Imbalanced Foreign Policy of Revisionist Minor Powers: Venezuela's Great Powers Risky Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
VVctor Mijares ◽  
Jamie J. Morris
Author(s):  
Carla Martinez Machain ◽  
Rebecca Kaye ◽  
Jared Oestman

Great powers have traditionally played a major role in the study of foreign policy. From a variety of work on foreign policy analysis, it is known that great powers are more active in their foreign policy than other states in the international system are. Whether the actions are disbursing foreign aid, creating alliances, conflict involvement, or others, studies will often control for great power status, with the underlying expectation being that major powers will be more likely to utilize these foreign policy tools. In fact, when considering relevant dyads in quantitative studies of foreign policy analysis, states have to be contiguous for the dyad to be considered relevant, but an exception is made for dyads containing at least one major power, given the ability of great powers to project their power beyond their borders. Key literature on the foreign policy behavior of great powers discusses different ways of defining great powers. In particular, the debate over defining great power status has focused on whether a great power should be defined solely on its physical capabilities, or also on intangible factors, such as its foreign policy interests or whether the state is recognized as a great power by others in the international system. Further, there are questions of whether great powers have to be military powers or whether economic superiority is enough to classify a state as a great power. There is also the issue of regional powers: states that are clearly military, economic, and political leaders within a limited geographic region, but not at the global level. Should these states be considered great powers, or should that classification be reserved for global powers? The literature on great-power foreign policy also discusses cooperative and conflictual behaviors of great powers in the international system. It addresses great power war, focusing on how they are more conflict prone than minor powers, and reviews the issues that drive great powers to engage in conflict, such as positional issues and the intent to shape the international system to their liking. It also discusses a variety of foreign policy actions, both coercive and cooperative, that major powers are more likely to engage in than their minor-power counterparts. In addition, there is much work done on the relationships between great powers and between great powers and minor powers, stressing the competitive nature of major-power interactions and the trade-off between economic and military security and policy concessions that defines major-minor power interactions.


2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 803-819 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Rosato ◽  
John Schuessler

What kind of policy can the United States pursue that ensures its security while minimizing the likelihood of war? We describe and defend a realist theory of foreign policy to guide American decision makers. Briefly, the theory says that if they want to ensure their security, great powers such as the United States should balance against other great powers. They should also take a relaxed view toward developments involving minor powers and, at most, should balance against hostile minor powers that inhabit strategically important regions of the world. We then show that had the great powers followed our theory's prescriptions, some of the most important wars of the past century might have been averted. Specifically, the world wars might not have occurred, and the United States might not have gone to war in either Vietnam or Iraq. In other words, realism as we conceive it offers the prospect of security without war. At the same time, we also argue that if the United States adopts an alternative liberal foreign policy, this is likely to result in more, rather than fewer, wars. We conclude by offering some theoretically-based proposals about how US decision makers should deal with China and Iran.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 65-77
Author(s):  
Martin Dahl

When the political camp centred on the Law and Justice party (PiS) came to power in 2015, it led to a change in priorities in Polish foreign policy. The Three Seas Initiative (TSI), understood as closer cooperation between eastern states of the European Union in the area between the Baltic, Adriatic, and Black seas, has become a new instrument of foreign policy. The initiative demonstrates the growing importance of Central and Eastern Europe in the global game of great powers. The region has become a subject of rivalry, not only between the United States and Russia but also China. Therefore, the main objective of this article is to try to describe the importance of the region to Germany and how Germany’s stance on the TSI has evolved. The article consists of three parts, an introduction to the issues, the genesis of the TSI, and the definition of goals set by the states participating in this initiative, as well as analysis of the German stance towards the initiative since its development in 2015. The theories of geopolitics and neorealism are used as the theoretical basis for the analysis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna Bäck ◽  
Jan Teorell ◽  
Alexander Von Hagen-Jamar ◽  
Alejandro Quiroz Flores

Abstract Why do some foreign ministers stay longer in office than others? Are they punished when the country loses a war? Several scholars have focused on the tenure of leaders as an important predictor of foreign policy outcomes, such as war onset, creating an interest in leadership survival. We here shift the focus to the survival of other important politicians in cabinet—foreign ministers, hypothesizing that their tenure depends on their performance in office. For example, we expect that foreign ministers stay longer in office when the country experiences an armed conflict resulting in a win or in a compromise agreement. We evaluate and find support for several of our hypotheses using an original historical dataset, which comprises all foreign ministers of the world's thirteen great powers from the early modern period to the present, covering about 1,100 foreign minister-terms of office.


2021 ◽  
pp. 002088172110567
Author(s):  
Shubhamitra Das

Indo-Pacific has emerged as a region of great movement, conflict and cooperation, contestations and coalition-building. The emergence of minilateral and multilateral cooperation by the middle powers is increasing in the region, with the regional countries enthusiastically mapping the region focussing on their centrality. History proves that the role of middle-power countries became more prominent during the moments of international transition. The two contrasting powers like India and Australia; one with a post-colonial identity in foreign policy-making, subtle emphasis on non-aligned movement (NAM) and emerging as an influential power, and, on the other, a traditional middle power with an alliance structure and regionalism akin to the Western model, have equal stakes in the region and it is inevitable for them to take a leadership position in building what is called a middle power communion in the Indo-Pacific. This article will explore the understanding of middle powers and how India and Australia, as middle powers; are strategically placed and, being great powers within their respective regions; take the responsibility of region-building and maintaining peace with great powers, and how the Indo-Pacific and Quad are emerging as discourses within their foreign policy-making.


Author(s):  
María Cecilia Míguez

Autonomy is a concept constantly referred to in Latin American foreign policy analysis, especially with respect to Argentina and Brazil. As great powers continue to exert effective control over peripheral economies and their political decision making, autonomy emerges as a possibility for self-determination in the areas where hegemonic powers’ economic, political, and cultural interferences are expressed. Although this is not a new concept, the quest for autonomy within the “global periphery”—and elsewhere too—still remains relevant. Helio Jaguaribe and Juan Carlos Puig’s theoretical approaches are fundamental epistemological contributions to international relations (IR), not only in South America (where the theoretical approach was first developed) but also to the wider IR field outside the mainstream scholarship. In line with global historical changes, autonomy took on some subsequent new meanings, which led to new and heterogeneous formulations that transformed, and in certain cases also contradicted, the very genesis of the idea of autonomy. As a result, the so-called autonomy “with adjectives” emerged within IR peripheral debates. The 21st century witnessed the rebirth of the concept amid the rise of multilateralism and the new Latin American regionalism, which brought its relational character to the fore. Some of the new approaches to autonomy, especially from Brazil, used the concept as a methodological tool to understand the historical evolution of the country’s foreign policy. As such, autonomy and its theoretical reflection remain central to the analyses and interpretations of the international relations of peripheral countries, and it is in this sense that the autonomy can be highlighted broadly as a Latin American contribution to IR discipline. The concept of autonomy has a unique and foundational content referred to the discussion of the asymmetries in the global order. Studying autonomy is critical to understanding peripheral countries’ problems and dynamics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document