Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering &

Information
Technology, Rahim Yar Khan

ASSIGNMENT

ASSIGNMENT TOPIC:
FOREIGN POLICY PROCESS

COURSE: FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

SUBMITTED TO
MR. MUHAMMAD ZAFAR

SUBMITTED BY:

(HUSS 221107005) SAQIB KHAN

 Foreign Policy Process

Foreign policy is the process by which countries influence each other to

protect and advance their national interests and values. The process of
making foreign policy involves a number of stages, including:
 Assessing the international and domestic political environment
 Formulating a comprehensive plan based on knowledge and experience
 Determining the best foreign policy option
 Taking concrete courses of action to attain objectives
Foreign policy is influenced by various factors such as domestic
considerations, the behavior of other states, and geopolitical
strategies. Foreign policymakers have many tools at their disposal, which
generally fall into three broad categories: political, economic, and
military. Some tools of foreign policy include: Diplomacy, Trade policy,
Economic sanctions, Arms control, and Intelligence.
Foreign policymaking can be more effective when it is internationally
coordinated within the appropriate time frame and procedures.

Pakistan

Pakistan’s foreign policy can be understood with respect to three impulses:

the normative, statist, and structural. First, the normative impulse is a
constitutive element of the Pakistani nation-state project, including ideological
and self-definitional tropes such as culture, values, religion, and history based
on its Islamic identity. The key question is to what extent Pakistan’s Islamic
identity provides explanations for its foreign policy when international relations
literature considers the national interest a more reliable predictor of foreign
policy than identity or ideology.

Foreign Policy Formulation in Pakistan: Institutional Framework

In a democratic setup, there are multiple stakeholders at different layers and
fields playing their constitutionally mandated respective roles in the formulation
of foreign policy. Pakistan being a functioning democracy, its policy formulation
process, by and large, resembles any nation-state having fairly well-functioning
democratic institutions. These are as follows
Parliament
Theoretically, it is the Parliament of the Islamic State of Pakistan that is the
supreme policy-making institution, including the formulation of the foreign
policy of the country.

Cabinet:
Although the Parliament is the supreme policy-making authority in the country,
in actual practice, it is the cabinet, headed by the duly elected chief executive
i.e., Prime Minister or the President, which formulates the foreign policy. The
Constitution requires that all-important foreign policy decisions ultimately must
be taken by the cabinet

Foreign Office:
Normally, any foreign policy proposal would be initiated by the Ministry of
Foreign affairs which is the focal point for the initiation of all proposals relating
to the foreign affairs of a country. However, there may be cases where any
issue relating to any ministry has foreign policy implications.

Armed Forces:
All over the world, armed forces play an extremely crucial role in the making of
the foreign policy of any country for obvious reasons. However, in the case of
Pakistan, they play the dominant role. There are multiple reasons for the
larger-than-life role played by Pakistan’s armed forces in the political
governance of the country,

Non-state Institutions
Although foreign policy formulation is a very structured process involving
formal institutions of the country, three non-state institutions provide important
inputs in this process. These are the think tanks, media, and civil society
organizations. Think tanks and research institutes play an extremely useful role
in any country’s formulation of policies by providing an independent
assessment of the ground realities as well as recommending a course of
action.
 India

Foreign Policy Making in India falls under the jurisdiction of the Union or Central Go
vernment of India. Like any other country, India's foreign policy expands its sphere
of influence, strengthens its role across nations, and makes its presence feel like an
emerging force. The Prime Minister of India and the Ministry of External Affairs also
have an important role in determining Foreign Policy Making in India.Due to the com
plicated global economic scenario, it becomes important to understand the Foreign
Policy Making in India. We have shared the process of policymaking, along with det
ails about the role of the Parliament in policymaking in India here.

About Foreign Policy Making in India

To achieve the goals of foreign policy making in India, 2023 brings several obstacle
s and opportunities. The rise of China and its influence on India's neighbourhood, fo
r example, is a source of concern for the country. Moreover, the conclusion of discu
ssions for an EU-China Comprehensive Investment Treaty dispels the idea of Chine
se isolation following the Covid-19 outbreak and strengthens China's position.This b
rings in the need to pay attention to foreign policy making in India. Some of the step
s that the country should take is increasing convergence with the United States. Indi
a must carefully address foreign policy difficulties and harness opportunities to shift
the regional power balance.

Which Body Formulates the Foreign Policy Making in India?

Foreign Policy Making in India is a complicated process that involves the participatio
n of several senior-level decision makers. One of the organizations involved in this p
rocess is the Ministry of External Affairs. This is the central government institution in
charge of foreign affairs. It is officially in charge of foreign policy making in India, pol
icy execution, and the day-to-day management of international relations.

Here are the details of everyone involved in the process of foreign policy making in I
ndia:

 Ministry of External Affairs

 Prime Minister
 Government Agencies
 Political Parties and other interest groups

About the Ministry of External Affairs

  The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) balances and maintains foreign policy
making in India.
 A cabinet minister leads the Ministry, supported by the Deputy Foreign
Minister.
 The MEA's administrative structure is divided into two categories: territorial
divisions and functional divisions. In its relevant domain, each division is in
charge of policy coordination.
 Foreign Policy Making in India is a crucial process directly managed by the
Ministry of External Affairs and the Prime Minister of India.
 With the rise of tensions among several foreign countries, Foreign Policy
Making in India has become crucial.

Process of Foreign Policy Making in India

Foreign policy is a complicated process mediated by numerous parties' involvement.

The issue of international affairs falls under the jurisdiction of the Union or Central g
overnment in India, which is a federal country. Political parties, the media, pressure
organisations, and government structures and authorities such as the Prime Ministe
r and the Ministry of External Affairs have a vital influence on foreign policy making i
n India.

 Since India has been a functioning democracy, non-government stakeholders

have begun to play a more significant role.
 The administration has also launched a public diplomacy apparatus to gather
public support for its foreign policy initiatives both at home and abroad.
 In addition, the development of a new type of information and communication
technology has resulted in substantial changes in how foreign policy making
in India is created and carried out.

Principles of Foreign Policy Making in India

The process of foreign policy making in India requires following certain principles of
international standards. Here, we have shared some of the essential principles of fo
reign policy making in India are:

 Mutual respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of each other
 Equality and mutual benefit
 Non-aggression pact
 Peaceful coexistence
 China

China’s foreign policy must rely on opaque and behind-the-scenes

coordination organs to work through a large number of bureaucratic agencies
of the state, party, and military, whose primary roles are information gathering
and the implementation and recommendation of policy. In addition, some new
players, such as think tanks, media, local governments, and transnational
corporations, have played a variety of roles to influence China’s foreign policy.
This chapter examines the evolving role of the paramount leader, the foreign
policy coordination and elaboration organs, the bureaucracies, and the new
players in the making and transformation of China’s foreign policy.

1 China's Formal Security Policy Decision-Making Structure

We begin with the assumption that domestic political considerations can influence fo
reign policy decisions. 2 There are some analytic advantages in placing the foreign
and security decision-making areas in a domestic context. The formal rank and auth
ority of different bodies within Chinese domestic politics are relatively well establish
ed. Rank consciousness dictates the way that officials and their agencies interact wi
th each other.

Almost all members of the bodies charged with implementing any policy are first an
d foremost members of the CPC. The Party's power is paramount. The Party's high
est body ranks higher than the highest State body's rank; the Party outranks all sect
ors of the State, including government departments; the Party controls the use of for
ce through the People's Liberation Army (PLA), which is an armed wing of the Party
rather than a conventional state army, and the Party controls the consultative mech
anisms of the state, which are designed to reflect popular opinion.
2 The Rule-Makers

The Communist Party of China and the Government of the People's Republic of Chi
na have separate decision-making structures although some entities overlap in func
tion, authority and even personnel. Therefore, within the formal Chinese political sys
tem, decisions are made along dual tracks: the Party track and the State track. Fro
m the point of view of understanding how the political system works, there are three
major coordination bodies of interest: one within the Party and two within the State.
.3 Major Bodies in the Foreign Policy Decision-Making
Structure

The ultimate decision-making body on crucial foreign policy issues (and any other is
sue of utmost relevance) is the executive committee of the Central Committee, calle
d the Politburo Standing Committee (PSC). The PSC oversees consequential decisi
ons affecting China's major relationships, including the United States, Japan, Russi
a and North Korea. The PSC also has to deal with emergencies or international cris
es, such as border skirmishes or international incidents. While one assumes that th
ere are a number of so-called ‘point men’ on the PSC covering various strategic iss
ues—Wang Qishan on Sino-US relations, Li Keqiang on the European Union and Z
hang Dejiang on North Korea for example—with the exception of PSC chair Xi Jinpi
ng, none of the other members have specific foreign policy responsibilities.
4 The Warring Entities

Historically, the military establishment has been an important interest group in the C
hinese political system, and it continues to wield substantial clout. Whether the milit
ary would like to have a greater role in foreign policy, decision making is not the foc
us of this article. However, what is important to note is that the Party leadership uph
olds a decision-making system that keeps the military at arm's length from political d
ecision making. The military has a completely different governance structure than ot
her areas of the Chinese state. This provides it with a good deal of autonomy over it
s own professional and operational activities
5 Old System, New World: Problems of Chinese Foreign
Policy Making

All foreign policy actors claim to operate in the name of China's national
interests—and thus almost all actions can be justified. The Ministry of
Commerce promotes China's prosperity; the People's Liberation Army
defends China's sovereignty; the oil companies ensure China's energy
security; local governments raise living standards; netizens uphold China's
dignity, and so on. When this is combined with the natural bureaucratic instinct
of ensuring sufficient resources for one's department, conflations of interest
can emerge. For example, the PLA is prone to exaggerate the tensions over
maritime interests to ensure sufficient funding for new vessels and aircraft;
and in doing so, it is likely to find a natural ally in the one or more of the
national oil companies aspiring to explore resources in contested waters.

United States of America

The Branches and Foreign Policy

The U.S. Constitution divides power between the three branches of government: the
legislative, the executive and the judicial. It also gives each branch some check on t
he other. The President can veto legislation; Congress can override the President’s
veto; the courts can declare a law of Congress or an act of the President unconstitut
ional. Foreign policy is thus split amongst different governmental structures.
The Senate
The framers, suspicious of executive power, regarded Congress as the most “demo
cratic” of the three branches. Congress’s power to tax and control government spen
ding —the “power of the purse” —is possibly its most important. Although the Presid
ent usually cannot spend money not appropriated by Congress, he has always been
granted some latitude in emergencies.
The Constitution assigns the Senate a distinctive role in the foreign policy process—
to advise the President in negotiating agreements, to consent to them once they ha
ve been signed, and to approve presidential appointments, including the Secretary
of State, other high officials of the State Department, ambassadors and career forei
gn service officers.

The President
Under the Constitution, the President serves as head of state and head of governm
ent. In most other governments (Britain’s and Germany’s, for example), the two func
tions are separate. As head of state, the President is, in effect, the personification of
the U.S.: its visible image, its official voice and its primary representative to the outsi
de world. As head of government, he formulates foreign policy, supervises its imple
mentation and attempts to obtain the resources to support it. He also organizes and
directs the departments and agencies that play a part in the foreign policy process.
Along with the Vice President, he is the only government official elected nationally.
This places him in a unique position to identify, express and pursue the “national int
erests” of the U.S.

The Policy making Machinery

Making foreign policy requires the participation of the President, the executive branc
h, Congress and the public. Conducting foreign policy, on the other hand, is the excl
usive prerogative of the President and his subordinates in the executive branch. Th
e distinction is fuzzy but important: you make policy when you decide to protect the
security of the Persian Gulf; you conduct policy when you send the Navy to do it.

Department of State
Until World War II, one agency, the Department of State, established in 1789 and th
e highest-ranking Cabinet department, and one individual, the Secretary of State, w
ho is directly responsible to the President, managed foreign affairs. The traditional f
unctions of the State Department and its professional diplomatic corps, the Foreign
Service, include: negotiating on behalf of the U.S. government with foreign governm
ents and in international organizations; defending U.S. position in the world;

The Pentagon and Security

The U.S. emerged from World War II a nuclear superpower with global interests, ne
cessitating expanded departments to handle foreign policy, and chiefly, security. Mili
tary power serves as an instrument of diplomacy—as a means of achieving goals d
efined by civilian officials of the government. The head of the Defense Department i
s a civilian secretary who serves in the President’s Cabinet. The principal military ad
viser to the President is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a strategy board c
onsisting of the senior officers of the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.

Formation of Foreign Policy

George Washington once remarked that the U.S. ought to have the most successful
foreign policy of any country in the world because it had so many self-styled secreta
ries of state. Since his day, the difficulty of developing a cohesive, relevant and feas
ible foreign policy has increased enormously.
Theoretically, the process of formulation should begin with a clear definition of the n
ational interests, followed by a delineation of the policies that would promote those i
nterests and the course of action by the various departments and agencies that wou
ld further those policies, as well as the allocation of the resources needed to carry th
em out. In practice, no system is likely to produce a cohesive, viable and supportabl
e foreign policy. The national interest is a cluster of particular interests, and the age
ncies and staffs involved may have very different views as to what it should be. The
government’s uneven response to the so-called “Arab Spring” is just one example of
the U.S.’s ever-shifting foreign policy.