The post-Cold War - Essay Prowess

The post-Cold War


Kindly ADD to CART to purchase the FULL answer at only $5.99


I may reply message later. Each answer more than two page

Answer four prompts/questions only: Write No more than four double-spaced pages per question. Each response is worth 7.5 points.

1. The post-Cold War/ post-9/11 international system has been characterized by Francis Fukuyama, as the “End of History,” and by Samuel Huntington as a “Clash of Civilizations.” First, describe what it is they mean by these statements and then critically assess their views (Fukuyama and Huntington).  

2. What political-economic policies underpin IMF/World Bank” policies? Assess their potential impact on small emerging economies like Jamaica?

3. Theories, like political ideologies, are constituted by myths, values, denial, ideology, and strategies/blueprints about the world, and so is, “Carnism.” In what ways are theories of World Politics, such as political-realism, for example, similar to the ideology of “Carnism?”

4. “Globalization,” is much talked about among scholars, policy-makers, and development practitioners. First, define what “globalization” is, and then subject it to critical assessment using two of the following: economic-realism (mercantilism), social-constructivism, liberal feminism and dependency/world-systems theory. 

5. Does Russia’s intervention and opposition to US policy in the region constitute a new “cold-war”, and is Russia demonized, as a result of its Syria policy?

6. Do gender/feminist perspectives on world politics and economics add to the understanding(s) of these global forces? If yes, why, and if not, why?

7. Is the European Union at risk of collapse? If yes, why, if not, why not?


Your answer(s) must be well thought out and organized. Be analytical. Use the readings, lectures, videos, and class discussion to support your answer(s). Show support for what you say by citing class materials and by using notes within the text. Your grade will be based on the accuracy, and consistency of your analysis; the strength of the arguments you develop and the depth and breadth of support you provide.