Have Your Say: Proposed Changes to Our International Relations Units

-

By Bernard Yegiora

PNG’s Foreign Policy White Paper 2025 provides an opportunity to reconsider how we teach International Relations at Divine Word University. I invite students, academic colleagues, foreign-service practitioners and anyone with a keen interest in PNG’s international relations to share their views on proposed changes to the seven IR units in our PNG and International Studies program.

Review and introduced in 2023, the Bachelor of Arts (PNG and International Studies) Program Specification Document (2022) is approaching its five-year review cycle. We propose undertaking the review work in 2027, with a revised program ready for implementation in 2028, subject to the university’s approval processes.

This review will help us assess whether the curriculum remains academically sound and relevant to PNG’s needs. The White Paper provides an important policy reference for considering how our units prepare students to understand PNG’s international priorities and the challenges of implementing foreign policy.

The following suggestions would give five units a stronger PNG focus while retaining the titles of two existing units.

Code Current title Suggested title
PG257 Theories of International Relations International Relations Theories: PNG Perspectives
PG258 International Organizations in PNG PNG Bilateral and Multilateral Relations
PG318 International Law and PNG Retain current title
PG319 Foreign Policy Analysis PNG in the International Political Economy
PG420 International and Regional Security PNG National and Regional Security
PG433 Geopolitics in the Asia-Pacific PNG in Pacific and Indo-Pacific Geopolitics
PG428 Foreign Policy in PNG Retain current title

These proposals involve reviewing content and learning outcomes alongside unit titles. The aim is to connect established IR concepts with PNG’s experience and strengthen students’ ability to apply theory to practical issues.

A significant proposal is to introduce a dedicated International Political Economy (IPE) unit. It would examine trade, investment, aid, development finance, extractive industries, economic diplomacy, multinational corporations, labour mobility and PNG’s economic relations with major partners. This would address a gap in the IR strand and broaden its coverage of the discipline’s major subfields.

Replacing Foreign Policy Analysis would require us to ensure that its essential concepts and analytical methods remain adequately covered, particularly within Foreign Policy in PNG.

The other suggested changes would strengthen attention to PNG’s bilateral and multilateral relationships, national and regional security, and position within Pacific and Indo-Pacific geopolitics. International Law and PNG would remain an important foundation for understanding international obligations, agreements and treaty making.

I welcome views from students, academic colleagues, foreign-service practitioners and anyone interested in PNG’s international relations on the following questions:

  • Do the suggested titles reflect what students need to understand about PNG’s international relations?
  • Which topics should we add, retain or strengthen?
  • Would a dedicated IPE unit improve the program?
  • What practical knowledge and skills should graduates develop for careers in diplomacy, government, business and regional organizations?
These are preliminary suggestions for discussion at our November 2026 meeting. Please share your views in the comments below or email me directly at yegiora.bs@gmail.com. Your feedback will inform the review work planned for 2027, with the aim of implementing the revised PSD program in 2028.

Comments

  1. Martha Yagama 200025September 30, 2026 at 9:03 PM

    Thank you for inviting us to share our views on the proposed changes to the seven International Relations units.

    Firstly, I agree with the proposal of moving from generic titles to PNG-centered titles. As you noted, the 2025 White Paper is the first revision since 1981 and explicitly links foreign policy to domestic goals — national security, economic prosperity, social wellbeing and national unity. Our units should do the same.

    Secondly, on the two retained units, PG318 International Law and PNG and PG428 Foreign Policy in PNG — I agree we should keep them. PG428 can become the capstone for Pillars 7 and 8: Departmental and diplomatic reform, and leadership/coordination. It would be good to invite DFA practitioners to co-teach protocol, consular and negotiation, and to bring in your proposal for an institutional Foreign Policy Analysis Unit where students can practice option papers, risk assessment and cost-benefit.

    This connects to our discussion in Topic 2 (PG428 Lessons, 2026) about the gap between academics and practitioners. After covering that topic, I learned that academics write about foreign policy but practitioners have to implement it with the reality of limited budget and staff. Hence, PNG foreign policy sometimes looks good on paper but is hard to do.

    Additional to this, I want to restate a comment made by one of my colleagues in our group presentation Q&A sessions — that "the White Paper was unrealistic and hard to follow." I understand that view. Because we had also highlighted in Topic 4 and Topic 5 about capacity and political instability, I also felt honestly that the document is very ambitious and not easy to follow.

    But I think it is still good to have it as guidance. Before this, as we learned in Topic 3, Topic 6 and Topic 8, we only had statements like ‘Universalism 1979, Look North and PNG Connect’. Now we have one full document that brings them together. Even if it is hard to follow, at least we now have a roadmap to refer to.

    All in all, I would like to believe that such engagements where professionals like Mr Lahui Ako involved in the PG428 unit is an attempt to bridge this gap. I believe we must have more practitioner lectures like Mr. Lahui Ako to learn how foreign policy is actually done.


    Cheers

    ReplyDelete
  2. Joelson Maodina AnereOctober 1, 2026 at 3:52 AM

    Dear Bernard, Greetings from Kennedy Estates in Port Moresby. I wish to register my views with you on the proposed changes to the Course units and to add my diverse experience and experimental learning views to this conversation going forward.

    Firstly, I believe that current title of 'Foreign Policy Analysis' should be retained because Foreign Policy Issues deals with the past, present, and future of Foreign Policy. However, I am much aware that there's a need to bring the course unit into the modern era with its changing or evolving panoramic landscape. Therefore, I will suggest that the name be changed to "PNG in the Global Political Economy".

    Secondly, I believe that the course unit 'International Organisations in PNG' should be changed to "PNG's Multilateralism". In this way, you cover PNG's Bilateral, Multilateral, Trilateral, Regional, and International partnerships.

    Thirdly, I also believe that the Course units on 'International and Regional Security' should be changed to "Security Studies" which covers a wide arc of areas and brings a diverse latitude and longitude of Security perspectives from Security Practitioners and Scholars alike to the teach or Co - teach these course. That richness of diversity in thought leadership is a huge plus for the IR student at Divine Word University.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di...
Read more

Allison's rational actor model

-
There are 3 common models of foreign policy decision making according to Graham Allison: rational actor model organizational process mode government politics model.  We will discuss the 3 models and compare them with the 3 levels of analysis. However, I challenge you to use your own initiative to learn about the other models of decision making. This will help you as future decision makers or analysts to understand how decisions are made and the processes. When one wakes up from bed he or she decides whether or not to brush their teeth, comb their hair and have a shower. These decisions are paramount, they affect and influence how the individual interacts in a social setting. This highlights the fact that as human beings we make decisions every day. Decision making is defined as the thought process of selecting a logical choice from the available options. In the case of the ‘Kibung peles boy’ analogy; the male student had a choice of approaching the girl to ask he...
Read more

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a ...
Read more