POL S 426 A: World Politics

World Politics
POLS/ SIS 426 
Spring 2026

Instructor: Aseem Prakash (office, Gowen 39)
Class Time: Monday and Wednesday 12:30-2:20 p.m. 
Class:  Gowen 201
E-mail: aseem@uw.edu
Office hours: On request
Teaching Assistant: TBA

Objectives

Harold Lasswell, one of the most famous political scientists, described politics as who gets what, when, and how. World Politics is no different.  We see conflict and cooperation in every sphere. We signal our politics in elections and conversations. The choices we make as consumers are also political choices. Thus, we need to think of a more expansive notion of politics. Therefore, you will read and explore topics such as the Ukraine crisis, migration, climate change, trade politics, NGOs, foreign aid, and energy politics.

By the end of the course, I hope all of you will develop a more nuanced understanding of world politics and feel empowered to contribute to policy debates. Remember, participation by informed citizens in policy deliberation is essential for sustaining our democracy. Further, I hope this course and the broader UW experience will motivate you to think of politics and public service as your career.

Readings
We do not have any textbooks. I will use articles only. I will either provide their URL in the syllabus or upload these articles on Canvas.

 This is a Device-Free Class 
Research suggests that the use of electronic devices in class can be distracting for you and your colleagues. Therefore, to enhance your learning experience, during the class, you are not allowed to use phones, tablets, laptops, or any Internet-connectable devices. Please take notes using a pen and a notebook.

 Grades
You will be graded on the following:

 Paper #1 (Research Paper)

(5 pages of text; single-spaced; references on the 6^th page; Please upload on Canvas by April 2X, 1200 noon PST).

According to the United Nations, 5.1 million Ukrainians have been displaced since the start of Russia’s invasion. The war has led to a refugee influx, an energy crisis in states like Germany and Poland, and debate in the United States over military aid, including what sorts of weapons to send to Ukraine.

Why do actors advocate different policy choices (about whether to provide certain military aid to Ukraine or not) on how to respond to the Ukrainian war? Identify the specific policy options that are advocated by the United States, Hungary, and Poland. What objectives do these actors wish to achieve? How might these actors think of the benefits and costs of their preferred option as well as the options offered by the other two actors? Make sure that you relate how domestic, regional, or international considerations influence the perceptions of benefits and costs of various options.

Your paper should be directed toward an academic audience. You are expected to undertake research on this subject by carefully reading and referencing 7-10 articles that are not included in the syllabus; <scholar.google.com> can help you to identify published work on this subject. Newspaper articles and encyclopedia references do not constitute such sources. Wikipedia is not an appropriate source for this either.

Grading Criteria for Paper 1:

A (100 – 93):  This paper asserts a very clear thesis and supports the central argument with evidence. The paper illustrates a thorough understanding of this policy issue. It can identify the specific policy options advocated by the three actors and the objectives these actors wish to achieve. This paper offers an insightful analysis of the benefits and costs of each policy option from the perspectives of the three actors. All points are relevant and sufficiently developed. This paper exemplifies strong and able writing, with appropriate language, clarity, organization, grammar, and flow. This paper is easy to read yet challenges the reader to think. The paper addresses the academic audience and uses the appropriate number of references (7-10 articles).

A- (92 - 88): On the whole, this paper presents a clear argument and is able to support it with evidence. This paper is similar to an ‘A’ paper, but it is missing at least one of the elements found in an ‘A’ paper. In content, this paper illustrates policy options from the perspectives of three actors and offers a good analysis of these actors’ positions on these policies. This paper, however, is weakened by either mechanics (organization, spelling, grammar, syntax, and flow) and/or clarity.

B+ (87 – 85): This paper has a central argument that is presented and engages the required number of articles, but at times it is weak in argumentation and/or using supporting evidence. This paper does engage sufficiently with the policy options proposed by these actors. It is sometimes unclear or vague on the position of the three actors’ on different policy options.  Ideas are slightly muddled, but in general, there is a satisfactory level of understanding. This paper is strong in writing.

B (84 - 82): This paper is similar to a B+ paper. It illustrates a similar level of accuracy and understanding of the literature. This paper, however, differs from a B+ paper because it illustrates a weaker display of effective argumentation. Ideas are at times muddled, and argumentation may not always be effective and/or well supported, and the central argument is either unclear or argued inconsistently. This paper also needs some improvement in writing.

B- (81- 78): This paper lacks a clear central argument. While it attempts to identify policy options and the actors’ positions on them, it is overly simplistic in its explanation. This paper demands attention to writing mechanics.

C ( 77 – 72): This paper has a strikingly vague argument. This paper is not able to identify policy options or the actors’ positions on them. The paper minimally engages with the relevant literature. Writing mechanics are poor.

Below C (71 and below): This paper does not respond to the question. It lacks a central argument. Ideas are strikingly muddled and vague. It does not engage with the literature. Writing mechanics are poor.

Late policy: Late papers will be penalized by 5 points (on a 100 scale) for each day late. For example, a paper that otherwise would have been an 85 becomes an 80 if it is one day late. The clock for lateness begins at the time of submission, with a ten-minute grace period to account for potential connectivity problems.

Paper #2 (Research Paper)

(5 pages of text, single-spaced; References on the 6^th page; Please upload on Canvas by May 2X, 1200 noon PST.

Many commentators have employed the Vietnam analogy to describe America’s predicament in Afghanistan. Did Afghanistan turn out to be America’s Vietnam? Examine the validity of the Vietnam analogy to Afghanistan in terms of three dimensions:  entry, commitment, and exit. Given the above assessments, what insights from the Vietnam War can be applied to the Afghanistan situation? How have America’s domestic politics and international commitments influenced America’s policy choices in both wars? Your paper should be directed toward an academic audience.

You are expected to conduct research on this subject (carefully read and reference five articles each on both wars (that is, ten articles in total); again, <scholar.google.com> will help you identify the published work. Also, these articles should not be included in the syllabus. Newspaper articles and encyclopedia references do not constitute such sources. Wikipedia is not an appropriate source for this either.

Grading Criteria for Paper 2:

 A (100 - 93): This paper answers the question by asserting a very clear thesis and supporting the central argument with evidence.  This paper considers how others might respond to this assessment. All points are relevant and sufficiently developed. This paper exemplifies strong and able writing, with appropriate language, clarity, organization, grammar, and flow. This paper is easy to read yet challenges the reader to think. The paper addresses the academic audience and uses the appropriate number of references (minimum 10).

 A- (92 - 88): On the whole, this paper presents a clear argument and can support it with evidence.  This paper is similar to an A paper, but it is missing at least one of the elements found in an A paper.  This paper, however, is weakened by either mechanics (organization, spelling, grammar, syntax, and flow) and/or clarity.  

 B+ (87 - 85): This paper has a central argument that is presented and presents the evidence, but at times it is weak in argumentation and/or using supporting evidence.  Ideas are slightly muddled, but in general, there is a satisfactory level of understanding. This paper is strong in writing mechanics. 

 B (84 - 82): This paper is similar to a B+ paper. It illustrates a similar level of accuracy and the use of evidence. This paper, however, differs from a B+ because it illustrates a weaker display of effective argumentation and/or use of supporting evidence. Ideas are at times muddled, and evidence may not always be effective and/or well supported, and the central argument either lacks clarity or is argued inconsistently. This paper also needs some improvement in writing mechanics.

 B- (81 - 78) : This paper lacks a clear central argument and argumentation. It demands attention to writing mechanics.

 C (77 - 72): This paper has a strikingly vague argument.  The paper only minimally provides supporting evidence. Writing mechanics are poor.

 Below C (71 and below): This paper does not respond to the question.  It lacks a central argument.  Ideas are strikingly muddled and vague.  It does not provide evidence to support the argument. Writing mechanics are poor. 

 Late policy: Late papers will be penalized by 5 points (on a 100 scale) for each day late. For example, a paper that otherwise would have been an 85 becomes an 80 if it is one day late. The clock for lateness begins at the time of submission, with a ten-minute grace period to account for potential connectivity problems.

Group project paper and presentation

(A single, jointly authored, 5-page report; single-spaced; references on the 6^th page. Please upload on Canvas by June X, 1200 noon PST).

Late policy: Late papers will be penalized by 5 points (on a 100 scale) for each day late. For example, a paper that otherwise would have been an 85 becomes an 80 if it is one day late. The clock for lateness begins at the time of submission, with a ten-minute grace period to account for potential connectivity problems.

You will participate in a group project  (3  or 4 students per group) that will examine issues such as democracy recession, the rise of China, and climate change. Siyu will assign you to specific groups.

Please examine questions such as: how did the problem emerge, and how has the country been affected by it? What specific steps has it taken to respond to it? Has the response been perceived as being successful? 

Each team will present its perspective in the class and also turn in a written report. We expect each team to survey the relevant literature (including newspaper articles) on the subject.   Your group will present to the class for 10 minutes, possibly followed by a brief Q&A.   You can use PowerPoint. Here are some ideas:

• Be specific on how the problem in question affected your country.
• What are the short-term consequences for say public health and the economy?
• What might be the long-term consequences?
• Ensure that you have a maximum of 5 slides and not more than 5 bullet points per slide.

Logistics

Make sure that you are checking your uw email; typically, students use @uw email address to coordinate activities with their group members. In previous classes, some group members have also shared phone numbers to facilitate texting – but given the privacy issue, this is something you need to decide for yourself. 

If you are having “issues” with your group members, please contact Siyu at least a week prior to your presentation date.

Class discussions: I want students to actively participate in class discussions, including discussions following guest lectures, student presentations, and documentaries. Feel free to connect these discussions with the issues/topics/readings from other courses you might have enrolled in at UW. World Politics is complicated and we need the ability to process different arguments, evaluate evidence, and develop a perspective. I welcome comments, questions, and different perspectives.

Extension Policy: In cases of illness and other extenuating circumstances, the TA will consider requests for a paper deadline extension, so long as a student makes the request ahead of time. In cases where a student encounters an emergency within four hours of a deadline and needs to ask for an extension, the student’s request will include (as an attachment) the work they have completed so far, which could include notes, an outline, and/or a draft.

 Evaluation

Evaluation

In total, you can score 100 points. To convert this into a 4-point scale, I will follow the departmental guidelines: https://depts.washington.edu/psteach/grading%20system.html

Please Note:  

This course qualifies for the W (writing) credit.

I reserve the right to change or modify the syllabus without prior notice.

I will follow UW’s policy on plagiarism: http://depts.washington.edu/grading/issue1/honesty.htm#plagiarism

Religious Accommodation
Washington state law requires that UW develop a policy for the accommodation of student absences or significant hardship due to reasons of faith or conscience, or for organized religious activities. The UW’s policy, including more information about how to request an accommodation, is available at Religious Accommodations Policy (https://registrar.washington.edu/staffandfaculty/religious-accommodations-policy/). Accommodations must be requested within the first two weeks of this course using the Religious Accommodations Request form (https://registrar.washington.edu/students/religious-accommodations-request/).