Choose one of the countries listed below, identify its counterpart/equivalent to the U.S. State Department
and complete the following assignment explained in SECTION 1 and SECTION 2.
COUNTRY CASE-STUDY LIST: (*You may only choose from this list.*)
1) Canada 2) South Africa 3) Israel 4) South Korea 5) China
6) Egypt 7) Russia 8) India 9) Brazil 10) Argentina
11) Indonesia 12) Australia 13) Mexico 14) France 15) Philippines
16) Jordan 17) Maldives 18) Germany 19) North Korea 20) Italy
21) Chile 22) Singapore 23) Japan 24) Saudi Arabia 25) Kuwait
26) Peru 27) Algeria 28) Iran 29) Pakistan 30) Mongolia
31) Malaysia 32) Kosovo 33) Nigeria 34) EU 35) UK
36) Bahrain 37) Poland 38) Demark 39) Lebanon 40) Morocco
41) Kenya 42) Iraq 43) Thailand 44) Turkmenistan 45) Turkey
46) Cuba 47) Qatar 48) Finland 49) Taiwan 50) Tunisia
SECTION 1 – COMPARATIVE DEPARTMENT/MINISTRY BACKGROUND SYNOPSES
This section requires you to provide comparative background synopses for both the U.S. State Department
and its counterpart from your selected country. In that connection, you must compare the two organizations
according to publicly available, factual information relevant to following subjects:
1) origin/evolution (including date established) and structure (perhaps a flow chart/diagram in the appendix);
2) mission (i.e., mission statement(s)) and declared goals/objectives;
3) size of personnel officially employed by organization (approximation is acceptable) and brief explanation
of post-2008 trend of fluctuation therein (decrease in size due to layoffs/austerity; relatively stable/stagnant due
to hiring freeze; gradual or rapid increase, etc.);
4) global ambassadorial/consular presence and brief explanation of post-Cold War trend of contraction
or expansion therein;
5) budget data since 2008 and brief explanation of trend of contraction, expansion or stagnancy therein
(if public data for 2008-2018 budgets is not retrievable, then students are allowed to make educated guesses as to what
the budget might be based on informed, careful extrapolation from available qual/quantitative data from past budget
information as well as expert speculation);
6) general responsibilities (formal/informal) of organizational leader (i.e., “secretary” of “foreign minister”);
7) frequency of leadership turnover in post-Cold War era and brief explanation of trend in turnover
(i.e., In the U.S.,post-Cold War Secretaries of State typically serve for one presidential term because of x, y and z…; In
post-Cold War Russia, Foreign Ministers experienced greater turnover in the 1990s due the political unpredictability
and tumult of the Yeltsin administration, but have generally have served long in the Putin era due to increasing
authoritarianism in the executive branch….);
2
8) secretary/minister place in line of executive succession (in the U.S. this is clear and formalized in law, but
in other countries – especially those with authoritarian governments – it might not be so clear; in the latter instance,
student are allowed and encouraged to make an informed “guestimate” as to where the Secretary/Minister may stand in
line of succession), informal status/rank of secretary/minister importance in national executive cabinet
and traditional level of influence over national executive’s foreign policy decisions (students will offer
informed, albeit speculative, commentary on these topics based on the data they have retrieved and analyzed);
9) major legislation enabling the organization’s function, articulating its responsibilities and
stipulating its powers in crisis management (this could include authority and duties delegated in/by national
constitutions as well as subsequent, supporting legislation); and,
10) explanation of how variance in #s 3-9 hypothetically could facilitate and undermine effectiveness in
crisis management of the U.S. State Department and your chosen foreign counterpart organization.
You must paraphrase all non-quantitative (i.e., statistical) information. No bullet-points or numbered list (like that
above) allowed; students must present content and commentary in full-sentence prose.
SECTION 2 – COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS IN CRISIS MANAGEMENT
Please assess and compare the effectiveness of the U.S. State Department and your chosen counterpart
organization in formulating, articulating and implementing foreign policy to individually manage one of
the following crises in such a way that promotes (or promoted) diplomatic and political, as opposed to
military, resolution:
***The U.S. State Department has endeavored to develop foreign policy responses to all of the crises listed below.***
Crisis #1: Iranian Pursuit of Nuclear Weapons Concerned countries  Israel, China, Egypt, Russia, France, Jordan,
Germany, Italy, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Pakistan, Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey, Qatar, Bahrain, N.Korea, Brazil
Crisis #2: North Korean Denuclearization Concerned countries  Canada, South Korea, China, Russia, Australia,
Philippines, Japan, Iran, Pakistan, Mongolia, Taiwan, Thailand
Crisis #3: Political Status of Taiwan Concerned countries  China, Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Philippines,
Russia, Vietnam, EU, Australia
Crisis #4: PRC Claims to South China Sea Countries concerned  Taiwan, Japan, S.Korea, Vietnam, Philippines,
Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Germany, France, India, Mongolia, EU, Singapore, Russia, Thailand
Crisis #5: Israeli-Palestinian Dispute Countries concerned  Egypt, Russia, France, Germany, Italy, Turkey,
Algeria, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Pakistan, Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain, Denmark, Lebanon, Iraq, Tunisia
Crisis #6: Russian Aggression in Ukraine Concerned countries  France, Italy, Germany, Denmark, China, UK,
EU, Japan, Poland, Finland, Turkmenistan, Kosovo, Israel, Canada, South Korea, Australia
Crisis #7: Darfur Concerned countries  Canada, South Africa, Israel, China, Egypt, Russia, France, EU, Germany,
Italy, Japan, Algeria, Nigeria, India, Denmark, UK
Crisis #8: Libyan Civil War (ongoing) Countries concerned  Israel, China, Egypt, Canada, Russia, France, EU,
Germany, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Algeria, UK, Morocco, Iraq, Qatar, Nigeria, South Africa, Turkey, Tunisia
Crisis #9: Afghan Civil War (ongoing) Countries concerned  Canada, China, Russia, India, Australia, France,
EU, Germany, Italy, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, UK, Poland, Denmark, Iraq, Turkmenistan, Turkey, Qatar, Finland
Crisis #10: Colombian Civil War (resolved) Countries concerned  Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Cuba, Mexico
3
To assess and compare the effectiveness of both the USSD and your chosen foreign counterpart organization
in individually managing your chosen crisis, you must complete the following tasks:
1) provide a brief synopsis of the “crisis” that you have chosen from those listed on page 2;
2) identify the aspirations of both the USSD & counterpart for political resolution of crisis and whether
respective visions for political resolution are similar;
3) identify the most effective policy tools that USSD & counterpart individually/separately used to realize
political resolution of crisis (these tools could include promise and delivery of economic dis/incentives, technology and
intelligence sharing, third-party mediation, weapons sales, cultural exchange, political/diplomatic resolution);
4) discern whether USSD and counterpart’s policy toward crisis has remained consistent or changed
remarkably over the years;
5) explore how closely USSD and counterpart rhetoric has matched respective behavior/actions to realize
desired political resolution to crisis; and,
6) provide informed opinion as to how well USSD and counterpart policy efforts may have contributed to
progress to political resolution of crisis – and whether each has been effective in crisis management.
***I am not looking for extensive discussion of how the USSD and counterpart may have cooperated in
crisis management. RATHER, I am looking for assessment of each organization’s individual efforts to
realize political resolution to said crisis.***
_________________________________________________________________________
RESEARCH REQUIREMENTS:
Students are expected to conduct research in which they obtain qualitative and quantitative evidence and
data for the mid-term. Students must extract relevant information from the following source types: (at
least) TWO books, (at least) TWO peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles, (at least) TWO newspaper
articles (preferably from the country of IA in question), (at least) TWO reputable websites, and (at least) TWO
official government documents.
Assigned course readings DO NOT count toward the minimum requirement of two per source type.
*For information on conducting research, access “Research Tutorials” folder in Modules section on course website starting Feb. 3.*
JSTOR, Academic Search Premier and Google Scholar provide excellent search engines for accessing and
reviewing peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles. The Economist Intelligence Unit is especially useful
for finding qualitative analysis and quantitative data on specific countries.
Ideally, at least some of the newspaper articles should come from newspapers native to the state that students
are researching (or native to the state(s) in which students’ chosen non-state actor is located) – Lexis-Nexis
Academic is a good place to locate English-language newspapers from many countries.
Official government documents comprise legislation, speech and interview transcriptions, government or
government-commissioned reports, policy and press statements and should come from governments of the
country students have chosen to research; in regard to non-state actors, such documents could come from
administrative bodies that govern and/or formulate policy on possession of nuclear weapons. Government
documents also include bilateral international treaties to which a chosen actor is signatory.
Reputable websites could include NGO, INGO, non-profit and think-tank sites that provide information
relevant to a student’s thesis. They exclude informal encyclopedic sites such as Wikipedia, Infoplease
and the like; more well-known encyclopedic sites such as Britannica or History.com are acceptable.
4
FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS:
1) Your assignment MUST be at least TEN, and at most FIFTEEN, full pages of text, double-spaced.
2) Your assignment MUST have a COVER/TITLE PAGE with (and in the following order):
a) A two-part title indicating which foreign counterpart you are comparing to the USSD,
the crisis each is attempting to manage and whether either or both have been effective
in managing said crisis type-written in CENTER of page (the title could read something like:
“The U.S. State Department & PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs: A Comparative Analysis of Failure to
Manage Effectively the North Korean Nuclear Crisis”)
b) Your name (centered at the bottom of the page)
c) Class name (centered at the bottom of the page)
d) Assignment due date – March 06, 2021 (centered at the bottom of the page)
e) My name – Dr. or Prof. Richardson (centered at the bottom of the page)
**Title-page DOES NOT count as one of the 10-15 pages of text mentioned above – nor do endnotes or bibliography.**
3) Your assignment must:
a) Be type-written in 12-point Times New Roman (TNR) font.
b) Be double-spaced.
c) Have page numbers written in 12-point TNR font and centered at bottom of each page.
d) Paragraphs beginning with FULL “Tab” indentations.
e) Have standard 1-inch margins on ALL SIDES.
4) Your assignment MUST be written in full-sentence prose with full sentences and proper punctuation.
5) Your assignment MUST have an introduction and conclusion. The introduction MUST provide: a
clearly discernible topical focus; a discussion of sections into which the paper will be divided; and, a
brief description of what sections will cover. The conclusion must summarize what the findings of
Section 2 and re-affirm Section 2 argument as to USSD and counterpart effectiveness in specific crisis
management.
CITATION REQUIREMENTS: ***READ AND THEN RE-READ VERY CAREFULLY***
1) Your assignment must have proper citation/documentation as it will consult, paraphrase and quote
directly a number of sources. Acceptable citation formats include APA, footnotes or endnotes. A
bibliography must be included regardless of method of in-text citation or use of endnotes.
2) In-text citations, including APA and the like, must provide author name(s), year of publication and exact
page (or specific range of pages) from which information is extracted – or paragraph number(s) (if taken
from an online/newspaper article). Online sources presented in bibliography must include date
retrieved/accessed and full web address. (Exceptions to this policy on provision of full web addresses
include newspaper articles accessed via Lexis-Nexis, scholarly journal articles or book chapters accessed
by Academic Search Premier or JSTOR, and data retrieved from the Economist Intelligence Unit.)
5
SUGGESTED GENERAL OUTLINE & ORGANIZATIONAL TEMPLATE
*Following this template is not required; students may augment it to their needs and preferences.
I. Introduction (0.5 – 1.0 pages double-spaced (DS)) (REQUIRED)
A. Introduction of comparative topical focus
B. ID of USSD foreign counterpart
C. Outline of what you will discuss in the comparative analysis (i.e., “This comparative analysis consists of two
major sections that are followed by a conclusion. The first section examines…)
II. Comparative Organizational Background (4.5 – 6.5 pages DS) (REQUIRED)
A. Origin (including date of establishment) & Organizational Structure
B. Mission & Goals
C. Size of Personnel & Global Ambassadorial Presence
D. Budget Data
E. General Responsibilities of Dept/Ministry “leader”
F. Frequency of Leadership Turnover
G. Dept/Min’y Leader Line of Succession, Unofficial “Rank” in Cabinet & Level of Influence over Nat’l Exec.
H. Enabling Legislation
I. Explanation of Variance #s 3-9 on Org. Effectiveness in Crisis Management
III. Comparative Effectiveness in Crisis Management (4.5 – 6.5 pages DS) (REQUIRED)
A. Synopsis of Crisis
B. USSD & Counterpart (CPT) Desired Political Outcome/Resolution
C. Most Effective USSD & CPT Foreign Policy Tools in Crisis Management (CM)
D. Consistency in CM Policy of USSD & CPT
E. USSD & CPT Rhetoric vs. Action
F. Informed Opinion as to Effectiveness of USSD & CPT in CM
IV. Conclusion (0.5 – 1.0 pages DS) (REQUIRED)
A. Summary of Section 2 Findings
B. Re-affirm argument as to comparative effectiveness of USSD & CPT in CM
V. Appendices (Charts, Graphs, Photos, etc.)
VI. Endnotes (if applicable)
VII. Bibliography (REQUIRED)