dataset_name: security_studies
description: "The following are multiple choice questions (with answers) about security\
  \ studies.\n\nQ: What are the frameworks of analysis within which terrorism has\
  \ been considered (as of 2020)?\n(A) Competition between larger nations has resulted\
  \ in some countries actively supporting terrorist groups to undermine the strength\
  \ of rival states. Terrorist networks are extended patronage clubs maintained and\
  \ paid for by their donor states and are conceptualised as being like state actors,\
  \ to be dealt with using military force. (B) Globalization has enabled the internationalization\
  \ of terrorist activities by opening up their operational space, although coordination\
  \ is still managed from a geographical base. This suggests that terrorist groups\
  \ are nationally structured which means that terrorism cannot be considered in terms\
  \ of a war to be defeated militarily without having serious implications on the\
  \ indigenous population. (C) Terrorism can be viewed as a problem to be resolved\
  \ by military means (war on terrorism), by normal police techniques (terrorism as\
  \ crime), or as a medical problem with underlying causes and symptoms (terrorism\
  \ as disease). (D) Terrorism is viewed as a criminal problem. The criminalization\
  \ of terrorism has two important implications. Firstly, it suggests that terrorism\
  \ can be eradicated - terrorists can be caught and brought to trial by normal judicial\
  \ proceedings thereby removing the threat from society - and secondly, it suggests\
  \ that preventative crime techniques are applicable to prevent its development.\n\
  A: Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on security studies\
  \ for help. (A) is wrong because it is not competition between larger nations that\
  \ causes terrorism. \n(B) is wrong because globalization is not the cause of terrorism.\n\
  (C) is correct because the US undertook the war on terrorism. \n(D) is wrong because\
  \ preventative crime techniques will likely not end terrorism. The answer is (C).\n\
  \nQ: Which of the following is the best lens through which to investigate the role\
  \ of child soldiers?\n(A) Child soldiers are victims of combat that need re-education\
  \ and rehabilitation. (B) Children and their mothers are not active subjects in\
  \ warfare and are best considered as subjects in the private sphere. (C) Children\
  \ are most often innocent bystanders in war and are best used as signifiers of peace.\
  \ (D) Children have political subjecthood that is missed when they are considered\
  \ as passive victims of warfare.\nA: Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia\
  \ articles on security studies for help. Child soliders as a political topic can\
  \ be missed when they are considered passive victims of warfare. The answer is (D).\n\
  \nQ: How can we best describe the relationship between the state-centric approach\
  \ and the concept of human security?\n(A) There are such wide divisions within the\
  \ human security framework regarding the nature of threats and referent objects\
  \ that no widely applicable comparisons between state-centric approaches and human\
  \ security can be drawn. (B) By adopting the framework of human security, the limitations\
  \ of the realist state-centric approach become evident. Whilst human security defines\
  \ the referent object as the person or population, state-centric approaches prioritise\
  \ the security of the state, de-prioritizing the pursuit of human security. (C)\
  \ The state-centric approach to security is a faction of human security, usually\
  \ defined within the broad school of human security. By being state-centric this\
  \ approach prioritises the individual as the referent object in security studies.\
  \ (D) Both the state-centric and human-centric approaches to security are mutually\
  \ exclusive and offer a sufficient analytic framework with which to understand the\
  \ international security system. It is therefore the role of security analysts to\
  \ determine which of these substantial concepts is correct, and which should be\
  \ discarded.\nA: Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia articles on security\
  \ studies for help. Human security focuses on a person or population whereas state-centric\
  \ approaches focus on the state while deprioritizing human security. The answer\
  \ is (B).\n\nQ: In order to become securitized, a threat must be presented in which\
  \ of these ways?\n(A) As an existential threat that requires immediate and extraordinary\
  \ action, posing a threat to the survival of the state or to societal security.\
  \ (B) As requiring immediate and extraordinary action by the state, threatening\
  \ the survival of a referent object and therefore warranting the use of measures\
  \ not normally employed in the political realm. (C) As an urgent threat to the survival\
  \ of the referent object, so serious that it legitimises the employment of extraordinary\
  \ action in response. (D) As an urgent threat to the survival of the audience that\
  \ requires extraordinary or emergency measures.\nA: Let's think step by step. We\
  \ refer to Wikipedia articles on security studies for help. To be securitized, a\
  \ threat must be an urgent threat to the survival of the referent object. The answer\
  \ is (C).\n\nQ: What distinguishes coercive diplomacy from military force?\n(A)\
  \ Compellence is another term for coercive diplomacy, but covering a narrower set\
  \ of criteria; compellence covers those threats aimed at initiating adversary action.\
  \ A threat to coerce a state to give up part of its territory would count as coercive\
  \ diplomacy, as long as that threat proactively initiates action before reactive\
  \ diplomacy is taken. (B) Coercive diplomacy constitutes the threats of limited\
  \ force to induce adversary's incentive to comply with the coercer's demands. It\
  \ is an influence strategy that is intended to obtain compliance: the use of force\
  \ to defeat an opponent first does not count. It leaves an element of choice with\
  \ the target to comply, or to continue. (C) Military force, or the threat of military\
  \ force, utilises fear to achieve strategic objectives. Coercive diplomacy is differentiated\
  \ from this approach, because it does not use fear as a tool for coercing an adversary.\
  \ (D) Coercive diplomacy is employed to use force but to limit its effects on the\
  \ international community. Coercive diplomacy is an aggressive strategy that is\
  \ intended to obtain compliance through defeat. It does not leave an element of\
  \ choice with the target, the target either being forced to comply or engage in\
  \ conflict. It seeks to control by imposing compliance by removing any opportunity\
  \ for negotiation or concession.\nA: Let's think step by step. We refer to Wikipedia\
  \ articles on security studies for help. Coercive diplomacy uses the threat of force\
  \ to induce the opponent to comply with demands. The answer is (B)."
include: _mmlu_flan_cot_fewshot_template_yaml
task: mmlu_flan_cot_fewshot_security_studies
