POLI/INTL 363: US Foreign Policy
Research
Paper
This
is big and has very important information in it. For that reason, I’ve created a Table of
Contents (linked to sections below) for you to use to find information you’re
looking for. You should read this entire
assignment, however. I guarantee you
will wind up with a better grade if you do.
Numbering Endnotes or Footnotes
Nitpicks and Style Issue (or Helpful hints)
Pick a specific US foreign policy decision. Choose
a one president and some foreign policy decision he made during his term. At the end of this document are a list of
possible decisions. These are just
examples of what you can do; you can choose something else. Pick any decision
you like. There are two exceptions. Please do not choose the Cuban Missile Crisis
of 1962. Too many of the case studies
used to illustrate the models of presidential decision making already examine
the missile crisis. Also, please do not choose any Obama administration foreign
policy decisions. There simply isn’t
enough information out there yet for you to get the depth of information you
need for this assignment. I will be
approving the topic, so I’ll make sure you have a topic that is appropriate.
Remember this is one decision made by one president. It should be
a narrowly defined decision. What I mean is this: the Johnson administration's
decision making on Viet Nam is not a suitable topic. That is a book, not a term
paper. Hypothetically, if you were interested in that topic then you could
narrow it down: Johnson's decision making during the Gulf of Tonkin Crisis of
1964 or Johnson's decision making to escalate the war from February 1965 to
July 1965 or Johnson's decision to de-escalate the war in the winter of 1968.
Presidential decision making is a key focus of this
course. Many scholars hypothesize that presidents attempt to bring order to
decision making. Without some order, the decision making process can be
chaotic. The hypothesis that a president attempts to structure, control, or
manage the decision making process is often called the Presidential Management
Model (PMM). Richard T. Johnson developed the PMM ideas and Alexander George
has used them to analyze most post-WW II presidents. You’ll be reading some of their
work to get a good understanding of the PMM idea (see the links below). PMM outlines three management styles
presidents have used to gain control of their administration's foreign policy
decision making process: (1) Competitive style, (2) Formalistic style, and (3)
Collegial style. In the first week of class we will discuss foreign policy
decision making and the PMM model in detail though we will not go into the
three different styles with any depth. That is part of your job as you research
and write your paper. Look at the three management styles of the PMM, and
examine the decision you have chosen. Which theoretical management style best
describes the decision process during the specific case you have chosen?
In other words, is the decision making style competitive, collegial, or
formalistic? Also (and this is important), presidents don’t use “models” to
make decisions; scholars use models to explain how presidents make decisions.
Remember that as you write the paper. Don’t write a sentence that says: “Nixon
used a formalistic model to make his decisions on China.” Say this: “The
formalistic model explains how Nixon made his decisions on China.”
The following readings are the ones that detail the
presidential management model. You must
read at least one of these, but I would recommend both. Johnson gives the basic outline of the theory
and George and George expand on it and give an overview of how these ideas
apply to post-war presidencies up to Clinton (super useful in giving you a look
at how presidents make decisions). Without reading these and understanding them
you cannot do the paper. The links below will take you to pdf files of
the readings.
1.
Richard T.
Johnson, Managing
the White House, New York, Harper and Row, 1974, pp. 1-8, and
230-240; (JK518 .J63 1974)
2.
Alexander George
and Juliette George, Presidential
Personality and Performance, Westview Press, Boulder, CO., 1998 (JK
511 .G46 1998): Chapter 6, "Presidential Management Styles and
Models," pp. 199-280 (pp. 263-280 are footnotes; this has a section on
every president from FDR to Clinton so you can get some ideas on each
president’s decision style from this chapter. These footnotes will also help
you get started with sources.)
A
brief, but important note follows. I
will use an example from the Bush administration to make the point.
·
This is not an
examination of whether the decision was a good one or not in your view, so do
not write a paper on whether the US should have invaded Iraq or should not have
invaded Iraq in 2003
·
This is not an
analysis of why the decision was made, so don’t write a paper explaining why
the Iraqi threat was so great that the US had to intervene or why the Iraqi
threat was not very large and the Bush administration intervened to gain
control of Middle Eastern oil and to prepare for an invasion of Iran.
What
I’m looking for is an analysis of how the decision was actually made, so please
do write a paper that would tell me:
·
Who did the president use for advice?
·
What committees were used or created to make the
decisions?
·
Who seemed to be the more important members of the
decision group and why?
·
Who were the less important members of the decision
group and why?
·
Did the president desire debate among his advisers or
did he try to prevent it?
·
Were alternative ideas encouraged or discouraged?
·
What were the key arguments and which advisers led the
argument?
·
How were the arguments settled and by whom?
·
How did the president ultimately decide to make a
decision?
Don’t
structure your paper as an answer to these questions, however. See below on a suggested structure. This is how an academic paper on the subject
would look.
The
goal is to look at the historical record -- how the senior decision makers
actually made their decision -- and then compare that to the three management
styles of the PMM model. In your opinion, which management style more
accurately describes the decision making process? What you are really doing is
examining a decision, deciding which management style describes the decision
process, then using your research on the decision making process to prove your
point. You also need to prove why the other management styles are less accurate
in explaining the decision process as you see it. You may decide that a decision has attributes
of more than one management style. Excellent. You just need to illustrate that
in your paper. You may also decide that the president lost complete control of
the decision making process. A president may have attempted to manage the
decision making process but failed to do so, or a president may have never
attempted to manage the process. In effect, there was no management style, only
chaos, the type of free-for-all that happens sometimes and leads to a breakdown
in the process. But then again, is this
really no management style or is it a deliberate attempt by the president to
have a wide open, freewheeling decision process. Maybe the president likes
anarchy.
So
in essence, this adds a fourth, fifth, and sixth choice, if you want:
That
is excellent as well. Again, you just need to illustrate that in your paper.
That's the key: using details from the actual decision making process to
support your analysis and conclusions about that process. There is no
right or wrong answer. The question is how well you make your case --
analysis backed up by evidence drawn from your research.
How is this done? You can do it in a number of ways.
A.
Pick the management style you think is the most accurate. Explain how this
model best illustrates the decision making process, then briefly (about two
pages) tell why the other two styles are not accurate descriptions of the
decision making process.
B.
Show why several of the management styles (or lack of management) are relevant,
and why you think that several of the styles are evident in the decision making
process. Of course, address why the leftover (if any) management style is not
relevant.
Ultimately,
these are the questions you will answer.
This
next part is especially important. In
essence, you are trying to look at how presidents organized (or failed to
organize) the advice given by decision makers and the method presidents used in
choosing a policy. Be specific. Don't give me only generalities. You must
illustrate your point with the historical record. When were decisions made?
What were the key meetings? Who was there? Who was not there and why? I’m looking
for names and dates.
A sample structure:
1. Intro Paragraph (See below on what a good intro will
have)
2. 2-4 paragraphs that illustrate the three models to
show me that you know them. You’ll need
citations to the works of Johnson and George here.
3. The narrative of the decision making process. Tell me the story of the decision
chronologically. When meetings
held? When were issues decided? Who was involved? The committees? The
factional battles between advisers and coalitions of advisers? Who did the president
listen to? How did they decide? In that
story you’ll answer the questions in italics in the paragraphs above this one.
o
In this
narrative, be chronological.
o
Tell when
meetings were held, who was there, what was debated, what if anything was
decided.
o
Then move on to
the next meetings
o
Meeting after
meeting, tell the story of what happened.
4. Conclusion
Up until the rough draft deadline
indicated on the syllabus I will look at anything you’d like me to look at
regarding the paper. Anything from
outlines, bibliographic sources, or even completed drafts can be turned in for
comment up until that date. I will go
over what you have, mark it up, and if you like give you a hypothetical
grade. You can then make revisions based
on my comments.
Ask me! If you have a question on where to find
sources or if you need a specific source and you can’t find it, ask me. This is what I do for a living. I have everything!
Library: Use the Library:
Really!!!! Here’s what I mean: Library
Memoirs: You are
studying decision making. Presidents and almost all their key advisers write
memoirs of their time in office. These
are books that the library has and that I also have. These will be your best sources for
information on decision making. If you don’t use memoirs, you are making it
very hard on yourself. You are searching and searching for information that is
sitting in someone’s memoirs, bur refusing to read the memoir. You’re wasting your time. I have placed a number of the key memoirs on
reserve at Cabell Library room 301. For the list of memoirs, follow this link: Memoirs.
Journalist
Accounts:
In addition, journalists write detailed day by day accounts of the decision
processes of presidential administrations.
These often focus specifically on key decisions or are 400 page books
that jump from decision to decision and focus on the interplay between the
advisers, exactly what you’re looking for. These are not on the web.
Biographies: There are
phenomenal biographies of presidents and secretaries of state. They detail
decision making and will provide you with excellent sources. The library should have them or I have them.
They are not on the web.
Scholarly
Accounts:
Scholars also write detailed hour by hour accounts of decisions on foreign
policy, based on interviews and archival research. These will also be excellent
sources. For these, look at scholar.google.com. It is the best way to find the scholarly
articles. Key journal are Presidential Studies Quarterly, Foreign
Policy Analysis, and Diplomatic
History. One way to use google.scholar is to use
key words for the president, the issue, and then the name of one of the
journals listed below. After doing that,
then a search under the president and the issue might get you some other
sources, but they are likely not as good.
So, for example, search under “Clinton, Bosnia, Washington Quarterly”
and you get a boatload of articles from the Washington Quarterly and other
journals as well. A full list
of journals and some hints on how to use
them are at the end of this document.
Citation
Tracing:
Don’t forget one of the best ways to find good sources. Say you found a great
article on exactly the issue you’re researching. That article will have footnotes, endnotes,
parenthetical references, and a bibliography.
Find those articles and books.
Use them. They are almost
guaranteed to be useful because the author of the great article you just read
must have found them useful.
Presidential
Libraries and Other Archives: Presidential libraries and some
archives do exist where you can search for original documents (minutes of
meetings, memos between advisers and the presidents). Eventually all of these will be
digitized. The JFK Presidential Library
is leading in this category. It
announced in January 2011 that it was going to put everything it has on
line. This will take years, but it
forces all the other libraries to keep up. So here are links to all the Presidential
Libraries and info on what is available on the web. There is also the National Security Archive
at George Washington University in Washington DC. The Archive is compiling
every document on foreign affairs that it can find and trying to get the US
government to release more and more. If
you have questions about archives and the release of government documents, let
me know. Most of my research is based on
wading through archival material.
Foreign Relations of the United States: This the
documentary record of US foreign relations. The State Department declassifies
documents and organizes them into massive volumes that provide one of the best
ways to research US foreign policy. The volumes, usually a few dozen for each
President, are organized by topic and then chronologically within the topic. If
you have questions on how to use it, let me know. If you follow the link,
you’ll see how it works. The volumes
start with Truman and the Reagan volumes are being written right now.
The Web: You cannot do
this type of research only on the web.
Do not expect to be able to sit in front of your computer and find the
information you need to write this paper.
It is not on the web. You must
use books and articles. If you try to do your research this way, you’ll be
wasting your time. You’ll search and search the web for information that is
simply not there and you’ll come to me the week before the paper is due and say
something like: “I can’t find any information on Nixon’s decisions on
China. I found tons of info on why it
was a good policy or a bad policy and why Nixon did it, but mothing on how he
did it.” I might cry. Nixon wrote a two-volume memoir (about 1,400
pages) and his National Security Adviser wrote three memoirs (each about 1,000
pages), and that’s just the starting place. There are more memoirs and
scholarly accounts. But they are not on
the web. Remember that the primacy
purpose of the internet is advertising (even what passes for information is
really advertising its information). The web tells you that everything you need
is on the web. That is not true. It is
especially not true when it comes to decision making.
A Warning about
the Web:
I don't think I need to tell you much about the web. In college I wrote papers
on a manual typewriter and I took my SATs on stone tablets. But if you do have
any questions about it let me know. An important note about internet sites:
what is crucial about any webpage is that you and I know what the source of the
information is. All information on the web is not equal. Before you trust any
information on the web you must know who runs the websites. Who is the source
of the information? The US Nazi Party has many websites. Their information is
probably not a source you want to use for research on Israeli foreign policy,
for example. Also for example, if you find a home page for a terrorist group,
it will be useful for illustrating doctrine, but may not be the best source for
objectivity on the success of the organization’s strategy or counterterrorist
efforts against it. So you need to know who runs the site, and you need to tell
me that in the citations (see below)
Read this. Pay attention to it;
Or face everlasting doom! Failure to pay attention to this will likely result
in a grade of D.
The following is not just because I
want to annoy you or because I like to have things done my way. The following is because this is a class
where you will do social science research and the rules of social science research
are different from the rules of English composition or journalism. Learning how to write for different audiences
and in different styles is part of the university experience.
You must use an established format for
citations and your bibliography. You
need to learn how to reference information properly, and how to write a
bibliography with the correct and complete information before you leave VCU.
This is easy to do, but more important than you think. Whether you go into
academia or business you will be judged on the quality of your information, and
that means people will want to know where you found your information. They will
judge you at first, before they read your text, on your bibliography and
citations. If you do it wrong while at VCU, you’ll get a deduction from your
grade. If you do this in graduate school
or government or the business world, you will be asked to go home and not come
back (as in “you’re fired”).
It does not matter to me what format
you use, as long as you use an established standard format for the social
sciences. You can use footnotes or endnotes or parenthetical references, but
you must learn to do it correctly. Here
are web resources that will teach you to do this:
·
You
can use scholar.google.com another way.
If you found the book or article on this page, you’ll see that
underneath the small paragraph on the source is a link for “cite”. Click on that and it will you give several
already formatted citations. You can do
that even if you didn’t originally find the source on scholar.google.com. Just go to the page and search for it there,
then click the “cite” link. The properly formatted citation can be copied and
pasted directly into you bibliography. Remember, however, that these are
bibliographic formats. Footnotes and
endnotes are slightly different and have different page number rules that are
discussed below. That is very important.
·
Easy
Bib
·
Bibme
·
Purdue OWL (Online Writing Workshop)
·
Chicago Manual of Style Quick
Guide
·
Endnotes (and footnote style). This is an
article that I wrote which has endnotes that you can use as a template. It also includes a bibliography that you can
use as a template. Endnote and footnote
citation style are the same. The only difference is where you place them in the
text. Microsoft word allows you to
choose endnotes or footnotes and to switch one to the other if you like. Ask me if you have questions on how to do
this.
·
Parenthetical
References This
is a link to an article I wrote which can be used as a template for citing
using parenthetical references. Note in the citations that the author’s name
and publication date is within the parentheses (and page numbers if available).
You may have to sign in to get the article.
Since
I have instructed you to pay attention to notation and bibliographic style, and
have provided you with a specific place to look for the proper styles, I will take points off of your paper if you
do not do this in the correct manner. This is simple. If you do not do
it correctly it means one or both of the following: 1) you are not taking the
assignment seriously or are too lazy to do the paper correctly; and/or 2) you
are doing the paper at the last minute. Both of these are good reasons why you
will not get the grade you are able to earn.
Warning! What not to do. I realize that in
many cases instructors in ENGL 200 are telling you to include reference
material in the text of the paper. However, this is exactly the wrong way to
reference in social science. What I mean
is the following.
In
doing research there are three basic types of things you must cite: quotes,
specific information, and other people’s ideas. Other people’s ideas are covered above under
plagiarism. See the section on quotes,
but that shouldn’t be a big issue here.
This is a small paper and you should avoid quotes. When I say specific information, what I refer
to is any information which is not general knowledge. For example, you would not need to use a
citation if you state that Henry Kissinger was Richard Nixon’s National
Security Adviser in Nixon’s first term (general knowledge). But you would have to cite the fact that
Kissinger met with Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai on July 9, 1971 and any details
of the meeting.
If you are referring to specific information that you
found on a specific page in a source (if the source has page numbers, unlike
some web sources), you must include the
page number where you found the information. Let’s say you found information in a book
that is 450 pages long. Citing the book and not the page number is not very
helpful for anyone who thought that the information was interesting and wanted
to learn more about it. You’re forcing
that person to scan through 450 pages of text to find the info. Instead, cite
the page number and then the reader can just turn to that page number. This is the established method of citation.
This is true even for parenthetical references.
If you are citing the main point of an article or book or something as
background information, you don’t need the page number, but if it is specific
material it does need a page number.
You may use endnotes. You may use footnotes, but then
the paper must be a bit longer since some of the page will be taken up by
footnotes. In the social sciences, footnotes and endnotes are numbered
consecutively. The first note is number
1; the second is number 2, etc.
Microsoft Word will do this for you.
You can use a source more than once in your paper. There are specific citation formats for the
first citation and for the second citation.
You can also put more than one source in a specific note. See my article for examples for all of this:
Endnotes /Footnotes. A
short reference follows:
·
Footnotes
and endnotes are numbered consecutively (1, 2, 3, 4…) Please don’t use the
natural sciences-style that merges the bibliography and citations. This format lists the sources in a
bibliography and numbers them, then cites information in the text by listing
the number of the source used in the bibliography. That format is for natural sciences and I
have never seen it used in any Political Science journal. Since this is Political Science, you should
learn how Political Science works.
This is the key to writing a good paper
so I am providing detailed instruction on this. Political Science has a
specific style of writing, especially when it comes to introductory
paragraphs. It mirrors the style of
government memoranda. In short, the
introductory paragraph should summarize the paper and that includes giving the
reader a summary of you conclusions. If
you don’t do this, even a great paper, becomes a grade of B.
A good introductory paragraph should
include the following:
In other words, the introduction should
provide your reader with a "road map" that explains exactly what you
will say during the paper. This is not as difficult as it sounds. Basically,
what you need to do is write the outline you have for your paper in sentences
in the first few paragraphs of the paper. Your opening paragraph (or couple of
opening paragraphs) should also give the reader some reason to be interested in
your topic and in your argument. Tell the reader why this subject is important.
Here is an example of an opening paragraph: (I’ll use a topic that won’t
overlap with anyone’s potential topic.)
The Barack Obama
administration’s decision to invade increase the number of troops in
Afghanistan in 2009 can best be described as a collegial decision making
process, in which the president relied on all his advisors to give him options
and evaluations of options. However, the
final decision was made by Obama himself after close consultation with National
Security Adviser James Jones, the senior commanders in Afghanistan, and key
all-purpose political advisers within the administration. , (There's the
topic and conclusion). During the deliberations in 2009 and 2010
all senior advisers participated in the decision making process. Even Vice President Joe Biden, who disagreed
with the general direction of the policy, was always allowed to air his views
in the National Security Council. While
divisions did exist between the political aides and the Dept. of Defense, no
views were left out of the debate (the
specific argument and your evidence). This decision making process will be
illustrated by a brief examination of the situation as Obama entered office, an
analysis of the intra-administration debate between January and December of
2009, and an examination of the final meetings where the decision was
made. The narrative of the decision will
be followed by an analysis of the decision process in the context of the
presidential management models. (your
road map).
So, this
paragraph tells me what you think, summarizes why you think that is true, and
explains how you will illustrate your point.
You
can use lots of topic headings and subheadings to correspond to the points on
your "road map" -- they'll help you organize your thoughts, and
they'll help your reader clearly identify where he is on the "road
map." The above paper might have five main sections:
As
you make the points that support your argument, you'll probably be aware of the
places in which your argument is controversial or in which a reasonable person
might disagree with you. Preempt those controversies in your text. Point out
what those opposing arguments might be, and why you think your point of view is
more accurate or reasonable.
·
Try
not to use quotes. I want your writing, not anyone else’s. If there is a great quote from a direct
participant in the event, a phrase, or word, that you think really adds to the
paper then a quote may be appropriate here or there. But if you have a paragraph-length quote in
an eight page paper, that would be bad.
·
In
a paper of this size, you should not quote general information that you found
in a scholarly article and don’t quote the conclusions of other scholars. Paraphrase the information or the idea in
your own words and then cite the source. The exact words of another scholar
don’t really matter, so simply use your own works and cite the source where you
found it. Ask me about this if you have a question.
·
Do
not give me a sentence in your paper that quotes that information directly from
the source. For example, don’t include a
sentence that says: “The United States included 20,000 troops.” It is basic factual information and does not
need to be quoted, but it does need to be cited. Even if it is an analyst’s opinion, it does
not need to be quoted. Just paraphrase
it in your words and cite the source.
·
Reserve
quotes for direct participants: candidates and their staffers. The exact words matter in these cases. In general though, go easy on quotes.
·
Too
many quotes means that you’re just cutting and pasting, not writing. A
research paper is not a series of quotes rearranged the way you like. It doesn’t teach you anything and your
grade will suffer horribly, terribly, and painfully.
·
So,
for example, if noted terrorist scholar Reed Richards says in his book that
“Al-Qaeda probably only consists of 10,000 people worldwide.” Do not give me a sentence in your paper that
reads: Reed Richards says that “Al-Qaeda probably only consists of 10,000
people worldwide.” Give me something
that says: “One scholar estimates that al-Qaeda only has 10,000 active members
globally” or “Al-Qaeda only has 10,000 fighters worldwide.” (Add the citation here which cites Richards’
book and the page number in it where the information is found). Or if Ben Grimm concludes in his book that:
“Al-Qaeda’s growth depends on economic reform in the Middle East. Elimination of poverty is not the biggest
problem. Rather it is the ability of the middle class to gain social and
economic mobility.” Don’t quote that,
but say: “Economic reforms designed to allow the middle class to grow and
prosper will be the key to battling al-Qaeda in the future” (Add the citation
here which cites Grimm’s book and the page number in it where the information
is found).
·
In
a larger paper, but not in this one, sometimes quotes are useful. A good quote is this: According to Osama
bin-Laden, “for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands
of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its
riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its
neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through
which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples” (Add the citation here which
cites Bin-Laden’s fatwa and the page number in it where the information is
found or the internet URL). This is an
excerpt from the 1998 fatwa of OBL.
Bin-Laden is a participant, a historical figure. His exact words are important.
·
In
any case: Never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever cut and paste anything from a
source into your document unless you place it in quotes and cite the source of
the quote. And generally in a paper that
is under a few dozen papers, there is never a need to quote anything that is
not an official source. Why quote
anything unless the exact works are crucial.
So quoting a President or Foreign Minister or a witness to an event is
useful, but quoting a scholar or journalist is not.
First,
never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever cut and paste anything from a source into
your document unless you place it in quotes and cite the source of the quote.
And generally in a paper that is under a few dozen papers, there is never a
need to quote anything that is not an official source. Why quote anything unless the exact works are
crucial. So quoting a President or
Foreign Minister or a witness to an event is useful, but quoting a scholar or
journalist is not. For the purposes of
this paper, there is no reason to quote anyone. The paper is too short for
quotes.
This is really not a fine line. Did you write the sentence or not? Did you
come up with the idea or not? When in
doubt, it’s relatively simple: never include something in your paper that you
did not write unless it is quotes and then it also must be cited. Anything that is not your idea must be cited.
Plagiarism is a violation of the VCU Honor Code and I will not hesitate to
charge someone with a violation if I catch plagiarism. If you have questions about what is
plagiarism, ask me or see VCU’s Writing
Integrity Workshop.
But just because someone else has
already written an idea that you agree with 100% doesn't mean you can't discuss
it in your paper. Just point out whose idea it is; paraphrase it in your own
words, cite the source of the idea, and expand upon it. Generally, that is how
Political Science works. 90% of all Political Science articles and books do the
following (I give you another example that is not topically relevant to the
class):
There are various explanations for the Clinton administration’s decision to grant China permanent most favored nation trading status. First, the Clinton administration is accused of hypocrisy, campaigning on a human rights platform only to abandon it once in power and satisfying the business community revealed itself as the real priority (Barton 1994, 1-34). Second, China experts argue that Clinton learned during his first year of office that sanctions on China would accomplish very little and only slow and steady engagement would ultimately improve China’s human rights situation over the long term (Rogers 1997, 17-29). A third argument focuses on the internal bargaining within the administration and the ability of President Clinton’s economic advisers to best a human-rights first collation of advisers from the State Department and NSC staff (Romanoff 2000, 307-332). Each of these arguments has merit. A combination of the second and third arguments that emphasizes Bill Clinton’s learning process holds the most explanatory power.
The article would then outline the theories of Barton, Rogers, and Romanoff, analyze each one, and then develop the fourth theory. There is no problem as long as Barton, Rogers, and Romanoff get credited with developing their theories, and the fourth theory is yours. If the fourth theory belongs to a fourth author (Banner? Stark? Hill?), the author should be credited and your article will show why his theory is superior to the other three. The point here is that you may find sources which have different opinions on an issue.
If paraphrasing an idea: make sure to change the verb you use so it is different from the verb used in the source. Make sure you change everything but the proper nouns. So let’s say, you’ve read this in your source: “The President phoned the Prime Minister immediately after he received the news.” That may be the point you want to make in your paper, but you shouldn’t quote that and can’t copy it (or you’d be plagiarizing). The only words you really can use here would be “President” and “Prime Minister.” These are the proper nouns. So put it into your own words. How about: “Once the President had been informed, he contacted the Prime Minister.” And then cite the source of the information. That would not be a quote problem or a suspicion of plagiarism
And never,
ever, ever, ever, ever, ever cut and paste anything from a source into your
document unless you place it in quotes and cite the source of the quote. (He said it again! And in italics! Must mean
something!)
1.
Margins and Font Papers should be doubled-spaced with one-inch margins, and reasonable
sized font (11 point). Shorter pages with wide margins and large print size
font will be penalized.
2.
Subject and Verb Make sure you have a subject and verb in every sentence. (You would be
surprised how many important journals and books allow non-sentence sentences).
This is non-fiction, not fiction. So you need to observe the basic rules of
grammar. A long sentence is not necessarily a better sentence -- each sentence
should express only one thought. Don't be afraid to break up a long sentence
into two or three shorter ones. It will usually flow better that way.
3.
Official Titles
Provide someone’s title in the text the first time you mention them if they are
an elected official (Tim Kaine, Governor of Virginia)
or an appointed official (Assistant Secretary of Defense for International
Security Affairs Paul Nitze).
Thereafter, you can refer to them as Kaine or
Nitze. So for the first mention, you’d say: “National Security Adviser Henry
Kissinger told his assistant to.…” From
that point on, you can simply say “Kissinger told his assistant to…” When you
mention a senator or representative, say: Senator John Warner (R-VA) to
introduce and after than you can just say Warner or Senator Warner.
4.
Keep a Copy
Make a copy of the paper for yourself before you hand it in to me. There are
two reasons for this. If you have a copy, you don't have to worry about me
losing a copy. I have never lost anyone's paper, but just in case you should
always make sure that you have a copy of your paper with you, in any class, not
just this one.
5.
Back up WHEN
YOU TYPE YOUR PAPER ON A COMPUTER MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A BACKUP DISK WITH THE
PAPER ON IT. AS YOU TYPE THE PAPER SAVE THE FILE TO THE BACKUP DISK EVERY TEN
MINUTES OR SO. Don’t just leave it on your hard drive and hope it will be
safe. A super safe way to deal with this
is to use your own, already built-in cloud system. Email the drafts of your paper to yourself
and then you know it will be safe on the VCU system and you can access it from
anywhere on the planet. Also, remember that if you type on the university
computers be careful. Putting your paper on the hard drive in the computer lab
is risky – they sweep the hard drives of files at night. Keep a backup copy for
yourself. I have several backup copies of anything I write. You don't ever want
to lose work because you didn't back it up.
6.
No Wikipedia
Do not use Wikipedia or any other web-based encyclopedia. It is unreliable and you should have stopped
using encyclopedias for research in elementary school.
7.
Reliability of the Internet Be careful about internet sources. Make sure the source is reliable. Remember that anyone can post anything on the
internet. There aren’t necessarily any
editors or fact checkers. For example,
there is a website that links me to the Kennedy assassination; I was two years
old. Ask me if you have questions about this (internet sources, not if I was
involved in the Kennedy assassination; I wasn’t).
8.
The use of “I”:
Try to avoid using “I” in non-fiction.
Instead of “I will discuss three problems…” say “This essay addresses
three problems…”
9.
The use of a
semicolon: Semicolons connect two complete sentences that are related to each
other. For example: “I went to the
pizzeria to get a pie; it was closed so I had Chinese food instead.” You could also write them as two separate
sentences if you wanted. The following
would be an incorrect use of a semicolon: “I had six very tasty pizzas last week;
except for that crappy one from the big chain store.” That should be a comma, not a semicolon. The test is this: If the two sentences you are connecting with
a semicolon could stand alone as complete sentences then use a semicolon. So it becomes obvious: “Except for that
crappy one from the big chain store” is not a sentence.
10.
The use of
“however”: This trips everyone up. It’s
a bit similar to semicolons. “I went to
the pizzeria; however, when I got there, it was closed.” Notice the semicolon, not the comma. That’s because “When I got there, it was
closed” could be a complete sentence by itself.
Also, this sentence is like the use of a semicolon. You are connecting two complete
sentences. In this case, you’re
connecting two sentences that are related, but related in a very specific
way. The second sentence is adding the
“however” to show a different expectation than the first sentence implies. The first sentence implies you were going to
eat pizza. The second sentence says you
didn’t. On the other hand, look at this
example: “I went to the pizzeria. Upon
arriving, however, I found out it was closed.”
The “however” is surrounded by commas.
That’s because “upon arriving” is not a sentence by itself. Here’s another aspect of this. “I went to the pizzeria, the one with the
best pizza in the world.” There is a
comma there because “the one with the best pizza in the world” is not a
sentence by itself. These are the non-fiction rules. In fiction, you can do
anything you want.
11.
Some useful
rules:
1. Numbers under
100 should be written as out. So you
would not have this sentence. “President
Bush met with 3 advisers.” It would be
“President Bush met with three advisers.”
2. When you have
an acronym, such as NSDD-75 or UN. First
write out the name in full: National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 75, or
United Nations (UN). After that first use of the term, use the acronym.
Papers are due at the beginning of class on the date
indicated in the syllabus. After about 10 minutes of class has passed, your
paper is one day late. That is true for the
rough draft and the final draft in cases where a rough draft is mandatory. I
will mark late papers down ONE GRADE for each day late. That means that an almost perfect paper -- one that I
would give 98 points to -- becomes an 88 if one day late, 78 if two days late,
etc,... all the way down to 8 points if nine days late, and zero points if ten
days late.
Talk to me if you are having some
family or personal problems. If there is a serious need to get an extension on
the paper, I will give you an extension. I do realize that there are more
important things in life than this class and this assignment. So if you
run into a problem, talk to me. Computer problems do not count as a problem
that warrants an extension. If you are writing your paper at the last
minute and you have a problem, the moral of the story is that you should not
have been writing your paper at the last minute. If you have a printer
problem, that doesn’t have to be a problem.
Give me your disk and I will print up the paper, or come to my office
hours and we'll print up the paper at my office. If you have some kind of
computer problem, and you are not writing your paper at the last minute, let me
know. Maybe I can help.
What kind of topics could you choose? You could choose, for example:
·
FDR and
lend-lease
·
FDR and policy
toward Japan before Pearl Harbor
·
Truman and the
Marshall Plan
·
Truman and the
Berlin Airlift
·
Truman and
Defense Spending (NSC-68)
·
Truman policy
toward China
·
Truman and the
creation of NATO
·
Truman and the
decision to fight in Korea
·
Eisenhower and US
policy in Viet Nam (Dien Bien Phu
is a great case study of presidential decision not to do something)
·
Eisenhower and US
policy toward China or Lebanon, or the rearmament of Germany
·
Eisenhower and US
nuclear weapons policy (creation of massive retaliation; the New Look)
·
Eisenhower and
the US Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Program
·
Eisenhower and
the Offshore Islands crises, either 1954/55 of 1958
·
Kennedy and the
increase in US assistance and activity in Viet Nam
·
Kennedy and the
Bay of Pigs
·
Kennedy and the
Berlin Crisis of 1961
·
Kennedy and
nuclear weapons policy
·
Kennedy and the
development of Flexible Response (NATO strategy)
·
Kennedy and the
Alliance for Progress
·
Johnson and
several specific Viet Nam decisions (raising troop levels in 1965; troop
deployments in 1966, or 1967 or 1968)
·
Johnson and the
Dominican Republic invasion
·
Johnson and US
aid to India (PL-480)
·
Johnson and the
Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia
·
Nixon and
Vietnamization
·
Nixon and the Cooper-Church
Amendment
·
Nixon and the
invasion of Cambodia
·
Nixon and the
opening to China
·
Nixon and the
India-Pakistan war
·
Nixon and the US
actions in Middle East
·
Nixon and the
pressure on Chile and ultimately the overthrow of Salvador Allende
·
Nixon and the
Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT)
·
Nixon and the
development of the ABM
·
Nixon and the
development of the MIRV
·
Ford and US
near-intervention in Angola (Clark Amendment in particular)
·
Ford and SALT II
(Vladivostok Accords)
·
Carter and US
policy on Human Rights (focus on specific countries)
·
Carter and the Ogaden War (Ethiopia and Somalia)
·
Carter and the
peace negotiations in the Middle East that led to the Camp David Accords
·
Carter and the
SALT II Treaty
·
Carter and the
Panama Canal Treaty
·
Carter and the Intermediate
Nuclear Force, INF, decision (also called the NATO Two-Track Decision)
·
Carter and the
Neutron bomb decision
·
Carter and the MX
Missile
·
Carter and
recognition of China
·
Carter and the
Taiwan Relations Act
·
Reagan and the
support of the Contras in Nicaragua
·
Reagan and
selling weapons to Iran
·
Reagan and arms
negotiations with the USSR
·
Reagan and the
sale of AWACS to Saudi Arabia
·
Reagan and US
assistance to rebels in Afghanistan
·
Reagan and the
INF Deployment
·
Reagan and the
INF Treaty
·
Reagan and resumption
of aid to rebels in Angola
·
Reagan and the MX
missile
·
Reagan and the
Strategic Defense Initiative (spending issues are relevant here)
·
Reagan and
defense spending
·
Reagan and the
sanctions against South Africa
·
Reagan and the
nuclear freeze movement
·
Bush 41 and the
first Gulf War 1990/91
·
Bush 41 and the
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START)
·
Bush 41 and the
aftermath of Tiananmen Square (China), (Most Favored Nation status)
·
Bush 41 and trade
tensions with Japan
·
Bush 41 and the
breakup of Yugoslavia;
·
Bush 41 and the
US intervention in Somalia
·
Clinton and the
US intervention in Somalia
·
Clinton and the
US intervention in Bosnia
·
Clinton and the
US intervention in Kosovo
·
Clinton and the
decision on Most Favored Nation status for China
·
Clinton and the
US intervention in Haiti
·
Clinton and trade
tensions with Japan;
·
Clinton and the
bailout of Russia
·
Clinton and the
crisis over North Korea’s nuclear weapons.
·
Bush 43 and the
Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty
·
Bush 43 and the
creation of the Department of Homeland Security
·
Bush 43 and
Decisions on Guantanamo Bay Detention
·
Bush 43 and the
Enemy Combatant Decisions
·
Bush 43 and the
US Invasion of Afghanistan
·
Bush 43 and
decision making on North Korea
This
is not an exhaustive list (though I got pretty tired typing it). Of course, choose something not on the list,
if you like. This list is just a sample
of all the different things that are possible topics. You will not run out of topics.
·
Journals
that will specifically have decision making articles:
o
Presidential Studies Quarterly
o
Congress and the Presidency
o
Foreign Policy Analysis
o
Diplomatic History
· Policy-Oriented that may have occasional decision making articles
·
Foreign
Affairs (policy-oriented)
·
Foreign
Policy (policy-oriented)
·
The
National Interest (policy-oriented)
·
The
Washington Quarterly (policy-oriented)
·
Survival
(policy-oriented)
·
Journal
of Intelligence and Counterintelligence (policy-oriented)
·
The
American Interest (policy-oriented)
·
Orbis
(half policy; half academic)
·
Journal
of Strategic Studies (half academic; half policy)
·
International
Security (academic)
·
Security
Studies (academic)
·
International
Affairs (London-based academic)
·
World
Politics (academic)
·
Journal
of Conflict Resolution (academic)
·
Armed
Forces and Society (academic on civil-military relations)
·
Journal
of National Security Law and Policy
·
National
Security Law Journal