1. How does Weber distinguish between an ethic of responsibility and an ethic of ultimate ends? Which does he see as the proper ethic for statecraft and why? Illustrate using Cathal Nolan’s essay on FDR’s diplomacy prior to the Second World War.

2. Briefly explain how the Athenian generals and/or the elders of Melos used the following types of moral reasoning in Thucydides' Melian Dialogue: (a) moral skepticism, (b) deontological reasoning, and (c) rule utilitarianism.

3. How does McElroy use the examples U.S. famine relief efforts in the Soviet Union in the early 1920s and the Panama Canal Treaties to challenge realist predictions about state behavior?

4. What is the deontological reasoning behind Walzer’s support for the Legalist Paradigm? What moral reasoning do cosmopolitans use in taking issue with this perspective?

5. According to Henkin assess the legality of intervention to bring about regime change in Iraq in terms of the United Nations Charter? How would a realist assess Henkin’s argument and the relevance of his legal reasoning? What alternative criteria might a realist use to assess the legitimacy of intervention?

1. How do realists assess the moral duty of statesmen, the degree to which moral or ethical considerations can or should play a role in diplomacy, and the Hobbesian premises underlying these positions. Critically assess at least two of the criticisms that normative scholars have put forward vis-a-vis the realist approach to international ethics. Do you find these criticisms persuasive or can they be accommodated or refuted by traditional realists? Defend your position by relating the differences between realists and their critics to concrete historical case studies or to current political issues.