Suchergebnisse

This thesis is an analysis of Thailand's foreign policy under Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva (2008-2011). It examines Thai foreign policy towards Cambodia, Malaysia, and Myanmar in the context of political transition in Thailand. It seeks to answer the following research questions: Were there any aspects of the Abhisit administration's foreign policy that differed significantly from that of his predecessors? What were the major factors, both domestic and external, that impacted on Abhisit's foreign policy decision-making? In answering these two questions, this thesis uses neoclassical realism as a theoretical framework to analyse Abhisit's foreign policy. This thesis comprises three case studies: the conflict between Thailand and Cambodia over the Preah Vihear temple, Abhisit's Malaysia policy in relation to the separatist insurgency in southern Thailand, and Abhisit's policy towards democratisation in Myanmar. Through the analysis of the three case studies, this thesis concludes that throughout the Abhisit administration, despite rhetorical differences, continuity was the hallmark of Thailand's relationships with neighbouring countries. Furthermore, this thesis argues that Abhisit's foreign policy was largely influenced by domestic political considerations, rather than external factors. In other words, although external or international pressures were significant, they were not the primary determinants of Abhisit's foreign policy. Specifically, a prolonged confrontation between the pro- and anti-Thaksin forces, the persistence of the Thai military's influence on politics, the continued separatist violence in southern Thailand, and Thai economic interests in Cambodia, Malaysia, and Myanmar were the major factors influencing Abhisit's foreign policy decision-making. In terms of external factors, the competing nationalisms in the region, the political circumstances in Cambodia, Malaysia, and Myanmar, and the inherent weakness of ASEAN cohesion were the primary factors influencing relations between Thailand and its neighbouring countries.

The main objective of this article is to present potential research opportunities offered by the analysis of conditions, structure and instruments of the foreign policy of the country. The secondary objective is to present several potentially interesting research scenarios using the presented approach. For the purpose of these analyses, selected definitions of foreign policy functioning in the mainstream of Polish science (by leading researchers of international relations) and included in English-language publications of renowned foreign publishers will be presented. Then, the authors' definition of foreign policy will be proposed based on these publications. In the following subsections there will be a presentation of selected elements of foreign policy analysis in the form of its determinants, structure and instruments. In their research, the authors used secondary research material in the form of scientific articles in Polish and English. The method used in the research is the method of content analysis.

The main objective of this article is to present potential research opportunities offered by the analysis of conditions, structure and instruments of the foreign policy of the country. The secondary objective is to present several potentially interesting research scenarios using the presented approach. For the purpose of these analyses, selected definitions of foreign policy functioning in the mainstream of Polish science (by leading researchers of international relations) and included in English-language publications of renowned foreign publishers will be presented. Then, the authors' definition of foreign policy will be proposed based on these publications. In the following subsections there will be a presentation of selected elements of foreign policy analysis in the form of its determinants, structure and instruments. In their research, the authors used secondary research material in the form of scientific articles in Polish and English. The method used in the research is the method of content analysis.

The main objective of this article is to present potential research opportunities offered by the analysis of conditions, structure and instruments of the foreign policy of the country. The secondary objective is to present several potentially interesting research scenarios using the presented approach. For the purpose of these analyses, selected definitions of foreign policy functioning in the mainstream of Polish science (by leading researchers of international relations) and included in English-language publications of renowned foreign publishers will be presented. Then, the authors' definition of foreign policy will be proposed based on these publications. In the following subsections there will be a presentation of selected elements of foreign policy analysis in the form of its determinants, structure and instruments. In their research, the authors used secondary research material in the form of scientific articles in Polish and English. The method used in the research is the method of content analysis.

The article focuses on the interconnectedness of foreign policy environments to explain Slovenia's opportunities and constraints for foreign policy action. During the period of pre-independence para-diplomacy, the building of an internal and external domestic environment successfully turned constraints (no international recognition) into opportunities (applying for membership of European and global intergovernmental organizations). In the second period — post-recognition — considering the absence of a strategic foreign policy document, the Slovenian internal foreign policy environment became a major constraint to seize foreign environment opportunities. This affected Slovenia's accomplishments, notably after NATO and EU memberships were achieved in 2004. Although the Slovenian internal environment matured during the following period to adopt, in 2015, a comprehensive foreign policy strategy the recent turn in world politics (especially the European financial and economic crisis and the migration crisis) created for the first time a foreign environment for Slovenia that offered many fewer opportunities and far more constraints. ; The article focuses on the interconnectedness of foreign policy environments to explain Slovenia's opportunities and constraints for foreign policy action. During the period of pre-independence para-diplomacy, the building of an internal and external domestic environment successfully turned constraints (no international recognition) into opportunities (applying for membership of European and global intergovernmental organizations). In the second period — post-recognition — considering the absence of a strategic foreign policy document, the Slovenian internal foreign policy environment became a major constraint to seize foreign environment opportunities. This affected Slovenia's accomplishments, notably after NATO and EU memberships were achieved in 2004. Although the Slovenian internal environment matured during the following period to adopt, in 2015, a comprehensive foreign policy strategy the recent turn in world politics (especially the European financial and economic crisis and the migration crisis) created for the first time a foreign environment for Slovenia that offered many fewer opportunities and far more constraints.

How much mileage can we get out of prospect theory to explain foreign policy decision-making? To answer this question, we first argue that risk as outcome uncertainty is the appropriate definition in prospect-theoretical applications. Then, we indicate that probability weighting—a crucial component of prospect theory—is typically ignored in such applications. We argue why this is problematic and suggest how to move forward. Next, we discuss how to establish the reference point in the face of outcomes in multiple dimensions, as is typically the case in foreign policy decision-making. Finally, we discuss what we have learnt regarding prospect theory's scope conditions and the differences across individuals in the theory's applicability. Overall, our contribution lies in identifying several underexposed or neglected issues (e.g., the definition of risk and probability weighting), in examining the advancements regarding prospect theory's scope conditions, and in discussing avenues for further research.

There is a clear link between a state's domestic situation - where policy is formulated and made (called foreign policy making), and its external environment, in which policy is implemented (called foreign policy behavior). In post-Soviet states in Central Asia, such as Kyrgyzstan, the states are operating their foreign policies in conditions of enormous structural change, uncertainty and lack of experience, stemming from the fact of having only recently established their own independence following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Changes in the international system and regional subsystems have also pushed them toward limited choices and certain idiosyncratic foreign policy behaviors. Furthermore, these states have entered into new alliances following the September 11 events, played roles in new conflicts (in Afghanistan and Iraq - the War on Terror), and sought assistance and protection from global and regional powers that had previously been inaccessible. This paper attempts to explain the foreign policy of Kyrgyzstan from 1991 to 2010. Robert Putnam's model of the "two-level game" approach is used to explain Kyrgyz foreign policy, based on the relationships between the international system and subsystems, and foreign policy and domestic politics.

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 behaviour in security policy, on the one hand, and in international trade and foreign aid, on the other. The articles in this Special Issue have been deliberately chosen to capture different elements of 'partyness', from analysing party positions to actual behaviour 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 decisionmaking.

Abstract This paper analyses the decision of the Obama administration to redirect its foreign policy towards Egypt in the wake of the Arab Spring. It attempts to highlight the issue of how governments deal with decision-making at times of crisis, and under which circumstances they take critical decisions that lead to major shifts in their foreign policy track record. It focuses on the process that led to a reassessment of US (United States) foreign policy, shifting from decades of support to the autocratic regime of Hosni Mubarak, towards backing his ouster. Specifically, the paper attempts to assess to what extent the decision to withdraw US support from a longstanding state-leader and ally in the Middle East can be seen as a foreign policy change (FPC). A relevant research question this paper pursues is: how can the withdrawal of US support to a regime considered as an ally be considered, in itself, as a radical FPC?

This article challenges the traditional approach to studying the creation of foreign policy within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Whilst most historical and contemporary research has focused upon the role of the Foreign Secretary, Permanent Under Secretary and senior overseas representatives, this article argues that an overlooked department – the Policy Planning Staff, and its contemporary successor, the Policy Unit – has had significant influence over the debate and direction of British foreign policy. Drawing upon documents received under the Freedom of Information Act, archival documents and interviews conducted with current and previous members of the Staff and the wider FCO, this article reveals the rationale for the planning department, its roles, structure, staffing and influence on foreign policy over time. It concludes that the department has been, and remains, a crucial part of the policy-making process and, therefore, warrants further attention from historians and those interested in contemporary foreign policy analysis.

Why does a state change its foreign policy objectives and who is responsible for instigating such change? According to Hermann, four primary change agents are central to this process: leaders, bureaucracies, changes in domestic constituencies, and external shocks. This paper argues that the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) is a complementary policy process framework that can explain foreign policy change (FPC) and that accounts for all four of these primary change agents. Additionally, it is a broader framework of the policy process that facilitates a more comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing FPC than traditional FPC research. The ACF has the potential to broaden our understanding of FPC by emphasizing the intersection of the international system with domestic politics and focusing on a myriad of policy actors coordinating their advocacy efforts to influence FPC. To support this argument, the paper discusses how FPC can benefit from the ACF and reviews past applications. It proposes a research agenda using the ACF to study FPC and draws conclusions about future challenges and directions.

The emergence of new influential global actors and the seeming omnipotence of global markets have produced a highly diversified international environment challenging the concept of foreign policy and the theoretical contribution of FPA. In view of this challenge, it is argued that instead of considering the above changes through a fragmentary approach, it would be more efficient to conceive them as part of an ongoing transformation process governing practice and theory in foreign policy. On this background, the political-economic interface is revisited, in order to highlight the significance of the concepts of security and prosperity in the contemporary international framework and to reconsider the question of an interdisciplinary approach to foreign policy.

Indonesian foreign policy is considered as a uniqe and rare policy. This is because the main focus of Indonesian foreign policy is Free and Active. For country like Indonesia which had just got independence in 1945, the country is considered as a country with a pioneer foreign policy to stand in a non-block. Therefore, Indonesia was quite popular with non-block movement and Bandung Conference in the Cold War Period. This paper discusses Indonesian foreign policy and match its policy with underlying theory of Foreign Policies: Realism, Idealism, and Constructivism. Moreover, this essay also analyses Indonesian Foreign Policy through Middle Power Concept. Additionally, this essay also explains the practices of Indonesian Foreign Policy in current years, especially under Joko Widodo 's Administration. Last but not least, the author also reveals Indonesian foreign policy and its relations to media, society or public opinion.

Recent events in the Ukraine (2014/15) and the not-too-distant wars in former Yugoslavia (1991-2001) have shown that conflict can still occur right on the external frontiers of the European Union. The multifaceted problems that failing states pose, such as humanitarian catastrophes and resulting migration streams, proliferation threats and economic impairment, do not stop at the borders but affect the European Union in many ways. Additionally, European society and its foundational values are increasingly threatened by violent terrorist attacks. The decades of relative stability and peace during the Cold War are definitively over.

Foreign policy is usually over-determined. The "national interest" often appears to be an immutable dictation of the international system and of domestic politics. As Henry Kissinger put it when he was Secretary of State, "the essential outlines of U.S. policy will remain the same no matter who wins the U.S. Presidential election" (Wittkopf, 2003, 524). Yet sometimes, "reality" is more malleable than it first appears. Not so long ago, it seemed "unimaginable" that the Soviet Union would disappear and Germany would be peacefully reunited. As former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft put it in 2003, the main divisions in foreign policy today are not between liberals and conservatives, but between the traditionalists and the transformationalists.1 The transformationalists believe that "we know what has to be done and have the power to do it. What has to be done is to transform the Middle East into a collection of democracies. That will bring peace and stability" (Rothkopf, 2005, 428). Transformational leadership has become a central part of the current debate about American foreign policy.