Suchergebnisse

"Domestic Role Contestation and Foreign Policy" published on by Oxford University Press.

1. Unpacking ego in role theory : vertical and horizontal role contestation and foreign policy / Cristian Cantir and Juliet Kaarbo -- 2. Role contestation in the July 1914 crisis : the British and French cases / Joe D. Hagan -- 3. Active independent or faithful ally? The domestic contestation of national role conceptions in Australia after World War II / Klaus Brummer and Cameron G. Thies -- 4. Role theory and Japanese security policy / Keiko Hirata -- 5. Contesting Belgium's role in development cooperation / Marijke Breuning -- 6. Domestic sources of changing Turkish foreign policy towards the MENA during the 2010s : a role theoretic approach / Ozgur Ozdamar -- 7. Intervention : domestic contestation and Britain's national role conceptions / Jamie Gaskarth -- 8. Belief systems and foreign policy roles : role contestation in U.S. foreign policy decisions / Stephen G. Walker, Mark Schafer, and John Beieler -- 9. To be or not to be a state? Role contestation in the debate over Scottish independence / Ryan Beasley, Juliet Kaarbo, and Hannah Solomon-Strauss -- 10. Multi-level role contestation : the EU in the Libyan crisis / Nicole koenig -- 11. Agents in structures : insights from cases of internal role contestation / Juliet Kaarbo and Cristian Cantir.

Despite the increase in the number of studies in International Relations using concepts from a role theory perspective, scholarship continues to assume that a state's own expectations of what role it should play on the world stage is shared among domestic political actors. Cristian Cantir and Juliet Kaarbo have gathered a leading team of internationally distinguished International Relations scholars to draw on decades of research in Foreign Policy Analysis to explore points of internal contestation of national role conceptions (NRCs) and the effects and outcomes of contestation between domestic political actors. Nine detailed comparative case studies have been selected for the purpose of theoretical exploration, with an eye to illustrating the relevance of role contestation in a diversity of settings, including variation in period, geographic area, unit of analysis, and aspects of the domestic political process. This edited book includes a number of pioneering insights into how the domestic political process can have a crucial effect on how a country behaves at the global level.

"Role Contestation in Making Foreign Policy Decisions: Digraph and Game Theory Models" published on by Oxford University Press.

Cover -- Half Title -- Series Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- List of Figures and Tables -- List of Abbreviations -- Acknowledgements -- 1. Marginalised diasporas: A force in role contestation? -- Surface-level similarities? Examining Tamil diaspora mobilisation in Canadian and British role contestation -- Case selection -- Organisation of the book -- 2. Diaspora role contestation in Canada and the UK: Theoretical and analytical frameworks -- All the world's a stage: Role theory, diasporas and foreign policy analysis -- Diasporas and foreign policy analysis -- Disaggregating agency in foreign policy analysis: Diasporas as role-makers in domestic role contestation -- Role theory and agency: Mass movements as role-making foreign policy agents -- Role theory and agency: Government and non-government elites as role-making foreign policy agents -- Role theory and agency: Interaction at the intersection of mass movements, government elites and diaspora interest groups -- Disaggregating institutions in foreign policy analysis: Domestic institutions, diaspora influence and international role performance -- Role theory and institutions: Institutional factors and diaspora decision-making access -- Role theory and institutions: Diaspora influence on domestic role conception and role performance -- Role Theory and constraints on international role performance -- Role Theory and role position ascription -- Role Theory and "indispensable" states -- Conclusion -- 3. A marginalised minority: The Sri Lankan civil war, the Tamil diaspora and transnational regimes of marginalisation -- Defining the "Tamil diaspora" -- The Tamil diaspora in Canada and the UK -- The marginalization of the Tamil diaspora: Decolonisation and regimes of migration and securitisation -- Theories of marginalisation.

"Using a Role Theory lens, this book addresses this shortage of work through investigating Tamil diaspora mass movements and interest groups as forces of domestic foreign policy influence. Until now Role Theory has not considered diaspora mass movements as collective action actors, nor looked at how marginalised diasporas influence elite foreign policy decision-making. Matthew K. Godwin employs a comparative, microfoundational decision-making narrative that looks incisively at decisions faced by the British and Canadian governments in 2009 and 2013 toward the Sri Lankan civil war and its aftermath. Through qualitative, elite-level interviews and content analysis of other primary source data, Godwin convincingly argues that when diaspora interest group elites are leveraging the power of mass movements in concert with credible partisan advocates, they can influence foreign policy decision-making. However, international institutional constraints on role behaviour may stymie their preferred role performance, especially if states are indispensable to the institutions their behaviour may unravel. Ultimately, Godwin concludes that some states can't behave 'badly', even when they want to. This book will be of interest to students and researchers of International Relations, Foreign Policy Analysis, Comparative Politics, Migration Studies and to non-government organizations who seek to influence governments"--

This paper develops a framework for examining the grand strategies of great powers through the use of the role contestation literature. We first identify national role conceptions advocated by leaders and political factions, and then compare them to detect contestation between their favored foreign policy roles. We argue that long-term consensus on certain roles may coalesce into the enduring ingredients of grand strategies, while the existence of a high amount of role contestation between leaders and political factions over roles may suggest foreign policy is guided by more temporary foreign policy beliefs. We explore this argument through an illustrative case of contemporary China. Our findings identify substantial variation between the national role conceptions of China's leaders and their factions over time. Of particular note, we find that (1) President Xi Jinping seems to be experiencing a much higher amount of role contestation within the party on more nationalistic and aggressive roles than his predecessors, and (2) certain roles, such as developer, Tianxia, regional leadership, and internal developer, are very consistent among both leaders and their factions over time such that these roles can be considered as part of China's grand strategy. This study shows how role theory might inform the analysis of grand strategy by offering a means of observing enduring features of grand strategy that could be applied more broadly to other countries.

AbstractThis paper develops a framework for examining the grand strategies of great powers through the use of the role contestation literature. We first identify national role conceptions advocated by leaders and political factions, and then compare them to detect contestation between their favored foreign policy roles. We argue that long-term consensus on certain roles may coalesce into the enduring ingredients of grand strategies, while the existence of a high amount of role contestation between leaders and political factions over roles may suggest foreign policy is guided by more temporary foreign policy beliefs. We explore this argument through an illustrative case of contemporary China. Our findings identify substantial variation between the national role conceptions of China's leaders and their factions over time. Of particular note, we find that (1) President Xi Jinping seems to be experiencing a much higher amount of role contestation within the party on more nationalistic and aggressive roles than his predecessors, and (2) certain roles, such as developer, Tianxia, regional leadership, and internal developer, are very consistent among both leaders and their factions over time such that these roles can be considered as part of China's grand strategy. This study shows how role theory might inform the analysis of grand strategy by offering a means of observing enduring features of grand strategy that could be applied more broadly to other countries.

Foreign policy role theorists have recently placed domestic role contestation central to their accounts of foreign policy continuity and change. Yet, contestation over national role conceptions is only one aspect of domestic competition over political power that can impact the roles states play in world politics. Frequently, foreign policies are an outgrowth of political struggle over matters only indirectly related to a state's international role. In this article, I draw role theorists' attention to cases where non-role-based political competition affects role performance, urging them to trace empirically the connections between role contestation, non-role-based political competition with role implications, and role performance. To make this case, I develop three plausibility probes: America's embrace of the hegemon role after 1945, Britain's 2016 Brexit vote, and the United States' recent turn towards a more transactional foreign policy. Highlighting non-role political competition with role implications offers a productive challenge that promises to enrich role theory in foreign policy analysis (FPA) by bringing it a step closer to domestic political competition.

This article assesses the possibilities for the development of foreign-policy role theory using the concepts of traditions and dilemmas from the interpretive approach to foreign policy, as well as narratives as an interpretive method for analysis. While role theory is rich in conceptualization, it still suffers from overt structuralism, inattention to domestic processes of divergence/convergence affecting national roles, and from methodological underdevelopment. This article goes beyond studies of national role conceptions that present foreign-policy behavior as determined by the national role, thus making it possible to understand the interplay of competing voices in determining a national role, the processes of role change, and the resulting reorientation of foreign policy. This article illustrates the possibilities and limitations of merging role theory and the interpretive approach through the study of Chile's and Mexico's attempts to join the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), their accession to APEC, and their performance once accepted into APEC.

AbstractIn this article I use a case study of the relationship between an international non‐government development organisation (NGO) and one of its local partner NGOs to question the desirability of basing NGO partnerships on the principle of subsidiarity. I argue that devolving maximum control to the local NGO in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity would have conflicted with the interests and expectations of both the international NGO and its local partner. As a result, there was occasional but significant contestation between these organisations about what sort of relationship was most compatible with the principle of partnership and what role each party should play within that relationship. I argue that such contestation over what constitutes partnership has the potential to contribute to the realisation of this value‐laden term by involving all parties in defining the nature of their relationship. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

"Role Theory in Foreign Policy" published on by Oxford University Press.