Posted: September 13th, 2017

critical article review

critical article review

Order Description

Your final written work will be a review of Fouad Ajami’s critical article about

Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations and a Summary of Robert Cooper’s The Breaking of

Nations ( chapter 2only, pp 16-37).

Ajami, Fouad. 1993. The Summoning: ‘But They Said, We Will Not Hearken’. Foreign

Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 4 (Sep. – Oct., 1993), pp. 2-9.

Cooper, Robert. 2003. The Breaking of Nations. NY: Atlantic Monthly Press.

Format: (articles biblio- info should be at top of first page). Your name, semester and

professor’s name on left top corner;; create a header with your last name and page

number in upper right hand corner. Type your paper using font 12 and double spaces.

Indent the first line of paragraphs using the tab key. Length: 1,500 to 2,000 words.

Guidelines

1. Introduction: Overview of the topic under review (future of conflict after Cold

War)

Briefly describe the topic of each reading (is the title appropriate? Descriptive of its

main arguments? Or is it provocative, to arise reader’s intellectual curiosity?) and the

purpose of your paper. DO NOT USE FIRST PERSON (Instead of “I think the title is

appropriate” say for example, “The title seems to be quite appropriate for the

material covered”

2. Body of Paper:

i. Identify and define important concepts the authors focus on, as well as

the authors’ theoretical perspective. Which is their main focus: States as

main actors and centers of future conflict? Colonialism and Imperialism?

Economic interests? Ideology/Religion? Culture? Regime type?

Globalization?

ii. Summarize the article’s content being aware of the context in which it

was written (historical time): Main argument; supporting arguments and

evidence presented to support their theories.

3. What conclusions does each author make about the future of conflict (be aware

of complexities involved, neither has a “bottom-line” conclusion but both

emphasize certain plausible scenarios of the future of human relations).

Contrast and compare their views as well as the two previous authors you

reviewed earlier, try to see the connection among them. What brings them

together (if anything), what sets them apart?
Page 2 of 2

Questions to consider

1. Does Ajami make a good case in his profound critique of Huntington’s Clash

of Civilizations? What is his main argument against the concept of civilization

as interpreted by Huntington? How does he explain the violence in the Middle

East?

2. How does Cooper bring these disparate scenarios together by his own

complex description of world orders and different types of states (depending

on their historical political development)?

3. How do both Fukuyama and Huntington differ from the other two authors’

worldviews? Which ideas are emphasized/de-emphasized by each? How can

we reconcile these disparate theories?
1 of 2
Displaying Final Paper_POLS 102 Fall 2015.docx.as mentioned above please insert in oproperiate places my name Tyrone Artis, professor M, Fornella course id pols 102s school old dominion university, and last due date april 23/2015, you can also refer back to the article critique containing fukuyama and huntington if need be.