Daniel Drezner, Professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and hilarious, yet brilliant (and practical?) blogger discusses how different theoretical approaches to IR would deal with the threat of Zombies.
I particularly liked his take on the Liberal Institutionalist approach:
"A liberal institutionalist would argue that zombies represent a classic externality problem of... dying and then existing in an undead state. Clearly, the zombie issue would cross borders and affect all states -- so the benefits from policy coordination would be pretty massive. This would give states a great opportunity to cooperate on the issue by quickly fashioning a World Zombie Organization (WZO) that would codify and promnulgate rules on how to deal with zombies. Alas, the effectiveness of the WZO would be uncertain. If the zombies had standing and appealed any WZO decision to wipe them out, we could be talking about an 18-month window when zombies could run amok without any effective regulation whatsoever.
Fortunately, the United States would likely respond by creating the North American F*** Zombies Agreement -- or NAFZA -- to handle the problem regionally. Similarly, one would expect the European Union to issue one mother of a directive to cope with the issue. Indeed, given that zonbies would likely to be covered under genetically modified organisms, the EU would likely trumpet the Catragena Protocol for Biosafety in an "I told you so" kind of way. Inevitably, Andrew Moravcsik would author an essay about the inherent superiority of the EU approach to zombie regulation, and why so many coluntries in Africa prefer the EU approach over the American approach of "die, motherf***ers, die!!" Oh, and British beef would once again be banned as a matter of principle."
Read the post here.