your argument with an example from  his article, "Demystifying the US Nuclear Posture Review."

PART II.

 Essay Questions.  Answer TWO questions from the three below.  Refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 10 points.

8. Does the US response on the morning of 9/11 have implications for current US nuclear strategy? First, explain the difference between a MAD and a NUTs strategy, then note what current US nuclear strategy is, then address the question about 9/11.

 9. Why might Iran want nuclear weapons? Discuss three different reasons, two of which should be non-security reasons.

 10. When do economic sanctions "work"? In addressing this question, first discuss two different trade sanctions and two different capital sanctions. Then explain when sanctions are likely to work.

REQUIRED: Answer question 11.

11. "Rouge states are an enormous threat to world peace because they cannot be deterred." Do you agree? To address this question, draw on your understanding of deterrence, and specifically Jeffrey Record's ("Threat Confusion and its Penalties") and President Bush's discussion of rogue states (in his "National Security Strategy of the USA").

Instructions: Write clearly. Quantity doesn't mean quality. Think before you write. Budget your time. The short answers are worth a  total of 20 points, the essay questions are worth a total of 20 points. The exam totals to 40 points. You have eighty minutes. Good luck.

PART I
Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Refer to class readings where appropriate. Spend no more than eight minutes on each question. Each question is worth four points.

1. In what three ways might offense dominance threaten peacetime stability? 

2. Does a counter-insurgency rely on brute force or coercion? What about
terrorism?

3.  "We can't spray and pray." To what is this referring?

4. What is a security dilemma? And at what level or levels of analysis is it?

5. What are three factors Pinkston/Saunders mention preventing the U.S. from
seeing North Korea clearly?

6. What is DDR and what role might the UN play in a DDR process?

7. Give an illustration of a cognitive bias, and an illustration of a motivated bias.

8. Why is it reductionist to use only Kenneth Waltz's first and second images but
not the third when explaining international conflict?

PART II.

Essay Questions.  Answer TWO of the following questions.  Be sure to refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 10 points.

9. Were situational or dispositional factors more important in the Haditha killings? To answer this question, you must explain what is alleged to have happened, you must define your terms, and your discussion must include both sides of the argument. Use the torture at Guantanamo to further explain the situational or dispositional sources of behavior.

10. What makes deterrence work? After defining the term and its assumptions,
discuss how one should think about credibility: what are its three parts and to whom must a threat be credible? Use U.S. policy toward Iran to illustrate your argument.

11. When approaching an international security problem, should we focus first on
the individual, on the state, or on the international level of analysis? Pick
any country and event you like (current or historical) and discuss by example the implications of focusing on each of these levels of analysis. What does each level catch, what does each miss?

Instructions: Budget your time. Be careful not to use the same arguments or the same evidence for different questions. The short answers are worth a  total of 10 points, the essay questions are worth 10 points each. The exam totals 40 points. You have 110 minutes. Good luck.

PART I. Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Spend no more than five minutes on each question. Each question is worth two points.

1. CBW have gone through four technological waves. What are they?

2. According to Kilcullen (as discussed in Packer), what is the key to defeating an insurgency?

3. What are three trade sanctions and three capital sanctions?

4. Define national security. Is it an end in itself? Explain your reasoning.

5. "Not all terrorists are insurgents, but all insurgents are terrorists." Do you agree? Define your terms.

6. What law of war might one use to assess the morality of economic sanctions?

7. According to Record, what are the drawbacks of threat inflation?

PART II. Essay Questions.  Answer TWO questions from the three below.  Refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 10 points.

8. "Economic sanctions have the virtue of being non-violent, but the vice of being notoriously ineffective." Do you agree? Explain your reasoning and then use two different examples to make your point.

9. To what extent can variations in the success of a state's foreign policy be explained by the skill of its intelligence systems?

10. Robert Jervis and Kenneth Payne meet at a cocktail party. Pleasant conversation gives way to an argument over nuclear strategy. First, summarize the central argument from each author's article. Second, pick an issue from current events that MAD and NUTs people would view differently. Third, explain what you imagine would be their respective position on the  issue you selected.
 
Part III. REQUIRED Essay. Answer question 11.

11.  Deterrence theory operates at what level of analysis? Illustrate your answer by discussing the problem of the spread of WMD.

407 Midterm (May 1, 2008)

Instructions: Budget your time. Be careful not to use the same arguments or the same evidence for different questions. The short answers are worth a total of 10 points, the essay questions are worth 15 points each. The exam totals 40 points. You have 80 minutes. Good luck.

PART I

Short Answers. Briefly answer FIVE of the following questions. Refer to class readings where appropriate. Each question is worth two points.

1. How did “defensive avoidance” contribute to the Falkland’s war?

2.  In the context of ethnic conflict, what are the two types of “bad history”? Provide illustrations.

3. Are Iraqi insurgents practicing deterrence, brute force, or something else against U.S. forces?

4. What is network-centric warfare? Is it offensive or defensive? What kinds of warfare is it probably best suited for?

5. What is the difference between a threat and a promise? Illustrate using an anecdote from current events.

6. What is the Afghan Model?

7. Prof. Mercer is accosted on the Ave by a retired military officer now serving as an independent military analyst for a major television network. What’s the debate (be specific). Who wins?

PART II.

Essay Questions.  Answer TWO of the following questions.  Be sure to refer to class readings when appropriate. Each question is worth 15 points.

1. Which is easier, deterrence or compellence? Why? Be sure to define your terms and explain what one needs to make each work.

2. How does Van Evera explain the origins of WWI? Detail his view, then discuss two critiques of his argument.

3. Apparently, Waltz is about to revise his classic book and add a subtitle. The new book will be called Man, the State, and War: Understanding Ethnic Conflict. What argument might he use at each level of analysis, what evidence or illustrations could one use to support each argument, and what critique could one make of each argument?