Article Analysis Assignment #1
  
       
     The main issue in USA Today’s article titled “US Denies     Proposing Direct Talks with Iran” is a “secret letter” a top conservative     lawmaker in Iran claims he received from President Barack Obama. The letter     remains remarkably visually absent. The main actors are US President Obama     and the Iranian Government, who currently is ramping up military action in     the Strait of Hormuz under threat of increased internationally recognized     economic sanctions.              Harvard     Professor Stanley Hoffman presents an End of History versus Realism review     of basic International Policy concepts. Realism is defined by Hoffman as     “states objectives are determined by threats to survival or security,”     “state’s economic and military power determines its fate,” and     “interdependence and international institutions are temporary.” This is     apparently the Kissinger model. End of History is “no more Global War, but     Globalization is Good for progress, which technology spreading, which is good     for the individual, who in turn strengthens each state,” according to     Hoffman. Each model faces distinct challenges: rivalry, civil wars, and the     fact that domestic policy will always shape international policy as     consequence of whichever reality is chosen to operate from. There is and     will be Globalization, maybe, but the trick is to decide which prism is     appropriate when viewing a particular event. With the news article I chose,     much like order of operations in algebra, deciding which level of analysis     to use will result in the more correct paradigm used to decipher the     situation in a theoretically-sound manner. Globalization is in an “embryonic”     stage, and as such, civil order is still in the process of becoming     legitimate. The progress of democracy, paired with autonomy-creating     technology, will free individuals to help their state prosper, creating     further security. And the abolition of borders will inevitably lead to     “improving the human condition.” This is not always evidentiary. As     described, there is no way but wisely to navigate the waterway. No one wise     way is guaranteed to be correct, but peace is maintained since Westphalia,     and must be kept that way. The chief threat to security appears to be     inequity, that which will arise as smaller states are absorbed by larger     states, due to civil war if not international intervention.  Hoffman states that cooperation     presupposes altruism, but as any crazy Randian can tell you, altruism is     objective. Finally, three effects of globalization ought to be understood:     there will be institutional power, but will it be state (sovereign) or     international? Human identity is naturally with the local state, not with     the continental shelf we were born on. And the cost of less violence is     inequity, which is the cause of violence. This is why we see the rise of     inner-state or transnational actors, terrorists with a religious or other     axe to grind. As I distill this essay, I am left with the thought: Either     the future holds international anarchy because of intervention reducing the     meaning of sovereign—or there will be international anarchy because there     is no intervention on the behalf of sovereign states when they are under     threat from non-state or inner-state actors. I will take Hoffman’s advice,     and worry less about the empirical evidence versus the normative evidence     and just dive into it. The “state” of Iran is claiming its sovereign right     to develop technology, and the US (among others) are claiming the     international sovereignty of the Imaginary Community for the purpose     forcing Iran to cooperate. More to come, as military actions just today     were ramped up by a series of British, French and American warships     traveling through the Strait .  |      
   |   
First
, read a news story from the newspaper or the Internet.  Answer the following questions regarding your news story: 1) What is the main issue, who are the main actors being discussed;  Then
, choose one of the assigned articles you read for this week.  Answer the following questions regarding the assigned article: 1) What are the basics of this article (who, what, when, how, why, etc.);  2) What is the overall main point the author is trying to convince you of?  3) Do you agree with the author’s argument?  Why?  Why not?   Finally
, tie together your news story with what you learned from the assigned article, textbook readings, podcasts, videos, etc. for this week.  Type your answers in the box below using your own words, no outline or bullets, complete sentences and paragraphs, single-spaced, full-page.  
  
 | 
 |  
Source citation: USA Today. “US Denies Proposing Direct     Talks With Iran.” Hoffman, Stanley.”Clash of Globalizations.”  |      
   |   
 
No comments:
Post a Comment