Practice Core: Understanding power and global politics with authentic IB Global Politics exam questions for both SL and HL students. This question bank mirrors Paper 1, 2, 3 structure, covering key topics like power and sovereignty, human rights, and global governance. Get instant solutions, detailed explanations, and build exam confidence with questions in the style of IB examiners.
Paper
Level
Question 1
SL & HLPaper 1
Source A
Source B
Adapted from “The Humanitarian Impact of War” by Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders), www.msf.org (2019).
War zones create devastating humanitarian crises that disproportionately affect civilian populations. Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) reports that in conflict-affected regions like Syria, indiscriminate airstrikes and ground offensives have destroyed vital infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and water supplies. These attacks not only cause immediate loss of life but also leave millions of people without access to healthcare, clean water, and shelter, driving large-scale displacement both within countries and across borders.
MSF highlights the essential need for humanitarian corridors, secure routes that allow aid organizations to reach populations in need and permit civilians to escape dangerous areas. However, the organization points out that maintaining these corridors is extremely challenging. Warring parties often use access to aid as a bargaining tool, intentionally block humanitarian assistance, or manipulate relief efforts for political gain. The threat of violence against aid workers further restricts operations, placing both civilians and humanitarian staff at constant risk.
The organization calls for stronger enforcement of international humanitarian law, emphasizing that all parties to conflict are obligated to protect civilians and ensure access to humanitarian aid. MSF urges the international community to hold violators accountable, support the neutrality of aid organizations, and prioritize civilian protection to prevent further human suffering in war zones.
Source C
Adapted from “The Limits of Peace Agreements” by the International Peace Institute, www.ipinst.org (2021).
While peace agreements are often celebrated as milestones in conflict resolution, their effectiveness depends on long-term implementation and addressing the root causes of conflict. The International Peace Institute (IPI) examines the 2016 Colombian peace agreement between the government and the FARC rebels, considered a landmark deal at the time. However, IPI notes that achieving lasting peace in Colombia has proved difficult, as challenges remain in reintegrating former combatants, delivering promised reforms, and addressing structural inequalities such as land distribution and rural poverty.
IPI points out that many peace agreements worldwide suffer from a gap between signed commitments and actual change on the ground. In Colombia, violence has persisted in some regions due to the emergence of new armed groups and ongoing disputes over resources and territory. The institute warns that without sustained political will, adequate funding, and mechanisms for accountability, peace agreements risk being only symbolic. Ensuring justice for victims, guaranteeing security, and building trust among divided communities are highlighted as key prerequisites for genuine reconciliation.
The report concludes that for peace agreements to have a transformative impact, they must be accompanied by comprehensive policies that address historical grievances, promote inclusion, and support social and economic development alongside political solutions.
Source D
Adapted from “The Role of Regional Organizations in Conflict Resolution” by the African Union Peace and Security Council, www.au.int (2020).
Regional organizations such as the African Union (AU) are increasingly recognized as essential actors in managing and resolving conflicts on the continent. The African Union Peace and Security Council (AUPSC) describes how regional organizations offer valuable local knowledge, quicker response capabilities, and political legitimacy in peace operations. The AU has played a critical role in mediating conflicts and deploying peacekeeping missions, such as the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) and the United Nations–African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID), to stabilize regions, protect civilians, and facilitate humanitarian aid.
Despite these achievements, the AUPSC identifies several persistent challenges. Funding shortfalls, limited logistical capacity, and dependence on external donors (such as the European Union or United Nations) constrain the scope and effectiveness of regional missions. In addition, political divisions among member states and varying levels of commitment can undermine unified action. The council also highlights the complexity of some conflicts, which often require close collaboration with international partners and national governments.
Nevertheless, the report argues that regional organizations, given their proximity and understanding of local dynamics, are well-positioned to take a lead role in conflict prevention and resolution. The AUPSC calls for stronger institutional support, sustainable financing, and increased cooperation between regional, continental, and global actors to achieve lasting peace in Africa.
1.[3]
Outline what Source A tells us about the challenges of using sanctions as a tool for conflict resolution.
2.[4]
With explicit reference to Source B and one example you have studied, explain the challenges of providing humanitarian aid in conflict zones.
3.[8]
Compare and contrast what Source C and Source D tell us about the factors that influence the success of conflict resolution efforts.
4.[10]
Using all the sources and your own knowledge, discuss the effectiveness of international and regional approaches to conflict resolution.
Question 2
SL & HLPaper 2
1.[25]
To what extent are human rights violated in the name of national security?
Question 3
SL & HLPaper 1
Source A
Source B
Adapted from: The Guardian, “Small island states call for urgent climate action” (2022)
Small island developing states (SIDS) are among the most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, despite contributing the least to global emissions. Rising sea levels, saltwater intrusion, and more frequent natural disasters threaten not only their environments but their sovereignty, economies, and national identities.
Leaders from the Pacific and Caribbean have repeatedly called on major polluters to honor their financial and legal commitments under the Paris Agreement. They argue that without immediate reductions in emissions and substantial funding for adaptation, their countries may become uninhabitable.
Despite diplomatic efforts, many SIDS face barriers in global negotiations. Their political and economic influence is limited, and their voices are often sidelined by more powerful states with competing priorities. The lack of binding enforcement mechanisms in climate agreements further complicates accountability.
Nevertheless, SIDS have developed alliances such as the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) to amplify their collective voice in global forums. They emphasize that climate justice is inseparable from human rights and development. For them, climate change is not a distant threat but an existential crisis that tests the inclusiveness and fairness of international cooperation.
Source C
Adapted from: UN News, “Tensions Rise Over Unequal Vaccine Distribution” (2021)
The global response to COVID-19 revealed serious fractures in international cooperation. Wealthy nations secured the majority of available vaccine doses early in the pandemic, often ordering far more than their populations needed. Meanwhile, many lower-income countries were left to wait for donations or rely on delayed shipments through COVAX, the global vaccine-sharing initiative.
While the WHO and other institutions called for equitable access, critics argue that structural inequality and national self-interest overwhelmed global solidarity. Some countries even blocked the export of vaccines or ingredients needed for production. Others engaged in "vaccine diplomacy," using access to doses as leverage in foreign policy.
This disparity not only prolonged the pandemic globally but also undermined trust in international institutions. Public health experts warned that “no one is safe until everyone is safe,” yet the response remained fragmented and competitive.
Some efforts were made to improve distribution, such as debt relief or technology transfer, but many states remained skeptical of international cooperation, viewing it as shaped by power imbalances and unequal benefits. The pandemic exposed the limitations of voluntary systems and raised questions about whether the current global order can respond effectively and equitably to shared challenges.
Source D
Adapted from: Human Rights Watch, “Corporate Power and Climate Accountability” (2023)
Multinational corporations play a major role in shaping global responses to environmental crises. Fossil fuel companies, agribusiness, and heavy industry sectors have significant financial interests in maintaining the status quo and are among the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. Despite this, they often present themselves as partners in sustainability through public-private partnerships and voluntary climate pledges.
However, many corporations continue to lobby against environmental regulations, fund climate denial, and delay transitions to green alternatives. Investigations have revealed discrepancies between corporate sustainability reports and actual practices, leading to accusations of "greenwashing." Critics argue that voluntary commitments lack transparency and accountability, enabling powerful actors to appear cooperative while undermining real progress.
Civil society groups and investigative journalists have exposed how corporate influence distorts policy outcomes, particularly in international negotiations. Some corporations wield more economic power than states, making it difficult for governments, especially in the Global South, to enforce compliance or prioritize the public interest.
While some companies have made genuine efforts toward decarbonization, the imbalance of influence raises concerns about the democratic legitimacy of global environmental governance. Human Rights Watch calls for stronger regulatory frameworks to ensure that climate justice and public welfare are not sacrificed for profit.
1.[3]
With reference to Source A, identify three ways as to how non-state actors can influence global politics.
2.[4]
Using Source B and one example you have studied, explain how small states or coalitions can attempt to shape international cooperation.
3.[8]
Compare and contrast what Source C and Source D reveal about how inequalities impact global cooperation.
4.[10]
“The challenge of addressing global issues lies in the unequal distribution of power between state and non-state actors.” Using all sources and your own knowledge, evaluate this claim.