THE MAIN TASK OF THE PAPER
“Many people think Trump was a dramatically different US president, and maybe he was.  But was Trump’s foreign policy really such a break with past US foreign policy? There are different ways to answer this question.  One way is to compare by focusing on a particular issue or event or on Trump’s general approach”
REQUIREMENTS 
Words: 4500 (+/- 10%)
Papers should not be descriptive – this, they should not be a narrative history.  They need to answer a question, or to explain something. In other words, they need to be analytical/theoretical in some sense and also empirical (i.e., based on evidence). 
Must have a clear research question, contain some sort of research plan (or “design), explain what data/information/evidence they rely on and conclude by summarizing the key results of the paper.
FOUR MAIN GOALS OF THE PAPER
Become knowledgeable about a particular area or issue of US foreign policy.  We cover “grand strategy” in the course, but most of us are interested in what US foreign policy is with respect to a particular issue or area.  This paper gives you a chance to explore that. 
Thinking  more deeply about the various aspects of foreign policy that we are covering in this course.  The course offers you a toolbox to use in understanding what foreign policy is and how it is made.  You should utilize the required readings to the extent that you can, but you are expected to do research that goes beyond these.  Attempting to apply the concepts and ideas covered in the course should help you understand what these really mean.  
Learn how to research issues on American foreign policy. This means learning about the sources and authors of particular importance in this field of study.  Writing about U.S. foreign policy these days also provides an education on the difficulties of doing social science research.  It is always difficult to write about fairly recent, socially or politically significant topics, but the polarized political situation in the US makes it more difficult to write clearly and calmly about recent events.  For example, Trump is/was extremely controversial and is disliked by the traditional experts on foreign policy while Biden is, for the most part, favored by many (but not all) of these.  In addition, Trump’s approach looked somewhat chaotic, at least compared to other administrations. But in some ways, any research on US foreign policy faces the same potential problems. Real life is messy.  You should always be conscious about how you define your topic and your terms and what biases the sources that you use might have. 
This is academic writing, so both form and substance matter.
STRUCTURE
Devide underchapters and undersections  as 1.2, 3.4 and 1.2.1, 3.4.1
1. Introduction
2. Background and research question
What is the background of the question/puzzle?  What makes this a good question or puzzle? Is it a particularly important policy area?  Is it very controversial among academics,  “talking heads” or among the interested public?  Do you have an innovative take on the issue or an unexpected viewpoint?
3. Theory
May be trying to determine the theoretical school to which a writer belongs or what level of analysis the writers as using (for example, in a literature review). You might then classify the literature according to what kind of theory to use.
Remember that your theory is your explanation. You might want to look at and refer to the similar theories of others (theories in roughly the same category) for tips and guidelines about what factors are important and what sort of information/data/research design can be used as evidence.  How have others answered your question or a similar question?  Can they give you some tips on what to do in your paper? (Remember to tell the reader if you are borrowing ideas from others – explain and put in a reference.)  
Remember: don’t just mention a lot of theory. You need to come to a “bottom line”: what explanation are you exploring?  
4. Research design, method and sources
This paper requires you to state a question and work out a reasonable way to answer it.  In this section you explain how you have researched and answered your question. Your research design is the basic logic of what you are doing and why doing this will allow you to arrive at a reasonable answer to the question you pose. (Note: The research design should make sense given your theoretical vantage point, but theoretical vantage point does not dictate your research design. It is also important to understand that no research design is perfect.  You need to choose something that is reasonable and explain to the reader what you are doing and why.)
Will have to explain how you are defining “different” or “traditional” and your plan for comparing Trump’s  policy to these and arriving at a decent answer. This is where you explain the kind of study you are making:  What their grand strategies were?  Or comparative case studies of some similar events?  Or, some sort of statistical study, or a literature review, etc. What is wanted here, is the overall logic of what you are doing.
What information will you be looking for?  How will you collect it?  How will you make sure that you get enough reliable information in order to draw a conclusion?  How will you analyze that information? 
Your methods have to do with  the tools and techniques you use  to collect and analyze your information.  Your sources are where the information comes from.  There is no perfect way to make a study of any given question, but there are better and worse ways.  In outlining your research design and method, the best papers consider the advantages and disadvantages with what you are doing. Remember that these only make sense in the context of your research question and your theory/explanation
These may be primary or secondary sources. That is, if you need information about Trump’s public statements, and you decide to get those from, say, Twitter or formal policy documents, those are primary sources.  If you rely on information collected by other researchers and writers, you are using secondary sources.  Primary sources are good, but it is not always practical to collect this sort of information yourself, especially when time is short, as it is here.  In using secondary sources, be careful to pick as reliable sources as possible.  You can lean on work others have done if what they have done is at least decent.
5. The results of findings
Here you present what you have found in a clear and systematic manner.  Pay attention to how you organize your presentation.  Lay it out in a logical way. Consider here what information you would like to have had but were unable to find. Pay attention to the argument you are making, and lay out your findings in accordance with it. 
6. Discussion and conclusion
Some papers have a separate “discussion” section and then a conclusion.  Because this paper is relatively short, you might combine these in a single, concluding section.  Either way, you should have the following elements:  A summary of  your main empirical points or findings, second an analysis of what  it all means
7. Sources / reference list  
As many sources as needed, and please use some of the ones listed, and feel free to concact me if there are are any questions.
SOME IMPORTANT LITERATURE 
Hook, Spanier & Steven W – American foreign policy since world war 2 (https://archive.org/details/americanforeignp0014span/page/n5/mode/2up) 
Hook and Steven W – American foreign policy: the paradox of world power 
Allison – Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis
Julian Borger – The year US foreign policy fell apart
Badie – Groupthink, Iraq and the War on Terror: Explaining US Policy shift toward Iraq
Michaels – Trump and the Deep State
Goldgeier &  Saunders  – The Unconstrained Presidency: Checks and Balances Eroded Long Before Trump.
Jervis  – Liberalism, the Blob, and American Foreign Policy: Evidence and Methodology, 
Mead – Jacksonian Revolt
TO REMEMBER
“foreign policy” can have a variety of meanings and it is seldom possible to cover everything.  If you focus on a particular foreign policy event, this can be challenging to define too, since it can be difficult to pinpoint exactly when an “event” begins and when it ends. Keep in mind that something like the US war in Afghanistan went through several phases and may be wise to pick out one (or a few) key decisions to focus on. There is no single right answer about how to do this: but do not despair: This means that you can set your own boundaries and definition.   Your choice should be reasonable and reasoned rather than arbitrary, and you should explain it in the paper.  Keep in mind that every writer on US foreign policy has to make similar choices.
Do not plagiarize! Thank you so much. 🙂