PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · Changing International Political Order
Do you agree with the view that the USA uses NATO as a traditional tool of strategy to perpetuate its hegemony in the world?
How the answer moves
The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.
Flow snapshot — how the answer moves
Intro routes
rR! NATO 1949, US-led mutual defence pact vs USSR; Warsaw Pact 1955 → agree on the purpose, dispute the method — hegemony perpetuated, but not by coercion R2 the question's premise is realist (Mearsheimer: hegemon strengthens self, weakens rivals) — NATO's post-1991 record fits that purpose — but the method is consent, not coercion
Body flow
realist premise stated (Mearsheimer) → NATO outlives the enemy it was built against — institutionalises US military leadership in Europe — carries American influence eastward into the former Soviet space — Hurrell: Cold War's end frees the USA from geopolitical constraints, less tolerant of alternative orders — Ukraine war read partly as a contest over that expansion → European strategic autonomy discouraged → pivot: how the alliance holds its members — US backing for European reconstruction and integration — allies "bandwagon" instead of balancing —> Gramsci: leadership by consent vs by force beats a purely material account → explains the alliance holding together after the Soviet threat went
Counter-view
a pure instrument of American will would obey — Europe resents being “dragged into" US confrontations → "Sinatra Doctrine" impulse → separate China policy → burden-sharing: "fund its security" → Rapp-Hooper's “alliance deficit"
Conclusion routes
R1 agreement must be qualified → hegemony perpetuated by consent → consent can be withheld R2 Zakaria: the future of that hegemony turns on America's capacity to adapt
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
