The hegemonic leadership model (i.e. hegemonic stability theory) has been used to explain the rise of U.S leadership in the post-World War II era. Clarify the role U.S. leadership played in the reconstruction of the international economy after 1945 as told through the lens of HST (Hegemonic Stability Theory)
This consists of two parts. In Part I you will write a short essay(3 page). In Part II, you must answer one long essay question (4 page). Be sure to write well-developed, coherent answers to both sections. Show breadth and depth (critical ability to put things together, add insights of your own, show whether you agree or not with a statement and why) in your answers. Write legibly and coherently. Refer to the readings or an author where applicable
Part I : Short Essay
1. The hegemonic leadership model (i.e. hegemonic stability theory) has been used to explain the rise of U.S leadership in the post-World War II era. Clarify the role U.S. leadership played in the reconstruction of the international economy after 1945 as told through the lens of HST (Hegemonic Stability Theory). What was the nature of this order? That is, how did the U.S. go about re-stabilizing the global economy? How did Pax Americana differ from the British led order during the 19th century?

Part II: Long Essay
The first part of the course demonstrated how advanced capitalist countries such as Britain. The United States, Germany, and Japan had widely divergent development trajectories as well as different modes of conducting economic policy. Referencing both lecture and the readings, elaborate on and explain these differences in development and subsequent economic policy-making. What accounts for these differences? Touch on two of the four national economies listed above in your answer to help illustrate these differences.

In the second half of your essay, consider these diverse national economies in the context of the current global economy. Did lectures and the readings imply that national differences will disappear? Does the evidence show that they have started to converge due to the pressures of the global economy (globalization, increases in capital flows, etc.) and international organizations (GATT/WTO, World Bank, IMF, regional trade agreements like NAFTA and the EU, etc.)? Or will we continue to see differences in national economic structures and in the behavior of key economic actors like multinational corporations? Use both lectures and reading to back up your position on this contentious issue.