Political Science 378

Political Science 378b

American National Security Policy

Spring 2000 Final Exam May 8, 2000

INSTRUCTIONS

There are four parts to this exam: I. Short Answer questions on material since the midterm; II. A pair of essays on the material since the midterm; III. A pair of comprehensive essays; IV. A second pair of comprehensive essays. Each part is worth 30 points, so the maximum score for the entire exam is 120 points. Each short answer question is worth 5 points, and each essay is worth 30 points. Follow the instructions for each section. Even though you will have the entire three hours, plan your time carefully. Outlining an essay before you write is not a bad idea. If you do not understand a question, ask me, don't guess! Good luck and have a good summer (and/or a good life!).

PART I. SHORT ANSWER QUESTIONS.

Do 3 short answer questions from each of the two sets of short answer questions.

SHORT ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE READINGS (5 points/answer).

1. According to ch. 12 of American National Security (Limited War), what are the main types of limitation on wars?

2. According to ch. 9 in the Use of Force (Hitler and the Blitzkrieg Strategy by Mearsheimer), what role did the campaign against Poland play in convincing the Germans to adopt a Blitzkrieg strategy against the West?

3. According to ch. 12 in the Use of Force (the Korean War by Halperin), for what reasons were atomic weapons not used by the US in the Korean War?

4. According to ch. 16 in the Use of Force (How Kuwait was won by Freedman & Karsh), for what reasons did Gen. Colin Powell (Chair of the JCS) challenge the idea that the Coalition could rely primarily on airpower?

5. According to ch. 18 in the Use of Force (From Preponderance to Offshore Balancing by Layne), if one uses the strategy of preponderance, what are the "deleterious consequences" for the US of the emergence of new great powers?

SHORT ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM THE LECTURES (5 points/answer).

6. Define "peacekeeping" and "peacemaking."

7. What arguments were made by the "NATO optimists? (name them)

8. What factors lead to success in air-to-air combat?

9. What are the main characteristics of naval warfare?

10. Name 5 of the reasons that it is plausible the US did not anticipate an attack on Pearl Harbor.

PART II. ESSAYS SINCE THE MIDERM

Write an essay on one of the following two questions. It is worth 30 points.

A. In the conclusion to his book Intervention, Haass says that "[t]he potential for intervening effectively with military means … [in] internal conflicts is less clear cut [than intervening in external conflicts]." What does the US experience in Kosovo say about this statement ? Did the US intervene effectively? Consider both the goals of the US intervention and the means used to intervene in your answer. What (if anything) does Kosovo suggest about the effectiveness of future US interventions in internal conflict? That is, do you feel that the Kosovo experience is relevant for future interventions of this type?

B. In the conclusion to his book Intervention, Haass says that three developments are discouraging about the future and US intervention. These three developments are: 1. The US will be challenged more often in the future; 2. Some of these challenges will probably include unconventional weaponry, and 3. There is declining popular and Congressional support for military interventions. Do you think he is correct about these developments? Evaluate each, and then discuss whether you believe that the collective impact is to reduce the chances that the US will intervene. Be sure to defend your answer.

PART III. COMPREHENSIVE ESSAYS

Write an essay on one of the following two questions. It is worth 30 points.

C. The Council on Foreign Relations book Future Visions for U.S. Defense Policy outlines 4 alternative choices to guide U.S. defense policy. In your essay, describe each choice, including the impact of each on the defense budget. Which of these choices do you feel is the most likely choice (i.e., which one will be the closest to the actual US defense policy of the next 10 years)? Why? Which choice do you think would be the best choice for US defense policy over the next 10 years)? Why? Be sure to give a real answer to both "why" questions!

D. The Marine Corps should be drastically reduced in size. It aircraft should be eliminated. We should use the Marines exclusively as quick reaction force to protect American people and facilities overseas, but all remaining ground combat roles should be shifted to the Army. OK, now that I have your attention, what is the role of the Marine Corps in American defense policy? Do we really need 2 services that are oriented towards ground combat? Go through the "world tour" I gave in the last few lectures about kinds of situation that the US must be prepared to handle with its military. Compare the capabilities of the Marine Corps versus the Army to deal with each situation. After these comparisons, do you think that the US needs to maintain a substantial Marine Corps (i.e., more or less at its current size)?

PART IV. COMPREHENSIVE ESSAYS

Write an essay on one of the following two questions. It is worth 30 points.

E. The US Army's AirLand Battle doctrine is classified as a strategy of maneuver, as opposed to a strategy of attrition. In your essay first describe what is a strategy of maneuver. Then describe the features of AirLand Battle. Finally, go through the "world tour" I gave in the last few lectures about kinds of situation that the US must be prepared to handle with its military. For each of these situations, is AirLand Battle appropriate and feasible to achieve US objectives? Be sure to discuss each situation and the reasons for your conclusion.

F. The Air Force will undoubtedly see the air campaign over Kosovo as a model for future uses of air power (at least if the right lessons are learned about it). Describe the air campaign over Kosovo in general terms. Then indicate what changes the Air Force would make to it if it gets to run the campaign (i.e., doesn't have to deal with the political complications of NATO). Then consider the "world tour" I gave of potential situations that the US may face in the future. For each of these situations, is a well-done Kosovo-type air campaign appropriate and feasible to achieve US objectives? Be sure to discuss each situation and the reasons for your conclusion.