Strategic Intelligence and Foreign Policy

Strategic intelligence, die evaluated informational product of intelligence bureaucracies, is a potentially important element in foreign policy decision making. But the role and impact of intelligence reports are very difficult to analyze, because of bodi secrecy and conceptual or definitional problems. Some new light is shed by a number of recent books, in three categories: essentially uncritical works by former insiders, muckraking exposes, and historical case studies. Collectively, these books improve our understanding of the variables that condition the impact of strategic intelligence on policy, or they illuminate die policy and bureaucratic context of intelligence activities. But only one of the recent books has a theoretical thrust. Great need remains, and opportunities exist, to move toward better dieoretical understanding of intelligence, or at least toward inproved information about when, how, or whether intelligence activities or reports have measurable impact on foreign policy decision making and policy outcomes in world politics.

Download Full-text

Politics, policy-making and the presence of images of suffering children

International Affairs ◽

10.1093/ia/iiz275 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 96 (3) ◽

pp. 593-608

Author(s):

Helen Berents

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Foreign Policy ◽

International Relations ◽

Policy Making ◽

Public Discourse ◽

Policy Decision ◽

World Politics ◽

Visual Politics ◽

Policy Decision Making ◽

Political Dimensions

Abstract In 2017 Trump expressed pity for the ‘beautiful babies’ killed in a gas attack on Khan Shaykhun in Syria before launching airstrikes against President Assad's regime. Images of suffering children in world politics are often used as a synecdoche for a broader conflict or disaster. Injured, suffering, or dead; the ways in which images of children circulate in global public discourse must be critically examined to uncover the assumptions that operate in these environments. This article explores reactions to images of children by representatives and leaders of states to trace the interconnected affective and political dimensions of these images. In contrast to attending to the expected empathetic responses prompted by images of children, this article particularly focuses on when such images prompt bellicose foreign policy decision-making. In doing this, the article forwards a way of thinking about images as contentious affective objects in international relations. The ways in which images of children's bodies and suffering are strategically deployed by politicians deserves closer scrutiny to uncover the visual politics of childhood inherent in these moments of international politics and policy-making.

Download Full-text

Small Group Effects on Foreign Policy Decision Making

10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.298 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Jean A. Garrison

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Foreign Policy ◽

Small Group ◽

Small Groups ◽

Policy Decision ◽

Policy Outcomes ◽

Starting Point ◽

Group Members ◽

Policy Decision Making ◽

High Level

The core decision-making literature argues that leaders and their advisors operate within a political and social context that determines when and how they matter to foreign policy decision making. Small groups and powerful leaders become important when they have an active interest in and involvement with the issue under discussion; when the problem is perceived to be a crisis and important to the future of the regime; in novel situations requiring more than simple application of existing standard operating procedures; and when high-level diplomacy is involved. Irving Janis’s groupthink and Graham Allison’s bureaucratic politics serve as the starting point in the study of small groups and foreign policy decision making. There are three distinct structural arrangements of decision groups: formalistic/hierarchical, competitive, and collegial advisory structures, which vary based on their centralization and how open they are to the input of various members of the decision group. Considering the leader, group members, and influence patterns, it is possible to see that decision making within a group rests on the symbiotic relationship between the leader and members of the group or among group members themselves. Indeed, the interaction among group members creates particular patterns of behavior that affect how the group functions and how the policy process will evolve and likely influence policy outcomes. Ultimately, small group decision making must overcome the consistent challenge to differentiate its role in foreign policy analysis from other decision units and expand further beyond the American context.

Download Full-text

Resistensi Hubungan Luar Negeri Amerika Serikat dan Iran: Studi Kasus Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)

Transformasi Global ◽

10.21776/ub.jtg.2020.007.01.7 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

pp. 144-175

Author(s):

Wildan Ilmanuarif Shafar ◽

Dian Mutmainah

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Decision Making ◽

Foreign Policy ◽

Policy Decision ◽

The United States ◽

United States Government ◽

Comprehensive Plan ◽

Policy Decision Making ◽

The Impact ◽

The U.S

Since 2015 the United States has been a signatory of the historic nuclear agreement with Iran known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was also agreed by other P5+1 countries. JCPOA is the achievement of the U.S. and other P5+1 countries' negotiations with Iran regarding the limitation of Iran's nuclear program. JCPOA is also known to be the vital instrument to reduce Iran's capabilities regarding its aggressive behavior and malign activities, creating destabilization in the Middle East. However, in 2018 the United States government decided to withdraw its participation from the JCPOA. As we know, this decision had an impact on Iran's behavior, which several times violated the contents of the JCPOA agreement even though they did not leave the agreement. We are also witnessing the impact of this decision increase the conflict between the US and Iran in recent years. This research aims to explain the rationale of the U.S. decision to withdraw from the JCPOA nuclear agreement with Iran in 2018. This research using the foreign policy decision-making framework model by Charles W. Kegley and Gregory A. Raymond. This concept focuses on explaining factors of foreign policy decision-making in three sources of analysis and the process of foreign policy-making based on rational choice.

Download Full-text

Analogies and Metaphors and Foreign Policy Decision Making

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.524 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

William Flanik

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Foreign Policy ◽

Cold War ◽

Case Studies ◽

Cognitive Functions ◽

Policy Decision ◽

Cognitive Sciences ◽

Policy Decision Making ◽

The Cold War ◽

Future Work

Like all decision making, foreign policy decision making (FPDM) requires transferring meaning from one representation to another. Since the end of the Cold War, students of FPDM have focused increasingly on historical analogies and, to a lesser extent, conceptual metaphors to explain how this transference works. Drawing on converging evidence from the cognitive sciences, as well as careful case studies of foreign policymaking, they’ve shown analogy and metaphor to be much more than “cheap talk.” Instead, metaphor and analogy are intrinsic to policymakers’ cognition. This article traces the development of this growing literature. So far, FPDM has treated analogy and metaphor separately. It has also paid far more attention to the former than the latter. By contrast, the article argues that analogy and metaphor are not only similar, they are equally essential to cognition. It defines and compares metaphor and analogy, analyzes their socio-cognitive functions in decision making, and charts the evolution of analogy and metaphor research in FPDM. It also suggests the utility of a constructivist-cognitive synthesis for future work in this area.

Download Full-text

Beliefs and Foreign Policy Decision Making

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.393 ◽

2017 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Mark Schafer ◽

Gary Smith

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Foreign Policy ◽

Policy Decision ◽

Policy Outcomes ◽

Decision Making Process ◽

Great Opportunity ◽

Cognitive Limitations ◽

Scant Attention ◽

Policy Decision Making ◽

The Rich

How do the beliefs of leaders affect foreign policy decision-making processes and outcomes? This question has been central to the study of foreign policy decision making (FPDM), yet it receives scant attention in the broader international relations literature. Although many controversies and debates surround the issue of specifically how political leaders’ beliefs affect foreign policy decisions and outcomes, there is one key assumption in this literature that is universally accepted: leaders matter. Individual leaders, their unique beliefs, and their distinctive cognitive limitations affect both the quality of the decision-making process and the direction of the foreign policy outcomes. The beliefs and images leaders hold act as powerful frames and limitations to incoming information. Despite the rich history of the field, scholars who study beliefs still have much more work to do to expand the generalizability of the qualitative findings in the literature. Scholars need more data, deriving from more sources, for more leaders, so that they can generate larger and more comprehensive datasets. Indeed, there is a great opportunity to expand this field of research and to paint a clearer picture of the decision-making process.

Download Full-text

The Party Politics of Foreign and Security Policy

Foreign Policy Analysis ◽

10.1093/fpa/oraa018 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 16 (4) ◽

pp. 515-531 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

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.

Download Full-text