Article:Boyer, Alan Lee. ''U.S. Foreign Policy in Central Asia: Risk, Ends, and Means.'' Naval War College Review 59, 1 (2006): 91-118. 20 Jan. 2007<http://proquest.umi.com/pqdwebdid=996940701&Fmt=4&amp;amp;clientId=9268&RQT=309&VName=PQD>.
Subject and approach: The author analyses U.S. foreign policy in Central Asia.
Thesis statement: The US is limited in its ability to effect change in Central Asia because of geopolitics, the nature of the local regimes, and a lack of leverage.
Argument: Strategic risk can be lowered only if the mismatches between ends and means are reduced and strategy is made sub-servient to policy.
1. What is the stated premise? Is it completely accurate?
Strategic risk can be lowered only if the mismatches between ends and means are reduced and strategy is made sub-servient to policy. It is accurate as an answer to the thesis statement.
2. What is the hidden premise?
That there is a problem between the geopolitical goals of the U.S. and the means used to attain them. Hence the need for a change in strategy.
3. Is the statement completely accurate?
4. Do the premises inescapably lead to the conclusion? No other?
Change is unavoidable but different strategies are possible.