GOV 312L- Exam #3 - Moser/McDonald
Questions with All Actual Answers
2026/2027 Updated.
What are institutions? What is the difference between institutions and organizations? What are
some examples of institutions in domestic and international politics? - Answer -"Institutions
are the rules of the game in a society or, more formally, are the humanly devised constraints
that shape human interaction. In consequence they structure incentives in human exchange,
whether political, social, or economic"; note: institutions are rules governing human interaction,
incentives- institutions tend to award certain behavior and punish others
-Institutions are rules, organizations can contain institutions but are not rules but rather are
actors
-Examples: institution= US Constitution; organization=Congress
Understand, explain, and give examples of how international institutions shape international
politics through the following mechanisms: a) guiding behavior and shaping expectations; b)
providing information about state interests and incentives to comply; c) allocating and
generating power for states. - Answer a) Important Rules: Sovereignty as legal recognition (by
other states) of a government's right to regulate people (set laws for them) living within set
territorial boundaries, Trade Liberalization- grant access of foreign companies to domestic
markets--facilitates the expansion of globalization and commerce (WTO, a regulator)
Organizations, like WTO and UN, matter in global politics because they sometimes possess the
capacity to enforce the rules that they are designed to promote; enforcement capacity- an
organization possesses the means to punish a member state if it violates the organization's
policy (WTO has this power); problem: if IO does not possess means to enforce (think UN) and
has to delegate authority to enforce to states-- can mean effective end to IO e.g. League of
Nations
b) Provision of info helps to reduce uncertainty about a state's future behavior, which can
encourage cooperation among states in the future; examples: Chinese entry in WTO- china had
to comply with the concessions of entry for gaining better access to american domestic market;
weapons inspectors--check for compliance
c) Creating new international law, IO's can rely on their rules to build up their own power to
influence states (Judicial activism of WTO). Setting a specific agenda, rules among IO's allocate
power among states by influencing the capacity of these member states (Veto power of UN
Security Council)
How does U.S. membership in international organizations like the UN, NATO, and WTO
demonstrate the ability of international institutions to solve a fundamental problem of
,international politics - to create and preserve coercive power and, at the same time, constrain
that same power? - Answer -IO's like UN, NATO, and WTO help to promote and defend policy
ideas consistent with American interests like democracy promotion, free trade, respect for
human rights, and the construction of an affective collective security organization. Ikenberry: US
entry into international organizations helps to solve fundamental problem of politics at
international level, but bc it is multilateral other states can work to check or constrain american
policy when they oppose it.
Watch the Jon Stewart video clip on the United Nations and explain his critique of the United
Nations. Why is this critique "funny but wrong" according to lecture? - Answer -Even though
Jon Stewart critiques the UN for not being effective with setting rules, the UN actually holds
international legitimacy on a set of foreign policy actions
Why does the United States participate in the United Nations and often abide by its decisions
when it could just ignore it instead (because it possesses much greater military capacity than
the UN)? What is the tension between the United States and international organizations? What
do states like the U.S. gain and lose from participation in international organizations? - Answer
-The US participates in the UN because it is a powerful source of legitimacy abroad and at home
for contreversial polices (e.g. US seeks approval for Iraq was in 2003), UN reflects global public
opinion which makes it easier to gain allies with this support, the domestic public are more
likely to support policies that have UN approval
-tension created by managing international relations with other states and also a domestic
imperative to preserve the capacity of the american gov't to remain sovereign in affecting public
policy.
-Gain of legitimacy for the policy and security of additional support to implement policies BUT
can require some surrender of sovereignty or authority of elected officials (surrendering
democratic control)
What are the Cold War origins of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)? What did Lord
Ismay mean when he said the goal of NATO was "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in,
and the Germans down"? What were (and are) the central dilemmas of NATO from both the
European and American sides of the relationship? - Answer - NATO alliance chief function
during the Cold War was to provide military security for western Europe against the possibility
of a Soviet attack, consisted of many multi-faceted benefits commitments it enacted
-Ismay meant:
1) "Keep the Russians out"- refers to NATO as the pillar to American lead containment of the
Soviet threat, provided protection from conventional and nuclear attack, cornerstone of peace
and prosperity
2) "the Americans in"- refers to NATO as a binding mechanism for American military power,
american led alliance provided a necessary hegemon for the collective security arrangement,
, the US provided essential public goods like military might, NATO forced them to act
multilaterally rather than unilaterally when taking into account foreign allies and debating
foreign policies and military action
3) "the Germans down"- refers to NATO's role in maintaining peace between the democratic
powers in Europe by integrating them into an alliance that was lead by an outsider (US)
-Dilemmas:
1) Potential for European shirking, European countries' shirking their responsibility to provide
for their own military security by not spending enough on their militaries during the Cold War
2) US potentially being a reluctant hegemon
What dilemmas did NATO face at the end of the Cold War? What was the case in favor of NATO
expansion after the Cold War? What was the case against NATO expansion after the Cold War? -
Answer -Dilemmas:
1) Loss of NATO's mission- end of Warsaw Pact mean end of NATO? , finding new missions and
adversaries including interventions outside of the region
2) Pressure from Eastern Europe to enter NATO, arguing they were unfairly abandoned by the
West to be left vulnerable to Russian hegemony, although it seemed to be good more countries
were supporting NATO EE nations brought burdens because some were simply not ready to join
the organization
3) What to do about Russia? How should NATO approach the 'new Russia'? , NATO should
preemptively contain Russia (even though it was no longer communist) vs. including Russia into
NATO
- For: NATO's original goals remain relevant, NATO could be used as a more effective "mini-UN"
mostly for the use of legitimacy
-Against: the mission of NATO was already accomplished which makes it no longer relevant--
security in Europe no longer needs NATO, If NATO continued could be seen as a threat and also
antagonizes Russia
According to the Patrick reading, describe the current demand or need for international
organizations to address new international problem given technological changes and other
transnational threats. Does Patrick think current international organizations are up to the task?
Why or why not? - Answer -Tremendous need for international rules and process of
enforcement as problems become transnational because single states can not resolve these
issues alone (who regulates internet? , what is the correct foreign response to a hacked
computer infrastructure? , etc.)
Questions with All Actual Answers
2026/2027 Updated.
What are institutions? What is the difference between institutions and organizations? What are
some examples of institutions in domestic and international politics? - Answer -"Institutions
are the rules of the game in a society or, more formally, are the humanly devised constraints
that shape human interaction. In consequence they structure incentives in human exchange,
whether political, social, or economic"; note: institutions are rules governing human interaction,
incentives- institutions tend to award certain behavior and punish others
-Institutions are rules, organizations can contain institutions but are not rules but rather are
actors
-Examples: institution= US Constitution; organization=Congress
Understand, explain, and give examples of how international institutions shape international
politics through the following mechanisms: a) guiding behavior and shaping expectations; b)
providing information about state interests and incentives to comply; c) allocating and
generating power for states. - Answer a) Important Rules: Sovereignty as legal recognition (by
other states) of a government's right to regulate people (set laws for them) living within set
territorial boundaries, Trade Liberalization- grant access of foreign companies to domestic
markets--facilitates the expansion of globalization and commerce (WTO, a regulator)
Organizations, like WTO and UN, matter in global politics because they sometimes possess the
capacity to enforce the rules that they are designed to promote; enforcement capacity- an
organization possesses the means to punish a member state if it violates the organization's
policy (WTO has this power); problem: if IO does not possess means to enforce (think UN) and
has to delegate authority to enforce to states-- can mean effective end to IO e.g. League of
Nations
b) Provision of info helps to reduce uncertainty about a state's future behavior, which can
encourage cooperation among states in the future; examples: Chinese entry in WTO- china had
to comply with the concessions of entry for gaining better access to american domestic market;
weapons inspectors--check for compliance
c) Creating new international law, IO's can rely on their rules to build up their own power to
influence states (Judicial activism of WTO). Setting a specific agenda, rules among IO's allocate
power among states by influencing the capacity of these member states (Veto power of UN
Security Council)
How does U.S. membership in international organizations like the UN, NATO, and WTO
demonstrate the ability of international institutions to solve a fundamental problem of
,international politics - to create and preserve coercive power and, at the same time, constrain
that same power? - Answer -IO's like UN, NATO, and WTO help to promote and defend policy
ideas consistent with American interests like democracy promotion, free trade, respect for
human rights, and the construction of an affective collective security organization. Ikenberry: US
entry into international organizations helps to solve fundamental problem of politics at
international level, but bc it is multilateral other states can work to check or constrain american
policy when they oppose it.
Watch the Jon Stewart video clip on the United Nations and explain his critique of the United
Nations. Why is this critique "funny but wrong" according to lecture? - Answer -Even though
Jon Stewart critiques the UN for not being effective with setting rules, the UN actually holds
international legitimacy on a set of foreign policy actions
Why does the United States participate in the United Nations and often abide by its decisions
when it could just ignore it instead (because it possesses much greater military capacity than
the UN)? What is the tension between the United States and international organizations? What
do states like the U.S. gain and lose from participation in international organizations? - Answer
-The US participates in the UN because it is a powerful source of legitimacy abroad and at home
for contreversial polices (e.g. US seeks approval for Iraq was in 2003), UN reflects global public
opinion which makes it easier to gain allies with this support, the domestic public are more
likely to support policies that have UN approval
-tension created by managing international relations with other states and also a domestic
imperative to preserve the capacity of the american gov't to remain sovereign in affecting public
policy.
-Gain of legitimacy for the policy and security of additional support to implement policies BUT
can require some surrender of sovereignty or authority of elected officials (surrendering
democratic control)
What are the Cold War origins of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)? What did Lord
Ismay mean when he said the goal of NATO was "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in,
and the Germans down"? What were (and are) the central dilemmas of NATO from both the
European and American sides of the relationship? - Answer - NATO alliance chief function
during the Cold War was to provide military security for western Europe against the possibility
of a Soviet attack, consisted of many multi-faceted benefits commitments it enacted
-Ismay meant:
1) "Keep the Russians out"- refers to NATO as the pillar to American lead containment of the
Soviet threat, provided protection from conventional and nuclear attack, cornerstone of peace
and prosperity
2) "the Americans in"- refers to NATO as a binding mechanism for American military power,
american led alliance provided a necessary hegemon for the collective security arrangement,
, the US provided essential public goods like military might, NATO forced them to act
multilaterally rather than unilaterally when taking into account foreign allies and debating
foreign policies and military action
3) "the Germans down"- refers to NATO's role in maintaining peace between the democratic
powers in Europe by integrating them into an alliance that was lead by an outsider (US)
-Dilemmas:
1) Potential for European shirking, European countries' shirking their responsibility to provide
for their own military security by not spending enough on their militaries during the Cold War
2) US potentially being a reluctant hegemon
What dilemmas did NATO face at the end of the Cold War? What was the case in favor of NATO
expansion after the Cold War? What was the case against NATO expansion after the Cold War? -
Answer -Dilemmas:
1) Loss of NATO's mission- end of Warsaw Pact mean end of NATO? , finding new missions and
adversaries including interventions outside of the region
2) Pressure from Eastern Europe to enter NATO, arguing they were unfairly abandoned by the
West to be left vulnerable to Russian hegemony, although it seemed to be good more countries
were supporting NATO EE nations brought burdens because some were simply not ready to join
the organization
3) What to do about Russia? How should NATO approach the 'new Russia'? , NATO should
preemptively contain Russia (even though it was no longer communist) vs. including Russia into
NATO
- For: NATO's original goals remain relevant, NATO could be used as a more effective "mini-UN"
mostly for the use of legitimacy
-Against: the mission of NATO was already accomplished which makes it no longer relevant--
security in Europe no longer needs NATO, If NATO continued could be seen as a threat and also
antagonizes Russia
According to the Patrick reading, describe the current demand or need for international
organizations to address new international problem given technological changes and other
transnational threats. Does Patrick think current international organizations are up to the task?
Why or why not? - Answer -Tremendous need for international rules and process of
enforcement as problems become transnational because single states can not resolve these
issues alone (who regulates internet? , what is the correct foreign response to a hacked
computer infrastructure? , etc.)
