It should be obvious right now that something is wrong with how we in the Anglosphere train and educate professionals who enter into the fields of diplomacy. Due to elite overproduction, short term topical issues are used to show regime loyalty and compete for ever scarcer positions, creating a class of people who believe the normal basics of geopolitics are abnormal and the abnormal period we are emerging from is the definition of the typical ideal. The ideology of democratism, not the wordly realities of statecraft, hold an inordinate sway over the world view of multiple generations in the North Atlantic policy making class.

While not the entirety of the diagnosis, it cannot be denied that how International Relations is taught is a major factor in this problem. And one thing I have quite a lot of experience with (even if it rapidly recedes in the rear view mirror from the present), is academia. Even when I was still in it eight years ago, I had many thoughts on how I did not like how international relations was taught, especially at the graduate level. As it was, I was a history major in undergraduate, which if anything gave me an advantage over the more conventional political science/IR undergrad people due to having a vast library of case studies to draw upon rather than the typical few. The only people having interesting or original thoughts in my program were also outsiders to the major, having just joined at the Master’s level if not later.

So, what would the ideal IR academic program look like? For simplicity’s sake and economic efficiency, let us make it a 4 year all comprehensive undergraduate program. The kind that requires no graduate schooling in order to immediately enter the diplomatic/statecraft field.

This four year program would be split into two two-year sections. In the first two years the knowledge of the student will be a kind of ‘Pre-IR’, with each student being able to choose the proportions of their courses from the following list:
-Geography
-History
-Anthropology
-Economics
-A foreign language

So long as the baseline requirements of having at least two courses in each of those topics are met, the student can choose however many additional ones from the list (as well as from psychology and philosophy) they want to meet their credit quota. Once this requirement is met, there is a mid-point review where the student is accepted into the next 2 year phase of the program, international relations proper or can opt out to pursue one of those other concentrations on the list instead with no penalty.

This concluding half of the experience begins with Introduction to International Relations Theory and Introduction to Diplomatic History as two required seminar courses. At this point, the amount of courses is reduced for higher credit modules and longer modules. Once those two courses are complete the student is then given free reign to choose any courses they wish so long as they are topic relevant. (Example of topics would be things like State Collapse, Alliances, International Political Economy, History of wars that had many participants, Courses on specific kinds of theorists, etc). Additionally, they now must select a mandatory study abroad year, either to begin second semester of junior year or first semester senior year.

This study abroad year will be covered in the tuition/financial aide of the baseline university costs and should come at no additional expense to the student. It would consist of either two separate stints in different countries (one developing, one developed) or a single year in one location of any level of development but which must NOT be an allied country to the host student’s host university. In other words, should this program be based in the North Atlantic, the full year study abroad options could not be in a country in the “liberal international order.” If it was based in China or Russia, the year abroad must not be in an S.C.O. country, etc. The point is that the students experience a diplomatic world outside of the normal bubble they would be subjected to. There will be coursework completed at an educational institution in the host country and an internship/job (part time) also done in that country, be it one’s home country’s embassy, an NGO, or at the temporary host university.

During this study abroad experience, the student would be encouraged to come up with and submit for approval a thesis project, to take one or two semesters, which they would create as a solo project upon their return to the home institution. If they end up taking extra semesters to do this they would not have to pay tuition for this time, and their accommodation would be taken care of by the university. But they must complete the project no more than two semesters after the return. The thesis project would use the knowledge they have gained both in coursework and in study abroad/internships in order to argue a unique and original point

Upon completing this, the student graduates and is now eligible for government service in a diplomatic capacity, and more than eligible in for work in the nonprofit sector. No further education should be needed unless specific subject matter expertise on a niche topic is desired. In such cases, this streamlined IR program should serve as a leg up in getting into any such programs.

A program like this would correct for many of the deficiencies in IR education and make the major one of the more impressive and prestigious in the humanities. It would reinvigorate the humanities themselves as something practical and worth investing in. And, perhaps most importantly, it would give a graduate-level quality of education without having to take on any expense or time commitments beyond a basic Bachelor’s degree.