Understanding foreign policy analysis

-

Throughout history we have read about the many heroes or heroines who changed the course of history. Almost all of them are human beings and not reptiles or amphibians. Thus, human beings are like fuel in a car that makes the car move or like flour in a cake.

This understanding is the starting point for our discussion on foreign policy analysis. According to Hudson (2007, p. 4), foreign policy analysis is the study of human decision makers acting singly or in groups.

Acting singly in a position of authority and power a human being like the President of the United States of America has the capability to make a decision that will change the world. This is evident is the current case involving the sanctions on Russian diplomats and intelligence officers. The accusation that the Russians influenced the outcome of the US presidential election prompted Barrack Obama to make such a decision. 

To understand the factors that influence a single decision maker one must refer to the individual level of analysis. At the individual level, there are two approaches to decision making; the rational and the cognitive psychology approach.

Rational involves reasoning in the form of a cost and benefit analysis, while cognitive psychology involves the use of cognitive, emotional, psychological and biological factors including perceptions. The poliheuristic approach is when a decision maker uses both approaches together to make a decision.

Also, as part of the National Executive Council, the Prime Minister of PNG and other cabinet ministers influence the direction the foreign affairs minister takes in dealing with the country’s bilateral or multilateral partners. The different members of the group either act rationally or cognitively when engaged in decision making.

As much as we want to be rational, sometimes since we are not robots we do take the cognitive psychology approach in decision making. That means we make decisions based on our human emotions, gender and perceptions.

Wikipedia states that foreign policy analysis involves the study of how a state makes foreign policy by analyzing the decision making process. From conceptualization to implementation the decision making process is very cumbersome.

Furthermore, Wikipedia states that foreign policy analysis can be considered a sub-field of the study of international relations, which aims to understand the processes behind foreign policy decision making.

According to the foreign policy analysis website: “As a field of study foreign policy analysis is characterized by its actor-specific focus. In its simplest terms, it is the study of the process, effects, causes, or outputs of foreign policy decision-making in either a comparative or case-specific manner. The underlying and often implicit argument theorizes that human beings, acting as a group or within a group, compose and cause change in international politics”.

In a comparative manner means to compare different cases, while a case-specific manner means analyzing a particular case to help one understand the process, effects, causes, or outputs of foreign policy decision-making. Regardless, human beings play a fundamental role in causing change in international politics.

Vladimir Putin made the decision to send the Black Sea fleet to the Crimean region of Ukraine to protect the ethnic Russians. His decision sparked a major international backlash when the US labelled his move as a breach of international law. Thus, Putin’s decision placed Russia in a very critical position after US threatened to kick Russia out of the G8.

If you compare the various ways in which different scholars and websites define foreign policy analysis, you will notice that the common elements are human beings and decision making. It is human beings who make decisions. Decision making is a process that involves human beings acting singly or in groups to satisfy both personal and national interest.

In addition, foreign policy can be defined as a line of argument rationalizing the course of action a government takes when interacting with other states and non-state actors in the international system.

‘Course of action a government takes’ means a decision, and it is common knowledge that only human beings as key ingredients that makes up a state are involved in making decisions either acting alone or in a group. Thus, this is how the definition of foreign policy is related to the sub-field of foreign policy analysis.

In other words, foreign policy analysis is like a magnifying glass that one can use to look deep into the definition of foreign policy to see how, why and what course of action is taken by whom.

Like all other social sciences, human beings and the decisions we make is the fundamental element of international relations. I believe Hudson (2007) calls it the ground of International relations.

References

Hudson, V. (2007). Foreign policy analysis classic and contemporary theory. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Wikipedia. (n. d.). Foreign policy analysis. Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://www.en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy_analysis

Foreign policy analysis. (n. d.) Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://www.foreignpolicyanalysis.org/

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a
Read more

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di
Read more

Rise and fall realism

-
Image
By Colin Elman and Michael A. Jensen Source: Williams, P. D. (Ed.). (2008). Security studies: an introduction . London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. What is rise and fall realism? Rise and fall realism remerge as a powerful alternative to the balance of power theories that predominated international relations scholarship during the 1950’s. Central theme Hegemony is the foundation for peace while balance is often associated with war (Organski). Dynamics Rise and fall realism emphasizes that war between major powers is least likely when the international system is dominated by a single state and when there are no rising challengers vying for system leadership. Given its privileged position, a dominant state is capable of shaping the rules and practices of the international system in such a way as to satisfy its selfish interest. Stability is a product of this hegemonic order, as states which are dissatisfied with the status quo lack the capabilities to change it.
Read more