1

PS332 Spring 2005 Paper requirements for “International Law and Human Rights”

  • First Draft = 15% of course grade (Due March 30)
  • Second Draft = 15% of course grade (Due April 22)

March 23 = The last day that I will look over your rough draft.

  • Seven pages maximum (excluding end notes). I will not read anything over seven pages.
  • Your grade will fall 10% for each day the paper is late.
  • Use endnotes (as opposed to footnotes or internal citations).
  • See the samples citations at the bottom of the next page for your endnote format. You MUST use this format for your citations (unless I formally allow you to use a different format prior to handing in the paper).
  • Use a title page and do not make it page #1.
  • You must use double-spacing, 12 point fonts, standard 1” margins and numbered pages.
  • Do NOT underline anything in your paper or in your endnotes. The only exception is for web addresses.
  • You may not tell me that you cannot get your computer (or printer) to put your paper into the format I have required.
  • You may not tell me that you cannot find enough information for your paper.
  • Your paper must be free of sloppy writing mistakes (This includes spelling, grammatical and typographical errors.)
  • Do not put anything in quotes unless you are very clear (in the text of the paper) about who is “speaking.”
  • You may not use the first person in writing this paper. (Do not use “I”)
  • Make use of appendices when appropriate.
  • Do not use a bibliography.

IF YOU MAKE IMPROPER USE OF INTERNET (OR ANY) SOURCES IN THIS PAPER YOU WILL FACE DISCIPLINARY ACTION. IF YOU ARE UNCERTAIN ABOUT WHAT CONSTITUTES PLAGIARISM IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO ASK ME.

  • PAPER TOPIC

Answer this question: Which theoretical perspective provides the most compelling framework for understanding the role of international law in the current international system? You are free to argue in favor of any theoretical framework, but it is adequate (and recommended) to argue only within the realm of the schools of thought that we have touched on this semester: Realist (Thucydides, Hobbes), Grotian (Grotius), Marxist (Trotsky, Marx). Although we did not examine Marx in this course, I expect you to use the piece by Trotsky to build upon Marx’s “Communist Manifesto” (that was covered in my intro course).

You are free to present any argument you wish, but you must link your essay to the authors listed above. You must ground your argument in an empirical analysis of a specific case study of international law (e.g. the UN, the ICC, the EU, the WTO, the struggle to promote human rights, the struggle to promote women’s rights, the struggle against terrorism). You must make it clear why your case study provides useful insight into the role of international law in the broader context of international relations. You must be clear about how your case study supports or refutes the theoretical frameworks above.

This paper is not a “thought piece.” You must present your own view, but you must support your view with research into the empirical case study and into relevant theoretical arguments. I expect you to draw upon existing theoretical scholarship on international law to support your argument.

Here is my suggested outline for your paper:

  1. Review your case study of international law (two pages)
  2. Link your case study to the three schools of thought, indicating clearly which school your case study supports(four pages)
  3. Explain the relevance of your case study for understanding the role of international law in the world today. Provide the bigger picture of your theoretical argument (one page)
  • I will grade your paper according to your ability to:
  • Follow the format directions described at the top of page one.
  • Write clear, succinct sentences and paragraphs.
  • Remove all sloppy writing errors.
  • Present a clear overview of your case study
  • Make clear and persuasive links between the theories and your case study.
  • Present the schools of thought clearly and fairly.
  • Explain the broader relevance of your findings in this study.
  • Conduct extensive research to support your findings.

sample citations:

Newspaper and magazine articles.[1] Books.[2] Websites.[3] Something from the same source as the previous citation.[4] Website without an author.[5]

If you have any questions about your citations please see me.

[1] Smith, Joe, “Why the US stinks”, The New York Times, (August 26, 1998)

[2] Jones, Mary, A History of US Stench, (New York: Random House, 1997) p. 45

[3] Williams, Robert, “The US still stinks”, Website of the US Department of State, (

[4] Ibid.

[5] “Statistics concerning US Stench”, Website of the US Department of Defense ( For information about the sources of US stench see: Jones, Fred, “Origins of Stench”, Journal of Politics, vol. 5, issue 3 (Summer 1994); Smith, Jane, Nagengast Stinks Even More Than the US, (New York: Dumb Publishers, 1994)