The document provides feedback on a review. It suggests making the topic more specific and clear, avoiding repetitive expressions, including a hypothesis and questions, and providing a more balanced analysis with arguments before making conclusions. It also recommends elaborating on the evolution of regionalism and comprehensively assessing how it helps protect member states' interests.
The document provides feedback on a review. It suggests making the topic more specific and clear, avoiding repetitive expressions, including a hypothesis and questions, and providing a more balanced analysis with arguments before making conclusions. It also recommends elaborating on the evolution of regionalism and comprehensively assessing how it helps protect member states' interests.
The document provides feedback on a review. It suggests making the topic more specific and clear, avoiding repetitive expressions, including a hypothesis and questions, and providing a more balanced analysis with arguments before making conclusions. It also recommends elaborating on the evolution of regionalism and comprehensively assessing how it helps protect member states' interests.
The topic should be specific, concise, and more clear.
Avoid making repetition of same expressions in different ways. The hypothesis and hypothetical questions should be written. Balanced and impartial analysis is lacking. For instance, you suppose that SAARC has had no achievements since its establishment. In this regard, you should have built arguments first to make conclusive remarks. Need to elaborate on the evolution of regionalism and its impact on regional and international politics. Like; make a comprehensive assessment of how regionalism helps protect the national interests of each member state.