by Dango and Manu

Introduction

The Undergraduate Paper Series (UPS) offered at Tokyo International University (TIU) is an opportunity for International Relations (IR) students to showcase their academic prowess and passion through the creation of a refined and reviewed paper. This is no easy task – the amount of time and effort it takes to create such a work is daunting, especially for undergraduates. Despite this, the UPS review team and professors of TIU receive many papers each year and select their top three candidates to have their papers published in the UPS. Additionally and annually, TIU holds seminars for these successful authors to talk about the experiences that they held in creating their works, and to give advice for the incoming generation of students; so that these students too could sharpen their lenses and skills not just in IR, but for their own academic ambitions as well.

This year’s UPS authors were:

Samantha Faith Djuwana Widi, who wrote “Eco-Promise or Environmental Pretense? Assessing Chinese Mining Firms’ Implementation of Green Belt and Road Initiative Principles in Southern Africa”.

Nilsen Maria Kloster, who wrote “Enemy Image Framing of China in US Policy and Executive Decisions”.

Tran Thi Van Anh, who wrote “Euroscepticism in Central Europe: The Case of Hungary and Poland”.

All three of these author’s works were featured in this year’s UPS Seminar, with Tran Thi Van Anh present through Zoom to explain the difficulties and process she experienced in creating her paper.
There is much to say about what was discussed and taught in the seminar – the most important details of which will be elaborated further.

Takeaways (Dango)

Immediately, it can be noted that the actual process of creating a paper in of itself does not come innately to anyone. This was an acknowledgement made by Tran Thi Van Anh, who took care in explaining how she even came up with the idea for her paper. She first found inspiration in a class she was taking, this class being “International Relations of Europe” taught by Professor Christopher Lamont. From this, she was able to think of questions relating to what she was interested in within that course – eventually coming upon terms and ideas that best summarized what she was trying to understand. This step was crucial – as it gave her a foundation in where she can start to create and ask meaningful questions; in this case, “How do EU states balance their national interests with EU goals”. Having a meaningful and significant question to ask is the first major step in the creation of any paper, and it is through further refinement and further research around this question that eventually led to the discovery of case studies (Hungary and Poland, for this piece), terminology (Eurosceptism, Europeanization, etc.), and other papers that gave more views that is useful for understanding the topic more in depth.
Embedded within this refinement would be the adoption of a specific methodology and means of analysis. Much significance is placed upon this specific aspect of the writing process, it is debatedly as important as the question itself. This is due to how the means of analysis itself can impact the way to present an argument, an important idea that Tran Thi Van Anh mentioned in the seminar. For this paper, a comparative methodology was adopted to analyze the case studies. It is through this means of analysis that the rest of the paper is structured around, and the foundation for the thesis to be built upon.

Anyone who has read through her paper would be able to conclude that it is evident that this process allowed for an organic manner of communication between author and reader. A specific observation made from her paper would be how the transition from the definition of terminology/ideas into the analysis of the piece’s case studies. Concepts such as “Europeanization”, or defining the work’s conceptual framework are explained further before delving into the ways in which these ideas relate to the case studies analyzed. This is something that can be best understood through reading her article, which can be read on the TIUIRSA’s (Tokyo International University International Relations Student Association) website.

Students of IR have the challenge of creating works that challenge the norms of the status quo. As we are students of IR, we should take care in the arguments we present through our papers; we should scrutinize and fact check our claims obsessively throughout the writing process not just to create a “good” paper, but to have a work that is meaningful and significant to those who take the time to read and acknowledge it. The authors of the UPS gave meaningful insight on the process, and a guideline for students to draw inspiration and motivation from.

Takeaways (Manu)

Having attended the seminar of the Undergraduate Paper Series (UPS), hosted by the International Relations Student Association (IRSA), undoubtedly provided a macro perspective on academic publishing. The event covered topics such as initial paper submission and screening peer review, working with the student of editorial board, and undergoing live Q&A. Professor Lamont and Chisha (Academic Head) shared valuable advice which emphasized the importance of writing a strong paper is for a topic of International Relations to be backed up by one’s passion. Witnessing our peers transition from student researchers to published authors gave an insight into the path through academics.

The climax of the seminar focused on presentations by the 2025 UPS winners, sharing personal views at their respective research methodologies. First, Tran Thi Van Anh presented her 2024 paper analyzing Euroscepticism in Hungary and Poland, through the utilization of a qualitative case study and statistical public opinion data. During the Q&A, she made connections with her paper to recent March 2026 events, highlighting the blocked pipeline in Hungary and its detachment from common EU stances towards Ukraine and Russia. Additionally, when Professor Resnick inquired on her future, she shared about waiting for a policy analysis institute in Vietnam and her interest in pursuing master’s program depending on her financial status. Therefore, hearing successful students share openly on the uncertainty and anxious times that may be brought forward post-graduate life has widened my perspective on what may come.

The two further papers, presented by Chisha on behalf of the other winners, illustrated various analytical frameworks. Samantha Faith Djuwana Widi research highlighted how non-binding norms being insufficient in identifying China as SDG’ partner, where a question from the panel on the definitions of “strategic conformity” in contrast to “changing conformity” raised the importance of conceptual clarity. On the other hand, Nilsen Maria Kolster’s paper explored official policy documents from Trump and Biden administrations as resources for a qualitative comparative case study. She made the argument that China is structurally labelled as an “out-group” and a systemic economic violator, through the usage of Cold War-style strategies to influence public opinion on state competition.

In conclusion, this seminar has helped shape my views on my own academic coursework. I have come to understand that research is more than just an abstract exercise for professors and researchers, but an active dialogue that can be driven by undergraduate students as well.