The future of International Relations will undoubtedly include the forces of globalization. As also understood from the information given, the correct answer is E. The statements with regard to the future prospects of International Relations in the options can be summarized by using the concept “Globalization”. Many thinkers foresee the development of ways to avoid conflict entirely — or at the very least, minimize it. Some theorists predict that wealth will be redistributed worldwide so that there will be more equity; the international system will not be comprised of “haves” and “have-nots.” Others hope for a decrease in nationalism and an upswing in “cosmopolitanism”, the sense that one is a citizen of the world rather than of a narrower group or affiliation. Some have suggested that cultural diversity will become more tolerated and more understood by greater proportions of the global population, and that this will render some of today’s International Relations theories null. To others, power and selfinterest will no longer dominate international relations as it does today, foregoing the terms of realism, and more liberal and perhaps even idealistic theories will be able to explain a different kind of world than we have today. Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” theory may no longer explain international relations and zones of conflict, or even make sense, as boundaries, difference and acceptance adapt to changing global politics. Humanitarianism may well arise as the leading topic; peoples might become as concerned with the well-being of others who share the globe as they currently are of their own strengths. Certainly, climate change, pollution, and non-fossil-fueled power will continue to be valid issues.

The explanations for the other concepts in the options are as follows:

Coalitions are sometimes thought of as alliances, especially when states come together against a common threat. Coalition means a joining together. Coalitions are always multilateral (with associates from different states). Before, during and post-World Wars I and II, alliances formed and then re-formed, depending on how international conditions were interpreted by various states and other entities. Multilateral coalitions are generally favored in modern times, allying several states together to take on a threat to or concern of all involved, either on the state or international level (consider United Nations peacekeeping missions containing troops from several or many states).

Mutually Assured Destruction: A relationship between two states in which each can destroy the other’s society even after absorbing an all-out attack (or ?rst strike) by the other state. In short, each state has an invulnerable second-strike capability (Griffiths and O’Callaghan, 2002, 201).

Human rights are also equal and nondiscriminatory. “Non-discrimination is a cross-cutting principle in international human rights law. The principle is present in all the major human rights treaties and provides the central theme of international human rights conventions such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.  

Power Projection: The capability of a country to project (or, alternatively, physically bring via sealift or airlift) its military power to any part of the world rapidly and with little advance notice. The United States is assessed to be especially good at this, as it has the largest inventory of nuclear weapons and the most high-tech weaponry overall. It continues to lead the world in terms of research on products intended for military use.