Foreign Policy Analysis

What is foreign policy

Broad area. Two definitions. It’s about what states governments do, primarily looking at a
political process. This government representatives work on behalf of their communities (better
than states, because they want to include organizations like the European Union, more than
international organization, political community). What is distinctive form domestic (one
authority, state) and international politics (a lot sovereignty actors). There is no sovereign
authority. States and all political communities they want to influence the outside world, all
states want to shape the external m.. by soft power (norms and values). The problem is that a
state might want to achieve a certain goal, it always involves INTERACTION between the
actors. States might influence other states, but also non- governmental actors, for example,
corporations.

Purpose of Foreign Analysis

Seeking to influence other nations to promote their values (liberal values, social
conservative, nationalist agenda), different than interest (material, economic interest). Hard
power can be economic power (sanctions, cut of supply to other countries), military. Soft power
is about the ability to promote the values, if it is effective, you have the values, the way of live
is attracted to others, that’s way many countries seek to promote the spread of their own values.

Foreign Policy Making Process

Inputs and outputs. The FP decision making involves Formulation, Decision-Making and
action. 1. What issues reaches the agenda, to what extent is a priority. 2. Once they reach the
agenda, a process of debate, discussion (states are complex organization) It tries to open the box
of decision making. Purpose: Open up the Blackbox of decision making. 3. Implement the
action, different tools to carry out the decision.

Explaining and understanding Foreign Policy

We can get a lot of information about how states make their own decisions. US why they
invaded Irak in 2003, there are massive books, journalist reports. For this discipline tries to
understand from systematic and theoretical point of view. Can we develop models of FP
analysis that explains more than one individual case? They have to find patters that will
eventually develop in theories. Systematic based knowledge: Try to order and rationalize the
data. Theories show us which data we should focus. No theory can explain everything. They
explain specific features of international politics. Some theories explain specific features of FP,
or simplification and abstractions. They are essential to guide us when there is excessive data,
big data sets.
» It is a subdiscipline. FP analysis is very close to international relations. It focuses on
domestic factors. What is distinctive: International level + domestic politics.
Overlaps the two.
» Grand theory, middle-range theory: Essential features of international politics
(Neorealism… Liberalism…). Explaining broad patterns of international politics.
Middle-range theory: Don’t explain nature, they explain specific foreign policy
decisions.
» Comparative FP: Can we compare decision making and outcomes across states. All
individual countries have very specific features that can explain their pattern of FP,
can a comparative be developed? It is ambitious trying to explain the foreign policy.
Outcomes in many different states. A work in progress, the problem is how do you
know you are comparting the same thing.
» General or actor specific theorizing: The aim is to develop more general theories.
Are there similarities between France or Germany, Japan…
» Levels of analysis problem: There are different levels. The first level can be the
system level: many different sovereign states interacting. This is the balance of
power. Or the domestic level: Perhaps sates are driving by the domestic policy.
(Liberal democratic states) Which level of analysis is more important.
» Structure- agency. How much free will actors have and how much the structure in
which they operate determines what they can do. Free will of actors and
opportunities of structure. Individuals can change history.

Realism and Foreign Policy Analysis

International Relation theories: Liberalism and Realism.

Diversity of the Realist Tradition

The most important point is that realism is not now and never has been a single theory. Is
historically been arguably the most influential IR theory. No one likes a realist, they tend to talk
about the constraints about moral action, and creating a more justice society. It emphasizes
element of conflict and competition in the human condition. History has always seen different
social groups that are in competition with each other, main feature of humans. (Marx Class
struggle). Realist talk about class and social groups.

Realism as a Tradition of Thought

They have three key elements:
1. Philosophical mood and disposition: It tend to be skeptical and emphasis constrains on
human progress. They view the world, more pessimistic
2. For of practical knowledge: How does our knowledge and theoretical understanding of the
world. Realism as a form of knowledge, conforms the principle of statecraft.
3. Scientific knowledge: Scientia. About trying to develop a theoretical social science
paradigm, a way of thinking theoretically. Waltz Moving away from reality, not staying
close to it.

Realism: The Basics

Conflict groups View that human society has evolved from collective social groups. The
Realist point is that we need to learn how to operate in this world. We need to start recognizing
hat they are different communities and analyze the world as it is, not how it supposed to be.
Explore ways this world of multiple states, how we can build a state order. Realism stresses this
element of conflict and cooperation. Stresses problem of power. International politics is a
struggle for power. Power is always the immediate aim (Morgenthau).
The problem for them  Creates dilemma for great powers, they have to be focused on what
other powers are doing.
EXTERNAL PRESSURE, SYSTEMIC FACTORS

Liberalism

Social science paradigm that should explain state behavior. They are being described as the
children of light States can pursue foreign policy built in international cooperation. Tends to
focus on the domestic regime type (The type of state that exist different impulses and
purposes, different interest, they act different because of the nature if the state). Liberal
democratic state represents more responsible systems, opportunities for different groups and in
general have achieve more than autocracies.

Liberal Zeitgeist
End of the Cold War 1989: Annus mirabilis. After 9/11, decline of the liberal new world
order. Francis Fukuyama: Ideal and philosophical terms, competing ideologist and perspectives.

Set of ideas
Political tradition is rooted in the Enlightenment. This was the movements of thinker and
philosophers in the 8th century. Leading to the French revolution, the old medieval system was
breaking down. They believed that social problems could be solved with the power of reason,
they tend to argue that human nature x Judea-Christian view of sin. They believed their nature is
benign, people will act in better ways if they are in a fair society. They tend to think that wars
are irrational, it could be eradicated from human history with the power of reason and
rationality.
Adam Smith  Division of labor. Immanuel Kant.
 Liberal Approach
Overcoming real politics, ideas of coercion and balance of power. It´s about transformation,
they tend to argue that there is progress through history, society and people are getting better.
They believe that although they are not particularly active, history and economic values tend to
be liberal. Tend to believe that International Politics can be domesticated strengthen
international law and institutions. Alexander Wendt Social constructivism, international
system isn’t that sort dominated by material sources and relative distribution of power.

Modern Liberalism
War would ruin us. It is irrational and destructive.

Liberalism and Foreign Policy

Three Analytical questions

1. What do states want?: what are the inputs and outcomes, what do they do in the end.
2. How do states make decisions in foreign policy?
3. What do states do?

How do states make decision in foreign policy

In terms of the goals, aim and objectives, they vary, there are many different aims and
goals. Security and survival, border issues of security+ Welfare and prosperity. States also have
aims about the external world, outside their country, all states engage in Milieu shaping, they
want to shape the external environment.

Diplomatic instruments
Positive inducement of diplomatic recognition. Political dialogue, there is a whole set of
diplomatic instruments. For a diplomat his victory is made up of microscopic advantages.
Diplomacy is open seen as a tool that involves when to make compromises, there is a whole art
of diplomacy. Has become very institutionalized, established rules and codes of behavior.

Military instruments
Actively using force, military intervention, using coercive power. Sometimes can be a
passive threat of using force, Deterrence is trying to prevent, stop a state form acting on. A way
they don’t want to.
 Agency Structure Debate
About autonomy and freedom, they have. To what extent they are trapped. I can’t be
avoided; the debate is very centrally to the extent that policy and decision making can be
explained by the domestic policy. All political parties come to power with the agenda, to what
extent that drives foreign policy. States actions are internally rooted in actors? Or externally
shaped?

Public opinion--- Media---- Policy