Suchergebnisse

"Simulation and ABM in Foreign Policy" published on by Oxford University Press.

Considers the circumstances under which US & French policy elites would recommend intervention. Discussion opens with a review of the pertinent literature, discerning propositions supported by four cases of potential humanitarian intervention in Central Africa, 1994-1996. The notion of problem representation is introduced, arguing that the manner in which the policy issue is represented underpins how decisionmakers choose options. It is contended that different types of problem representations result in decisions to intervene (or not). International structural & domestic political factors that confront policymakers are listed: eg, international (UN, NATO, US) & domestic public opinion & financial constraints. A typology of intervention problem representations is provided: scalar vs threshold problem conception, humanitarian vs catastrophic thrust, natural vs human immediate causes, & complexity of the causal structure. Public speeches & interviews of US & French elites are drawn on to scrutinize how the problem was discursively represented vis-a-vis possible intervention in Central Africa. Analysis leads to a call to refine intervention theories in light of the support (& lack) it garnered from the literature review. Some patterns involving the problem representation variables & the international & domestic constraints are identified. It is concluded that when a problem is represented as involving a threshold, the difference between representing it as humanitarian rather than catastrophic is key to comprehending the recommendation to intercede: representing the problem as catastrophic is more likely to result in a recommendation to intervene. Domestic public opinion & cultural responsibility were the major factors related to intervention recommendations, with the former resulting in recommendations against (particularly unilateral) & the latter in recommendations for. 2 Tables. J. Zendejas

Experimental work on modes of problem representation (Sylvan, Diascro, & Haddad, 1996) has found that the story model of Pennington and Hastie (1986, 1988) is a helpful construct in understanding how people reach decisions when dealing with questions of foreign policy. Here, a modified version of the story model is applied to statements by military officers in the Soviet Union and in France, representing the situations they face before and after the loss of Eastern Europe and Indochina, respectively (Charlick‐Paley, 1997). Both baseline stories and those after the losses of empire are examined to test the hypothesis that when a military experiences the loss of its state's empire, officers will formulate a new story that justifies the change in its status, and that this new story will motivate new patterns of civil‐military relations in the post‐imperial era. The hypothesis finds general support, and stories are found to be a useful vehicle in understanding differences between groups of military officers. An analysis of how officers' stories change over time yields intriguing results as to how mutable stories are and which elements of a story are most likely to change first. In particular, expansion of the level of a goal is found to be a representational response to the political stimulus of loss of empire.

Experimental work on modes of problem representation has found that the story model of Pennington and Hastie (1986, 1988) is a helpful construct in understanding how people reach decisions when dealing with questions of foreign policy. A modified version of the story model is applied to statements by military officers in the Soviet Union and in France, representing the situations they face before and after the loss of Eastern Europe and Indochina, respectively. Both baseline stories and those after the losses of empire are examined to test the hypothesis that when a military experiences the loss of its state's empire, officers will formulate a new story that justifies the change in its status, and that this new story will motivate new patterns of civic-military relations in the post-imperial era. (Original abstract - amended)