An exam paper from the future
Later generations and current readers are invited to answer these questions
Gideon Rachman
Journalism is sometimes said to be the first draft of history. This article is the first draft of a history exam for students graduating in 2066. I have tried to imagine the questions future historians will ask about today’s political events.
To make the exercise more interesting, readers are invited to answer any of the questions below, from any section of the paper, and to send answers to essayquestion@ft.com. The three most interesting essays will be published online in the Financial Times. Answers should be received by September 20.
Candidates will notice that while some questions can be answered on the basis of currently available knowledge, others may require a degree of speculation about the future. Where appropriate, authors are allowed to use their imagination and intuition to fill in some details about events yet to unfold.
Answers should between 700 and 900 words. You have one hour.
Section A: The US
© Reuters
1. “The orderly management of decline.” Discuss this verdict on the foreign policy of President Barack Obama.
2. A great social reformer or a great disappointment? Which is the fairer verdict on the presidency of Mr Obama?
3. Why did the Bush and Clinton clans have such a grip on American politics between 1988 and 2020?
4. Donald Trump was not an accident but the logical culmination of long-term trends in politics and society. Discuss.
Section B: Europe
© AP
1. Brexit was a symptom, but not a fundamental cause, of the decline of the EU. Discuss.
2. Why was the “European project”
unable to provide the definitive answer to the German question?
3. Why did the French become obsessed with their own decline in the early 21st century?
4. A worthy successor to Adenauer and Kohl: discuss this verdict on Angela Merkel.
5. Why was the euro such a disaster for southern Europe?
6. Was Vladimir Putin a good or a bad tsar for Russia?
7. Why did Turkey turn its back on the legacy of Ataturk?
Section C: The Middle East
© Reuters
1. Why did the Arab spring happen and why did it fail?
2. From 2011, the people of Syria were the victims of outside powers more than their own government. Discuss.
3. How much of a threat was post-revolutionary Iran to the Middle East and to the world order?
4. A Faustian bargain: discuss this verdict on the US-Saudi relationship before and after 9/11.
5. Was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at the core of the problems of the Middle East after 1989 or a distraction from the real issues?
Section D: Asia
© AP
1. Why did Asia’s great powers become obsessed with the possession of uninhabited islands and reefs during the early 21st century?
2. The maintenance of Communist party rule was essential to the development of China between 1978 and 2016. Discuss.
3. Why did China become more not less authoritarian under Xi Jinping?
4. Why did China and eastern Europe take such different paths after 1989, and what were the consequences for the global order?
5. Did Narendra Modi represent a new India?
6. The most important fact in global politics from 1980 onwards was the growing economic power of Asia. Discuss.
7. A brave but doomed venture: discuss this verdict on Abenomics.
8. Why did the world’s great powers allow North Korea to develop nuclear weapons?
Section E: Africa and Latin America
© Bloomberg
1. How “new” was the new South Africa?
2. Why was Africa the first continent to become the subject of a contest for influence between China and the US?
3. Oil was a curse not a blessing: discuss with reference to either Nigeria or Angola in the early 21st century.
4. Why did Hugo Chávez become an icon for the global left?
5. “Brazil is the country of the future and it always will be.” Was this a fair verdict between 1950 and 2016?
6. Was proximity to the US a blessing or a curse for Mexico from 1980 onwards? Discuss with reference to other Latin American countries.
Section F: General
© Bloomberg
1. Why did the “end of history” only last for 20 years?
2. Is neoliberalism a useful term for understanding the political economy of the early 21st century?
3. Is neoconservatism a useful term for understanding US foreign policy in the early 21st century?
4. Did globalisation lead to the creation of a global oligarchy?
5. Why did globalisation not kill nationalism?
6. Why was the rise of social media so disruptive to conventional politics?
7. Did climate change demonstrate that a world of nation states and democratic politics was incapable of meeting the challenges of the 21st century?
8. The International Criminal Court represented the high tide for the international legal system. Discuss.
9. Will a machine ever be able to answer these questions better than a human?
gideon.rachman@ft.com
Financial Times