Sample International Relations Essay on respond to the following statement: ‘Critical theories provide a more convincing approach to the study of security than problem-solving theories

The summative assessment for the module is a 2,500-word essay.
In your essay, respond to the following statement: ‘Critical theories provide a more
convincing approach to the study of security than problem-solving theories.’
You should evaluate this claim, referring to at least two relevant theories and drawing upon
one security issue. The Reading list includes general readings that can support the
development of your essay.
In developing your essay, pay attention to the key marking criterion located in the
Assessment section. A good essay has a clearly presented argument, defines the concepts
used well, and applies them to a well-defined empirical case study.
Readings to use :
Campbell, David. “Introduction: On dangers and the interpretation.” In Writing
Security: United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, 1–15. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 1998.
Huysmans, Jef. “Security! What do you mean? From concept to thick
signifier.” European Journal of International Relations 4, no. 2 (1998): 226–255.
Peoples, Columba and Vaughan-Williams, Nick. “Introduction: Mapping critical
security studies and travelling without maps.” In Critical Security Studies: An
Introduction, 1–14. Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2021.
Tickner, J. Ann. “Feminist responses to international security studies.” Peace
Review 16, no. 1 (2006): 43–48.
Zalewski, Marysia. “All these theories yet the bodies keep piling up: theories,
theorists, theorising.” In International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, edited by S.
Smith, K. Booth and M. Zalewski, 340–353. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2010.
Campbell, David. “Introduction: On dangers and the interpretation.” In Writing Security:
United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, 1–15. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1998.
Campbell, David. “Introduction: On dangers and the interpretation.” In Writing Security:
United States Foreign Policy and the Politics of Identity, 1–15. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press, 1998.
Robert Cox, “Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International
Relations Theory,” Millennium 10, no. 2 (June 1981): 129.
Adamson, Fiona. “Spaces of Global Security: Beyond Methodological
Nationalism.” Journal of Global Security Studies 1, no. 1 (2016): 16–35.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_crossref10.1093/jogss/ogv003
Agathangelou, Anna M. “Bodies of Desire, Terror and the War in Eurasia: Impolite
Disruptions of (Neo) Liberal Internationalism, Neoconservatism and the ‘New’
Imperium.” Millennium 38, no. 3 (2010): 693–72.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177
_0305829810364194
Babic, Milan. “Let’s talk about the interregnum: Gramsci and the crisis of the liberal
world order.” International Affairs 96, no. 3 (2020): 767–86.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_narcisuvapub:oai:dare.uva.nl:p
ublications/d6dc10db-c8a0-456d-ac9e-0f28489bf742
Henderson, Errol A. “Hidden in plain sight: racism in international relations
theory.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 26, no. 1 (2013): 71–92.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_0955
7571_2012_710585
Khan, Mizan R. Climate Change, Adaptation and International Relations Theory. EInternational Relations, 2016. https://www.e-ir.info/2016/04/29/climate-changeadaptation-and-international-relations-theory/
Kumar, Sanjeev H. M. “Traversing the Romance of a Liberal International Order: The
Democratic Peace Thesis and the Regional Security Problematique in South
Asia.” International Studies 57, no. 4 (2020): 344–360.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_sage_s10_1177_00208817209
62959
Sabaratnam, Meera. “Is IR Theory White? Racialised Subject-Positioning in Three
Canonical Texts.” Millennium 49, no. 1 (2020): 3–31.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_sage_s10_1177_03058298209
71687
Sanchez, Gabriella. “To Other and Vilify: Manufacturing Migration as
Crime.” European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 27, no. 1 (2020): 1–4.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_gale_ofa659529401
Schmidt, Brian. Hegemony: A conceptual and theoretical analysis. Berlin: DOC
Research, 2018. Institute.
https://doc-research.org/2018/08/hegemony-conceptual-theoretical-analysis/
Taylor, Ian. “The Liberal Peace Security Regimen: A Gramscian Critique of its
Application in Africa”. Africa Development / Afrique et Développement 42, no. 3
(2017): 25–44.
https://librarysearch.kcl.ac.uk/permalink/f/1fdleu2/TN_proquest2007462715
Cohn, Carol. “Women and Wars: Towards A Conceptual Framework.” In Women
and Wars: Contested Histories, Uncertain Futures, 1–35. Cambridge: Polity Press,
2013.
Sylvester, Christine. “Feminist (IR) Takes on War.” In War as Experience:
Contributions from International Relations and Feminist Analysis, 38–62. New York:
Routledge, 2013.
Enloe, Cynthia. “Gender Makes the World Go Round: Where are the Women?”
In Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics, 1–
36. Berkley: University of California Press, 2014