1. In January, as one of his first acts as president, President Trump terminated U.S. involvement in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a NAFTA-style agreement with Mexico, Canada, Chile, Peru, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Brunei. What was the significance of this agreement? What were the major criticisms of it? Would you support this partnership? Why or why not? Does your answer reflect mercantilist or liberal assumption?

2. In November 2016, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) approved a loan to Egypt in the amount of $12 billion dollars. In order to access the bailout funds, Egypt must take steps to devalue its currency, raise utility costs, make significant efforts to shrink Its budget deficit, impose a value-added tax (VAT) to raise more government revenue, and to reform the government bureaucracy, among other possible reforms. Many of these measures are very unpopular among citizens, arguing that these changes will negatively impact citizens already suffering from high levels of inflation and unemployment. Some scholars criticize the IMF for imposing harsh terms in its conditionality agreements with countries receiving IMF funds, while others applaud the IMF for demanding serious reforms before providing financial resources. Which argument do you think is most convincing and why? If you were a leader negotiating with the IMF, what kinds of terms would you be willing to agree to and what terms would you resist and why?

3. In the first few months of 2017, North Korea has conducted multiple tests of long- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. In September 2016, it conducted itâs fifth, and most powerful, underground nuclear test. These tests were direct violations of UN Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874 forbidding North Korea from using ballistic missile technology and developing a nuclear program. What are likely North Koreaâs motivations? How has UN Security Council and other actors responded? What has been significant about the international response? What implications do these continued violations have for the UN Security Council and for enforcement of international law?

4. Since WWII, there has been a global trend toward greater integration and cooperation among states. Since the end of the Cold War, however, there have been increased instances of states disintegrating along ethnic lines, and in March 2017 the United Kingdom initiated the process of leaving the European Union. What arguments have been given in favor of Britain leaving the EU? What arguments have been given in opposition? Do you think Britain made the right decision? Why or why not? Does your answer reflect functional, neofunctional, or intergovernmental assumptions? Explain.

5. The Responsibility to Protect doctrine (R2P) was adopted in 2005 in response to international inaction during the Rwandan genocide. What are the basic premises of the R2P doctrine? What was the justification of applying R2P to Libya? Why hasnât the international community invoked R2P in its response to Syria? What justifications have states given for nonintervention by the UN in Syria? What does that tell you about the evolution of international norms of human rights?

6. On April 26, 2013, an illegally-built garment factory collapsed in Bangladesh killing at least 500 workers. Numerous deadly factory accidents have occurred since, including a deadly fire in a factory in September 2016. Clothing accounts for 80% of Bangladeshâs exports. How does this highlight some of the difficulties of free trade? Which theory of economic accumulation do you think best explains this situation and why? Reducing trade barriers as a mechanism for economic development continues to be heavily promoted. Should it continue to be promoted? Why or why not?

7. A recent UN report argued CO emissions are increasing so rapidly, that the international goal of limiting ultimate global warming to 2° Celsius is on the verge of becoming unattainable. In December 2015, the Paris Agreement was signed. It has been celebrated as the most ambitious environmental agreement to date. However critics point out that much of it is not legally binding, and lacks specific methods to achieve that goal. Why are states reluctant to commit to a specific, legally binding environmental treaty? Do these concerns reflect the views of mercantilists, liberal, or both? In what ways? How does this demonstrate the tragedy of the commons, and the problem of the environment as a common good?

8. According to the text, "new international political possibilities arise from technological developments" (p. 361). Recent news involving information technology include the twitter account of a 7-year-old Syrian girl conveying the horrors in Aleppo, internet blackouts in Ethiopia in response to anti-government protests, and numerous cyber-attacks by Russia targeting the presidential election in the United States, failed North Korean missile tests possibly due to American cyber- attacks. . What are the implications of advancing information technology, pros and cons for states, individuals, and other non-state actors? What implications does this have for the North-South gap in terms of economic development and political stability?