scholarly journals China's Foreign- and Security-policy Decision-making Processes under Hu Jintao

2009 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 63-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Pierre Cabestan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
National Security ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Implementation Processes ◽  
International Economic Relations ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Since 1979, foreign- and security-policy-making and implementation processes have gradually and substantially changed. New modes of operation that have consolidated under Hu Jintao, actually took shape under Jiang Zemin in the 1990s, and some, under Deng Xiaoping. While the military's role has diminished, that of diplomats, experts, and bureaucracies dealing with trade, international economic relations, energy, propaganda and education has increased. Decision making in this area has remained highly centralized and concentrated in the supreme leading bodies of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). However, China's globalization and decentralization, as well as the increasing complexity of its international interests, have intensified the need to better coordinate the activities of the various CCP and state organs involved in foreign and security policy; hence, the growing importance of the CCP leading small groups (foreign affairs, national security, Taiwan, etc.). But the rigidity of the current institutional pattern has so far foiled repeated attempts to establish a National Security Council.

China’s foreign and security policy institutions and decision-making under Xi Jinping

2020 ◽  
pp. 136914812097488
Author(s):  
Jean-Pierre Cabestan
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Chinese Communist Party ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Xi Jinping ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
Security Risks ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
General Secretary

Power concentration in the hands of Xi Jinping, Chinese Communist Party General Secretary, can be interpreted not only as a reaction to the power fragmentation and the intra-party factionalism that developed under his predecessor, but also as a way to strengthen and stabilise China’s authoritarian polity. In the realm of foreign and security policy, it can also be understood as the result of China’s awareness of both the growing transnational security risks that it is facing and the need to better address the new international tasks and responsibilities it needs to fulfil as a great power. Since 2012, Xi has embarked on sweeping institutional reforms that have contributed to centralising and better coordinating foreign and security decision-making. Yet, although more integrated, China’s authoritarian system has remained fragmented, including in the realm of foreign and security policy, an area where decision-making processes are still highly opaque.

7. Discretion and deference

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Endicott
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
National Security ◽  
Public Expenditure ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Administrative Body ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses how judges can defer in appropriate ways to administrative authorities on some issues, while still opposing abuses of power. The chapter explains why the courts defer massively to administrative authorities on some issues involving foreign affairs and national security, public expenditure, planning, and legal and political processes. The mere fact that the law has allocated the power to an administrative body gives rise to a presumption that a court should not interfere unless there is a ground for review other than that the court would have reached a decision; the extent to which a court ought to defer is determined by the three reasons for allocating power to an administrative body: the body’s expertise, its political responsibility, and/or its decision-making processes.

scholarly journals Intergovernmental Cooperation and the Idea of Community in the Institutional and Decision-making Sphere of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 540-552
Author(s):  
Michal Piechowicz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Institutional Structure ◽  
Evolutionary Development ◽  
Treaty Of Lisbon ◽  
Intergovernmental Cooperation ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

The Treaty of Lisbon (TL) altered the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) not only in its institutional structure, but also in its function and decision making processes. These changes affected the competences of member states, other authorities, and their relationships. They also influenced the prospects for intergovernmental cooperation and the evolutionary development of communitisation phenomena within this policy.

7. Discretion and deference

2021 ◽  
pp. 239-286
Author(s):  
Timothy Endicott
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
National Security ◽  
Public Expenditure ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Administrative Body ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses how judges can defer in appropriate ways to administrative authorities on some issues, while still opposing abuses of power. The chapter explains why the courts defer massively to administrative authorities on some issues involving foreign affairs and national security, public expenditure, planning, and legal and political processes. The mere fact that the law has allocated the power to an administrative body gives rise to a presumption that a court should not interfere unless there is a ground for review other than that the court would have reached a decision. The extent to which a court ought to defer is determined by the three reasons for allocating power to an administrative body: the body’s expertise, its political responsibility, and/or its decision-making processes.

Europäisierung von Außenpolitik?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Clemens ◽  
Alexander Reinfeldt ◽  
Telse Rüter
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
National Level ◽  
Southern Europe ◽  
Complex Interactions ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Did the establishment of the EPC in the 1970s, the predecessor of today’s EU Common Foreign and Security Policy, lead to the ‘Europeanisation’ of national foreign policies and the ‘socialisation’ of the actors involved? Based on a thorough analysis of sources, this study aims to answer these questions, taking into account different concepts of ‘Europeanisation’ and ‘socialisation’ in political science. It focuses on the four EC/EPC countries Belgium, France, Germany and the United Kingdom, and on the foreign policy areas of Southern Europe and the Mediterranean as well as Southern Africa. As the authors point out, only an in-depth and source-based analysis of decision-making processes on both an EPC and national level can determine the complex interactions as well as the influencing factors that shape foreign policy. By conducting such an analysis, they are able to provide conclusive answers to the questions of ‘Europeanisation’ and ‘socialisation’.

scholarly journals The Party Politics of Foreign and Security Policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 515-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tapio Raunio ◽  
Wolfgang Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Actual Behavior ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The positions of political parties in various foreign policy questions and how such ideological stances matter in foreign and security policy decision-making remain largely unexplored beyond the specific case of the United States. Reviewing the “state of the art” in foreign policy analysis and comparative politics, this introductory article discusses the changing nature of both international politics and party systems and cleavages in Europe and beyond. It puts forward reasons why we should see different patterns of coalitions and party behavior in security policy, on the one hand, and in international trade and foreign aid, on the other hand. The articles in this Special Issue have been deliberately chosen to capture different elements of “partyness,” from analyzing party positions to actual behavior by legislatures and governments to transnational party networks. Our main argument is that there are genuine ideological differences between political parties and that the impact of these competing ideologies is also discernible in foreign policy decision-making.

The Intergovernmental Constitution of the EU's Foreign, Security & Defence Executive

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Thym
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Executive Order ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Pillar Structure ◽  
The Eu

European Union – Common Foreign and Security Policy – Changes with the abolition of the pillar structure by the Lisbon Treaty – Common Security and Defence Policy – Executive order of the EU – Between supranationalism and intergovernmentalism – The role of the High Representative – Joint political leadership – The European External Action Service as an administrative infrastructure – Constitutionalisation of foreign affairs

Italy and the politics of European defence: playing by the logic of multi-level networks

Modern Italy ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Foradori ◽  
Paolo Rosa
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
European Level ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Common Defence

SummaryThe article looks at the role of Italy in the decision-making arena of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), analysing the initiatives it put in place to address and influence the construction of a common defence. The article aims to explain the ability or inability of Italy to build up a consensus around its proposals. By studying two initiatives in the field of European defence and security, it seeks to determine the factors which resulted in the differing outcomes of Italian actions at the European level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document