Chapter 1 - History and Evolution of FP Flashcards
3 Kinds of Hegemons
- Global hegemon (U.S. between 1989 - mid 1990s)
- Regional Hegemons (China, EU, Brazil)
- Economic Hegemons (EU)
Two Things that Prompt Policy
Perception of an opportunity or a threat
Perceived by decision-makers
Foreign-Policy Executive
PM, Cabinet, bureaucrats
Inter-mestic Hourglass
The global sphere exists in the top, is filtered through the foreign policy executive to the domestic sphere.
Vice versa
Criticism - There are more actors than just the FP executives at this point
Intervening Variable
People or things that can affect your behaviour - imperfect transmission belt that makes one’s perception of threat or opportunity not lead ‘logically’ to the policy output
3 Paradoxes of FP
- The state is the only and primary actor, yet its role has fundamentally shifted
- All foreign policy is the same, yet unique
- FPA is IR theory, yet it is a middle-range FP theory
First Paradox of FP
The state is the only primary actor, yet its role has diminished/shifted.
- The national interest is unitary and alone dictates state behaviour
- FP has opened up to new actors (TNCs, IGOs, NGOs, etc.)
3 Goals of States (outdated)
- Maintaining security
- Maintaining prosperity
- Maintaining prestige
Arguably that prestige has lost its influence. Starting in the Congress of Vienna in 1815, the powerful states did what they wanted.
Congress of Vienna
Congress in 1815 where Gaal hypothesizes that prestige as a form of power ended. Power became the primary consideration, 5 of the 8 (who were the strongest) alone decided what to do.
Prior to this, small nations with no power but prestige had considerable influence.
The Concert of Europe
An agreement to strictly keep the balance of power between 1815-1914.
Any actor that tried to mess with the balance would be attacked by all.
Interpretations of IGOs and Institutional Power
Regime theorist (Keohane / Nye) - they have transcended state interest HST (Gilpin) say they are just an extension
Example of economic power not resulting in structural power
India has huge economy, but because France has a seat on the UNSC, it has more structural power despite being smaller.
Paradox 2 of FP
All foreign policy is the same but unique
- The one national interest exists through the macro lens. Domestic factors are irrelevant.
- Each actor and context is unique. FP outcomes are unique according to the micro approach.
Question of Middle Range Theory
Question: How can past factors and present be combined not to be predictable but insightful
Paradox 3 of FP
FPA is IR theory but actually FPA is a middle-range FP theory
- Abstract, theoretical views of the state that emphasizes structural forces. Agential focus.
- FPA is generic framework to understand and analyze specific situations. Individual, national, regional, cultural, and identity can influence FP
Intended v Real Outcome in US Embassy in Jerusalem
Intended outcome: appealing to voter base
Actual outcome: base didn’t care that much
Threatened peace and threatened America’s role as arbitrator
6 Steps to FP cycle
- Agenda Setting
- Policy Formulation
- Decision-making phase
- Implementation
- Evaluation
- Maintenance, Succession, Termination
Agenda-Setting
Power in agenda setting
Difference between institutional and public agenda
Policy Formulation
Input from as many people as people
Draft a few policies and look more closely
Implementation
When the bureaucracy flexes its muscles, shows its influences.
Evaluation
Actually happens at each stage
3 Paradigmatic Works
- Richard Snyder - Decision-Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics
- James Rosenau - Pre-Theories and Theories of FP
- Sprout couple - Man-Milieu Relationship Hypotheses in the Context of International Politics
Richard Snyder - Decision Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics
- Emphasis on FPDM
- Positivism - wanted to be able to predict events
- Multi-causal and interdisciplinary (conceded defeat in terms of positivism)
James Rosenau -
Pre-Theories and Theories of FP
- Middle-range theory
- The need to integrate information from several levels of analysis
- Shows the debate on whether multi-level analysis is too complex to be helpful or whether it’s necessary to explain things
Sprout Couple - Man-Milieu Relationship in the Context of International Politics
- Emphasized psychological, social, political contexts
2. How do individuals act as independent or intervening variables to effect outcomes
Classic FPA Scholarship
(1954-1993)
- Focus on group decision making (groupthink and problem framing)
- Focus on organizational process and bureaucratic politics (SOPs)
Groupthink
Asserts that decision making is a psychological process over a rational one
Effects of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
- Allow for little flexibility
2. Isn’t rational necessarily, but makes things manageable
The Psychological and Societal Milieux of FPDM
- Individual Characteristics (actor-specific theory)
- National and society characteristics (Polity types)
- International system (Polarity, power distribution)
- This was a rebuke of positivist, data-based assumptions of earlier FPA scholarship
The Psychological and Societal Milieux of FPDM
- Individual Characteristics (actor-specific theory)
- National and society characteristics (Polity types)
- International system (Polarity, power distribution)
- This was a rebuke of positivist, data-based assumptions of earlier FPA scholarship
FPA Self-Reflection (HIPM)
Late 70s - 80s
- Historical analysis to be insightful
- Doesn’t explain why x did y, but what does x generally do historically?
- No conceptual or methodological tools
- Putnam’s Two-Level Game
- Introduction of middle-range theory
Two-Level Game
Robert Putnam 1st level - international factors 2nd level - domestic factors Nexus = FP executives Distinct from inter-mestic in that the two actually mix together and have impacts on one another
Middle-Range Theory
A mix of grand theories and overly specific and contextualized for insight
Contemporary Research Agenda of FPA (IAMMMP)
- Accept the impossibility of prediction
- Look below the state level and use actor-specific information
- Build middle-range theory as the interface between actor-general and real-world complexity
- Pursue multi-causal explanations
- Multidisciplinary
- Process of FPDM just as important as outputs
Framing
An important part of the group level which can affect the 2nd level of the two-level game.
Very important in middle-range theory in that it creates narratives, applies to cultural binaries, highlights how many actors can pressure the system
US vs European Research
US is quantitative and macro level while Europe is process tracing
Neoclassical Realism
Unit level variables constrain or facilitate the ability of all types of states to respond to systemic imperatives
Primary Levels of Analysis in FPA
- Cognitive Process
- Leader personality and orientation
- Small-group dynamics
- Interface of leader personality with small-group composition
- Organizational
- Bureaucratic Politics
- Culture and foreign policy
- Domestic political contestation
- National attributes and foreign policy
- Systemic effects on FP
Classic FPA - Pt. 2 (Electric boogaloo)
- Small-group decision making
- Organizational process and bureaucratic politics
- Comparative foreign policy
- Psychological influences on FPDM
- Societal milieux (context)
