Suchergebnisse

Many of the strengths of research in Foreign Policy Analysis have been overlooked by role theorists. Role theorists often assume that roles are shared across elites and masses, that elites can manipulate masses, or that public opinion on roles constrains elites. Role theorists also tend to assume that there is a consensus among elites over national roles. Research in Foreign Policy Analysis, on the other hand, demonstrates that foreign policy may be contested both vertically (between elites and masses) and horizontally (among elites) and that these conflicts affect foreign policy decision making and foreign policy behavior. We propose that (i) contested roles mean that roles and foreign policy are not as stable as is often implied; (ii) research on contested roles offers Foreign Policy Analysis a less preference-oriented way of conceptualizing policy disagreements and decision making; and (iii) structures reveal themselves as important when agents use them in domestic discourse over contested roles, but the impact of international norm and role structures is not automatic, as it is shaped by the agents (and domestic structures) in the domestic political process. We suggest that research on the strategic use of roles could bring together these benefits of examining contested roles. Adapted from the source document.

"Why does North Korea behave erratically in pursuing its nuclear weapons program? Why did the United States prefer bilateral alliances to multilateral ones in Asia after World War II? Why did China become "nice"--no more military coercion--in dealing with the pro-independence Taiwan President Chen Shuibian after 2000? Why did China compromise in the negotiation of the Chunxiao gas exploration in 2008 while Japan became provocative later in the Sino-Japanese disputes in the East China Sea? North Korea's nuclear behavior, U.S. alliance strategy, China's Taiwan policy, and Sino-Japanese territorial disputes are all important examples of seemingly irrational foreign policy decisions that have determined regional stability and Asian security. By examining major events in Asian security, this book investigates why and how leaders make risky and seemingly irrational decisions in international politics. The authors take the innovative step of integrating the neoclassical realist framework in political science and prospect theory in psychology. Their analysis suggests that political leaders are more likely to take risky actions when their vital interests and political legitimacy are seriously threatened. For each case, the authors first discuss the weaknesses of some of the prevailing arguments, mainly from rationalist and constructivist theorizing, and then offer an alternative explanation based on their political legitimacy-prospect theory model. This pioneering book tests and expands prospect theory to the study of Asian security and challenges traditional, expected-utility-based, rationalist theories of foreign policy behavior"--

"Why does North Korea behave erratically in pursuing its nuclear weapons program? Why did the United States prefer bilateral alliances to multilateral ones in Asia after World War II? Why did China become "nice"--No more military coercion--in dealing with the pro-independence Taiwan President Chen Shuibian after 2000? Why did China compromise in the negotiation of the Chunxiao gas exploration in 2008 while Japan became provocative later in the Sino-Japanese disputes in the East China Sea? North Korea's nuclear behavior, U.S. alliance strategy, China's Taiwan policy, and Sino-Japanese territorial disputes are all important examples of seemingly irrational foreign policy decisions that have determined regional stability and Asian security. By examining major events in Asian security, this book investigates why and how leaders make risky and seemingly irrational decisions in international politics. The authors take the innovative step of integrating the neoclassical realist framework in political science and prospect theory in psychology. Their analysis suggests that political leaders are more likely to take risky actions when their vital interests and political legitimacy are seriously threatened. For each case, the authors first discuss the weaknesses of some of the prevailing arguments, mainly from rationalist and constructivist theorizing, and then offer an alternative explanation based on their political legitimacy-prospect theory model. This pioneering book tests and expands prospect theory to the study of Asian security and challenges traditional, expected-utility-based, rationalist theories of foreign policy behavior"--

Foreign policy analysis of a Baltic state. Lithuania and 'Grybauskaitė Doctrine' by Tomas Janeliūnas takes the reader on an academic-historic journey through a diverse selection of possible lenses, including "small state", "Baltic state(s)", "Lithuanian foreign policy" and "Grybauskaitė as an actor". These not necessarily overlapping paths coalesce around eleven chapters that seek to familiarize the reader with the foreign policy doctrine of Dalia Grybauskaitė, who served as president of Lithuania between 2009 and 2019. In the introductory chapter of the book, the author does not reveal or introduce the reader to the core essence of Grybauskaitė's doctrine. Instead, the author only introduces the sources of studying the doctrine; namely, the speeches of Grybauskaite and interviews conducted while undertaking the research. ; N/A

The purpose of this paper is to characterize Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) in post-Cold War Poland. The scope of this text is limited to FPA, understood as empirical research utilizing foreign policy theories by taking into account factors at the domestic level. "Polish FPA"is defined as research conducted by scholars employed in Poland. The text focuses on five aspects of Polish FPA: (1) historical context, (2) the teaching covering this subject, (3) the development of institutions doing research on foreign policy, (4) adaptation of ideas from global (mainly Western) science (in fact, westernization), and (5) the most important publications analyzing foreign policy and applying theoretical approaches. The paper is a response to the existing research gap as, so far, no work has been prepared strictly on the FPA's development in post-Cold War Poland. The weaknesses of the existing literature on this subject are its (1) selectivity, (2) focus on mainstream international relations theories and (3) sketchiness.

Rethinking Foreign Policy Analysis presents the definitive treatment to integrate theories of foreign policy analysis and international relations--addressing the agent-centered, micro-political study of decisions by leaders and the structure-oriented macro political study of state interactions in an international system.

What is cosmopolitanism and how did and does it operate in the Middle East? How does the term apply to persons, milieus and ideologies? Sami Zubaida argues that cosmopolitanism is connected with certain lifestyles, that cross communal boundaries and stimulate the making of eclectical choices between elements of different cultures. Milieus in which these lifestyles flourish are usually produced by empires which bring together diverse peoples and cultures. Social mobility and the rise of a separate class of intellectuals are other preconditions for the adoption of a cosmopolitan attitude. In this paper Zubaida traces the historical instances of cosmopolitanism in the Middle East, its present condition and future prospects. He demonstrates that it is a rare and highly vulnerable phenomenon that goes against the grain of most modern homogenizing trends in politics and culture. (RECIPE/DÜI)