Creating a “Democratic Foreign Policy”: The State Department's Division of Public Liaison and Public Opinion, 1944-1953*

2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANDREW JOHNSTONE
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 205316801878711
Author(s):  
Akisato Suzuki

Does the state of the domestic economy change the size of the effect of audience costs? As public opinion research has shown, citizens assess the performance of their leaders based not only on foreign policy, but also on the domestic economy. Thus, if leaders are subject to audience costs, they should be even less able to afford failure in an international crisis when the economy is performing badly than when the economy is doing well. As a result, such leaders should be even more able to make their threats credible and, therefore, are more likely to be successful in coercive diplomacy. This novel prediction finds no empirical support in a replication study using Moon and Souva (2016). I discuss possible reasons for this result and avenues for further research.


2020 ◽  
pp. 602-614
Author(s):  
Rafael A. Arslanov ◽  
◽  
Elena V. Linkova ◽  

The article studies perception of the uprising of December 14, 1825 in the Western European public opinion as reflected in the press. The source base of the study consists of archival (including previously unpublished) documents found by the authors while working in the State Archive of Turin, and also of the considerable fond 11 “Foreign newspapers,” stored in the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire. The authors investigate and summarize assessments of the Decembrists’ uprising that appeared in the European press in late 1825 – early 1826 and identify the origin of the newspaper information. Working with archival documents, the authors have used a number of methods that are typical for both historical research (retrospective, analytical, comparative methods) and source studies (heuristic, textual, and hermeneutic methods). These methods allow the authors not only to analyze the documents and determine their epistemological value, but also to comprehend their content in historical context. The article concludes that the European public opinion not just showed interest in the events in St. Petersburg, but also tried to analyze them, to identify their sources and their consequences for Russia and Europe. There were two trends in the coverage of the Decembrist uprising. Firstly, publicists repeated the information received through official channels. Secondly, journalists were inclined to believe that the revolutionary tendencies that emerged in the Russian army after the Napoleonic wars were characteristic of all European countries. The accumulated scientific material allows the authors to come to certain conclusions that are valuable for studying not just the uprising on the Senate square on December 14, 1825, but also mechanisms of formation of the image of Russia on the international arena.


1988 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 573-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Black

One of the greatest problems in the discussion of eighteenth-century British foreign policy concerns the assessment of the influence of the particular character of the British political system. British foreign policy, and thus the country's alliance strategy, was conditioned by the subtle interplay of internal processes, the functioning of her domestic political system, and the international situation. As historians are concerned increasingly to probe the nature of the domestic pressures influencing the formulation and execution of policy, so it becomes more important to define the political, as opposed to constitutional, role of Parliament and public opinion. This is of obvious significance for the study of Britain's relations with her allies. Were these made more difficult as a consequence of the distinctive character of the British political system? There was no shortage of contemporaries willing to state that this was the case. An obvious category of discussion concerned the citing of domestic pressure as a reason why concessions could not be made to foreign powers, both allies and those whose alliance was sought. This was of particular significance when ministries explained why gains made during war could not be surrendered at peace treaties and gains made at the peace could not be yielded subsequently. Their defense of the retention of Gibraltar was based on this argument. Similar arguments were used by British ministers in seeking to persuade allies to do as they wished. Diplomatic pressure on France over the state of Dunkirk or on Spain and Portugal over commercial disputes made frequent use of the argument of domestic pressure.


2003 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 273-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Chudowsky ◽  
Taras Kuzio

The article critically surveys the impact of domestic public opinion on foreign policy in Ukraine by integrating it within theories of public opinion. Studies of public opinion in Ukraine have not given due weight to the unique characteristics of the Ukrainian ‘public’, which differs greatly from the Western public. Ukrainian society is passive, atomized and its power is ‘submerged’ relative to that of the state. The article argues that public opinion is of minimal importance in the area of foreign policy.


1989 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 16-28
Author(s):  
Jerome M. Segal
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Quraysha Bibi Ismail Sooliman

This paper considers the effect of violence on the emotions of IS fighters and the resultant consequences of those emotions as a factor in their choice to use violence. By interrogating the human aspect of the fighters, I am focusing not on religion but on human agency as a factor in the violence. In this regard, this paper is about reorienting the question about the violence of IS not as “religious” violence but as a response to how these fighters perceive what is happening to them and their homeland. It is about politicising the political, about the violence of the state and its coalition of killing as opposed to a consistent effort to frame the violence into an explanation of “extremist religious ideology.” This shift in analysis is significant because of the increasing harm that is caused by the rise in Islamophobia where all Muslims are considered “radical” and are dehumanised. This is by no means a new project; rather it reflects the ongoing project of distortion of and animosity toward Islam, the suspension of ethics and the naturalisation of war. It is about an advocacy for war by hegemonic powers and (puppet regimes) states against racialised groups in the name of defending liberal values. Furthermore, the myth of religious violence has served to advance the goals of power which have been used in domestic and foreign policy to marginalise and dehumanise Muslims and to portray the violence of the secular state as a justified intervention in order to protect Western civilisation and the secular subject.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document