The idea behind this paper is very straightforward: Please choose something important that happened or is happening in international relations and then test two contrasting theoretical approaches to decide which theory best explains the important thing that happened or is happening. The thing could be any complex event or pattern that you consider to be significant and important from an international relations perspective. It could be a particular war breaking out; it could be persistent inequality of some sort; it could be some aspect of ethnic identity in a country you’re interested it; it could be something related to the global economy. The list goes on and on.
Just as one example, consider the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, a classic “thing” in the study of IR. Following an extremely tense 13-day standoff which threatened to annihilate the world in nuclear war, the United States and the Soviet Union finally reached an agreement to end the crisis. So which theory best explains the crisis and/or its resolution?
The key point is that you want to test two differing and contrasting theoretical approaches to see which one best explains the significant thing or pattern. You might choose to test, for example, Neorealism and Constructivism (or any of the other theoretical approaches we’ve been talking about). You would then first spend 4-5 pages of the paper outlining how the Neorealists would explain the case. Then you would spend 4-5 pages outlining how a Constructivist would explain the case. Finally, you would spend 3-4 pages explaining why YOU think either Neorealism or Constructivism best explains the case and why.
Note, therefore, what you’re not doing in the paper. You’re not going to just describe the important event or pattern. You wouldn’t, for example, just write a blow-by-blow account of the Cuban Missile Crisis. To be sure, you’ll have to spend a page or so at the beginning telling the reader about your case; and as you go through each of the theories, you’ll have to reveal some more details about the case: those that each theory tends to shine a light on. But your main energies should be spent on contrasting the two theories and testing which one is most powerful in explaining the event or pattern.
The case doesn’t have to be something historical. It could absolutely be something going on right now. Choosing the event or pattern is up to you.