wo Competing Hypotheses for Non-State Actors
Hypothesis 1: Non-state actors are independent and important actors that cause change in the IR of the ME. They can be violent or non-violent in nature but given the presence of weak or autocratic regimes in the region, the most significant ones use violence strategically to cause change in the IR of the ME.

Hypothesis 2: Non-state actors in the ME do not have causal power independent of the states in the region or in the international system. Violent Non-state Actors (VSNAs) are simply derivative of the power of the states that sponsor them.

What do the readings tell us about these two hypotheses?

Things to keep in mind when doing this assignment:

Be sure to read/re-read the ACH material i have attached.

Building the Evidence Base:

Facts vs. Other Things
Strength of the Evidence
Quality of the Source
Contestability of the Evidence
Corroborating support
Relevance of the Evidence
Importance to a given hypothesis (how would you know?)
Materiality of the Impact (significance)
Gaps in the Evidence

A Good Hypothesis:
Is written as a definite statement, not as a question
Is based on observations and knowledge
Is testable and falsifiable
Predicts the anticipated results clearly
Contains a dependent and an independent variable
DV = phenomenon being explained
IV = explains the phenomenon

I have uploaded all the readings but two. please find a copy of these on google or something: Fawcett, International Relations of the Middle East. 3nd Edition chapter 2 and 9.  They are very important reading for completing this assignment

Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.