Georgetown University is one of the top ranked International Relations (IR) schools in the United States. Faculty members teaching international relations at U.S. universities voted Georgetown as one of the best places for undergraduate and graduate students interested in pursuing IR programs. According to the report published by the Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations at the College of William and Mary (March/April 2009 issue of Foreign Policy magazine), Georgetown is ranked No. 1 in the survey of top master’s degree programs in IR for students looking to pursue careers in policy. Columbia University is ranked in the top five (#5) in this category.

In addition Georgetown earned the 15th highest number of votes in the category: Top Ph.D. programs for students interested in pursuing academic careers in IR.

University of California, San Diego was ranked 9th in the nation on a list of the best schools for students pursuing an international relations career in academia. It was also ranked 10th on the list for students aspiring to a career in public policy, while Johns Hopkins University was rated 1st for public policy studies. The survey of over 1,100 college and university scholars asking professors to name the best schools for both academic and policy careers has been published by the influential journal "Foreign Policy".

List of International Relations schools in US:

  • Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Prescott Campus
  • Northern Arizona University
  • Prescott College
  • Hendrix College
  • University of Arkansas
  • University of Arkansas Little Rock
  • Samford University
  • Spring Hills College
  • Troy University
  • University of Alabama
  • University of Southern California
  • University of the Pacific:
  • University of California, San Diego: Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies
  • San Francisco State University
  • University of Denver: Graduate School of International Studies
  • Yale University: Jackson Institute for Global Affairs
  • Johns Hopkins University: Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS)
  • American University: School of International Service
  • Georgetown University: Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service
  • The George Washington University: Elliott School of International Affairs
  • The Institute of World Politics
  • Florida International University: School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA)
  • Florida State University
  • University of Georgia School of Public and International Affairs
  • Georgia Institute of Technology: The Sam Nunn School of International Affairs
  • University of Chicago: Committee On International Relations
  • University of Kentucky: Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce
  • Tufts University: Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
  • Harvard University: Kennedy School of Government
  • University of Mississippi: Croft Institute for International Studies
  • Oklahoma State University: OSU School of International Studies
  • Seton Hall University: John C. Whitehead School of Diplomacy and International Relations
  • Princeton University: Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs
  • The New School: Graduate Program in International Affairs
  • Columbia University: School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA)
  • Syracuse University: Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs
  • University of Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs
  • Pennsylvania State University: School of International Affairs
  • Brown University: Watson Institute for International Studies
  • University of Washington Henry M. Jackson School of International Studies
* Next: Top Political Science Programs

Sunny Peter, who is based in Mumbai and has recently taken a Masters in Politics and International Relations, is a new contributor to the Wardman Wire. Sunny writes the Global Affairs Monitor (”Reviewing the faultlines of world politics”), and more personally at Words of Worth.

Former President of Pakistan Gen Pervez Musharraf is seeking a re-enter the politics of his country. He has been sending feelers to that effect, expressing his keenness to return to Pakistan and fight the elections to achieve the sense of “legitimacy” as a political leader, something that he lacked during his nine years in power.
Ten months is a pretty long time in Pakistan’s political landscape.

New exigencies ensure that the past is comfortably forgotten. No one knows it better than Gen Musharraf. He has been lying low for the past ten months, slowly but surely planning his re-entry into the national political space. His exile is more or less self-imposed, giving time for all the negative publicity he earned to subside. If news reports are to be believed, there is no reason why they should not be, Gen Musharraf is busy in London’s social circuit delivering think-tank lectures and community meetings these days.

With political squabbles back home in Pakistan, Gen Musharraf may not be able to hide his glee for long.

Given the country’s political history it may not be very surprising to someday see Gen Musharraf align with the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz Mian Nawaz Sharif, the very man he had once ousted, against the common enemy, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) which holds power today. As the crisis between President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani unfolds, all political parties particularly Nawaz Sharif and Gen Musharraf would be waiting for the right opportunity to strike back.

The fact that Gen Musharraf has opted for this as the most opportune time to announce his desire to re-enter Pakistani politics will set alarm bells ringing in Islamabad. This at a time when the Pakistani establishment is seeing some visible consolidation and stability in power against major terror groups operating from the country.

The army is back in their barracks and the Pakistani government has succeeded in extracting out some benefits from the Obama administration in return for supporting the war on terror effort.

Furthermore, the Pakistani troops have successfully continued its movement against the terror groups, at least the ones detrimental to American interest. All along, particularly during the last days of his rule, Gen Musharraf had given a feeling that the United States had no other option but to support him if they wanted to ensure the commitment of Pakistan in the war on terror. It is also now known that the effort of Gen Musharraf to continue in power had earned him the tactical opposition of the Pakistani army. Under General Kayani, whom he himself appointed, the troops preferred to stay back in their barracks rather than roam the streets of Islamabad. In fact, it is known that the army had sent some hints to Gen Musharraf to vacate his position and prefer an elected role.

Gen Musharraf has made his first move after a pre-planned lull of ten months. It now needs to be seen how the political establishment in Pakistan respond to their former President’s desire to join them on the nation political stage.