1 / 14

Foreign Policy Decision-Making

Foreign Policy Decision-Making. PO 325: International Politics. Foreign Policy Decision-Making. The major theories of IR that we discussed in the first section of the class are largely systemic (or global) and, in some cases, dyadic (interstate)

zuzana
Download Presentation

Foreign Policy Decision-Making

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Foreign Policy Decision-Making PO 325: International Politics

  2. Foreign Policy Decision-Making • The major theories of IR that we discussed in the first section of the class are largely systemic (or global) and, in some cases, dyadic (interstate) • In this section, we begin by focusing on explanations that seek understanding of international processes by focusing on the specific attributes and internal processes of states and leaders (domestic and individual)

  3. Foreign Policy Decision-Making • Foreign Policies: Strategies used by governments to guide their actions in the international arena • Individual and group contributions to domestic level outcomes – realism and rational choice theory ignore important state-specific interests, actors, and processes • Foreign Policy Process: how important actors within states arrive at and implement international policy • Largely Descriptive, But Some Important Theoretical Bases and Explanations

  4. How are FP Decisions Made? • Rationality as Applied to FP Decision-Making • Clarify Choices • Order Preferences • List Alternatives • Explore Likely Consequences • Choose Best Outcome While Mindful of Costs • Cornerstone of Realist IR Theory

  5. How are FP Decisions Made? • However, several decision-making models begin with the notion that rationality is not an accurate portrayal of reality and that, therefore, a realist notion of FP decision-making is flawed

  6. What’s Wrong With Rationality? • 1. Inapplicability of Rational Framework to Individual Decision-Making (e.g., leaders can’t make rational choices) • Different goals • Individual Psychological Factors • Misperception/Selective Perception – Subconscious Filter • Affective Bias – Influence of Emotion • Cognitive Biases • Cognitive Balance/Dissonance • Justification • Wishful Thinking • Mirror Image • Projection

  7. What’s Wrong With Rationality? • 2. The Fallacy of the Unitary Actor Assumption (e.g., state decisions are not reflective of unified decision-making) • Similar Critique as Liberalism, But more nuanced • FP Shaped by internal dynamics of states and societies

  8. What’s Wrong With Rationality? • Several Actors are Crucial to FP Decision-Making; International Outputs are the Results of their Interests, Which May Differ • Bureaucracies • Diplomats – disagreements with leaders • Tensions amongst Bureaucratic Agencies – specialization, turf wars, funding • Interest Groups – lobbying to influence • Military-Industrial Complex • Public Opinion – constraint and approval generation (rally around the flag)

  9. What’s Wrong With Rationality? • Decision Structure Affects Outcomes • Agenda Control • Composition of Decision Group • Further, Group Psychological Factors Can Influence this Decentralized Decision Process • Group Psychology Conditions Responses – Groupthink • Crisis management • Stress of Crises Leading to suboptimal decision-making

  10. The Organizational Model • Organizational Process • Leaders rely on Standard Operating Procedure, not cost-benefit analysis • Low-level officials establish (or rely on previously established) standardized procedures to set the “menu of choice” for high-ranking officials

  11. The Organizational Model • Organizational Process (continued) • This means that any given international output is not contingent upon reasoned choices made by leaders when facing new situations, but largely on how new situations set into motion plans that were developed for previously foreseen situations (may not be commensurate with situation at hand) • Leadership choice is therefore at the plan implementation level • Example: World War I Mobilization

  12. The Bureaucratic/Government Bargaining Model • FP decisions are the result of “pushing and tugging” amongst various bureaucratic agencies, and not rational decision-making by executive leaders • Bureaucrats tend to see FP situations in light of how they effect the continued existence and well-being of their bureaucracies; their responses to such situations are largely colored by these considerations

  13. The Bureaucratic/Government Bargaining Model • As such, bureaucratic outputs may reflect the desires of several bureaucracies to accrue benefits or secure relative ascendancy, not to further national interest • “Budget Maximization” • Turf Wars over Specific Issues • From this perspective, even when a bureaucratic consensus on action emerges, leaders ultimately implement options that reflect bureaucratic biases • Example: Clinton, DoD, and NATO in Bosnia

  14. Example of a Psychological FP Explanation - Groupthink • Groupthink: The implementation of a potentially sub-optimal policy because of the individual psychological need to maintain adherence with overarching group worldview • Example: The CIA, the War on Terror, and Iraq

More Related