INTRODUCTION
Foreign policy is the relation between the states. “Foreign policy is an activity of the state with which it fulfils its aims and interests within the international arena” (Patrič, 2013, p. 1). Foreign policy has many definitions by the other scholar. According to Laura Neack, which is cited from Charles Herman,(n.d), he mentioned foreign policy as,
“The discrete purposeful action that results from the political level decision of an individual or group of individuals… [it is] the abservable artifact of a political level decision. It is not the decision, but a product of the decision” (Neack, 2003, p. 25)
There are a lot of approaches that can be applied in making decision for foreign policy. The example of the approach is
…show more content…
That means, their approach was had rationality in doing decision making of foreign policy. According to Slantchev,
“the rational actor model treats foreign policy choices as products of the following idealized sequence. Given some problem, a rational decision maker takes into account the foreign policy goals of the nation and determines which ones take priority over others.” (Slantchev, April 19, 2005)
From this context we know that the actor which is rationality have to come over the decision making to achieve their goals in term of foreign policy. By the way, according to Slantchev,
“To recapitulate, the rational actor model hypothesizes that people are rational in the sense that they choose actions that somehow help them achieve their goals. This may not look controversial. However, one may well wonder about the ability of the actors to relate means to ends in an effective way. This is the individual limitation critique” (Slantchev, April 19, 2005).
Besides that, the rational actor had some critique in term of doing their approach of foreign policy decision making. Yet, somehow the issues came out by the actor was do not have control over the implementation in their decision making. Therefore, it was called “principal-agent problem, or the organizational critique.” (Slantchev, April 19, 2005) Within our understanding about this critique, for example, you want certain goals achieved but
· Detail #1: Cold War was a time that United States started to create allied circles such Nato to straighten up its strength in Europe ad for any possible foreign attacks. In a passage by Soviet foreign minister V.M Molotov he stated, “the collaboration between the Soviet Union, the United States, and Britain would also today produce good results. But the United States and Britain have departed from these democratic principles and have violated the decisions jointly taken.” Doc:H · Commentary #1 (explain meaning of detail): In this passage V.M Molotov was saying that during World War democracy had worked well.
Rationality, in International Relations, refers to how states implement foreign policies to reach its certain goals. In the film, McNamara explains his conversation he had with Communist Cuban leader Fidel Castro regarding Castro’s acknowledgement that Cuba would have been destroyed by the United States if Soviet Union had not retracted their nuclear weapons. To McNamara’s surprise, rational leader Castro expressed his full acknowledgement and confessed that he was willing to let his country destroyed. Based on that conversation, McNamara concludes that rationality sometimes leads to unnecessary deaths of citizens, and that is not okay because human lives and their rights matter. In the article, One World, Rival Theory, John Snyder asserts, “Constructivism often echoes the theme human rights and international justice activist sound.” McNamara’s conclusion matches with Constructivism, and his lesson is useful because it warns people to think twice about their foreign policies and consider the
Domestic policy differs from foreign policy, which deals with a nation’s relationship with other nations, domestic policy tends to be more visible and often more controversial. The relationship between domestic and the other nations is also commonly linked by the influence of border security, improved infrastructure, surging economy, domestic culture, political, religion, social attitudes, and many other variables. American focus on national security strategies to protect the United States, promoting economic prosperity, creating peace through strength, and gaining American influences in the world. Our relationship with other nations can vary depending on each belief or values. A basic aspect in the relation between domestic and other nations is the importance of national identity and consistent needs to protect such values. Domestic and foreign policy can be distinguished as two separate concepts in international relations, because some nations do not have a similar set of objectives. Domestic sources play their role in the forms of compromises between social structure and elements of the government. The influence of the domestic policy forms the basis of foreign strategy. The relationship between domestic and other nations are separable in the sense that global politics play a major role in the modern global society and the conduct of states in
Foreign policy decision-makers are not omnipotent enlightened individuals who can calmly evaluate all available information, assign relative values, and reflectively consider options. Instead, foreign policy is determined by individuals, as a collective, attempting to comprehend a bewildering array of information sources while influenced by personal emotion, relationships, and a subjective understanding of history. Theory, henceforth, is simplification of reality predisposed to emphases certain facts while degrading others. In explaining the reasons for Australia’s invasion of Iraq in 2003, neoclassical realism and constructivism will be applied in deepening the rationale exploration. The systemic, national, and individual facets of this decision are examined supported discussing surrounding social rules, identity, perceptions, and the US-Australian alliance. Neoclassical realism combined structural realist theories with a deep unit-specific analysis to inform understandings of foreign policy where it is assumed states seek increases in relative power. Constructivism, however, is as social science allows for analysists to drill down into relationships and individuals to determine the its socially formatted nature.
An effective foreign policy could be described as making alliances, gaining land with beneficial resources and
When one can truly understand and uncover the meaning behind these articles and how they fit into one or more of the ‘boxes’ we call paradigms and perspectives. In order to dissect and analyze the case of the Cold War, especially its origins, one must not only skim through the text and uncover main ideas, but also must also relate the readings to these paradigms and establish one’s own ideals and opinions regarding the study of international relations. Personally, I believe the articles associated with the origins of the Cold War along with Professor Katzenstein’s lecture on the topic provide strong arguments for the use of a ‘middle fish’ perspective and a ‘big fish’ paradigm: domestic politics and realism, respectively. Through George Kennan’s personal accounts, experience and analysis at both the time of the Cold War’s inception and forty-plus years later after the fall of the Soviet Union, a point is made regarding the nature of Soviet expansion as an offensive maneuver, which he believed must be contained by a defensive strategy. This point of conflicting strategies by the U.S. and (especially) the Soviet Union provides the reader with a realist argument and perspective. Also, in his second piece, which details remarks made to the Council on Foreign Relations in 1994, Kennan explains that instead of whole-heartedly adopting
The era of globalization has witnessed the growing influence of a number of unconventional international actors, from non-governmental organizations, to multi-national corporations, to global political movements. Traditional, state-centric definitions of foreign policy as "the policy of a sovereign state in its interaction with other sovereign states is no longer sufficient. Several alternative definitions are more helpful at highlighting aspects of foreign policy
In “Questing for Monsters to Destroy,” John Mueller, an American political scientist, says American policymakers put, “a truly massive emphasis on exquisite theorizing and on defense expenditures,” because these policymakers, “became mesmerized by perceived threats that scarcely warranted the preoccupation and effort,” of actual military action (p 117). Continuing, he argues that American decision makers constantly saw Russia’s actions as bigger threats than they really were and acted accordingly, which resulted in the U.S. spending money and troops to fight wars they should have never been involved in.
In “Questing for Monsters to Destroy,” John Mueller, an American political scientist, says American policymakers put “a truly massive emphasis on exquisite theorizing and on defense expenditures,” because these policymakers, “became mesmerized by perceived threats that scarcely warranted the preoccupation and effort,” of actual military action (p 117). He argues that American decision makers constantly saw Russia’s actions as bigger threats than they really were and acted accordingly, which resulted in the U.S. spending money and troops to fight wars they should have never been involved in.
The end of the cold war obligated the United States once again to face the old problems which weren’t based on containment of communism. Like in the aftermath of World War 2 when America’s influence in the world was expanded, the end of the Cold War did much of the same. The problem’s the Soviet Union once had of controlling and influencing smaller countries under its thumb, now were inherited by the last super power standing, which at the time was the United States. Debate began to rise on what path America should take next on foreign policy, should the U.S commit itself to small problems or hold back its fire until a greater threat emerged?
After December 26 1991, when the Soviet Union fell, the bipolarity of the international system was effaced. In the post- Cold War era, the United States faced the problem, without a defined enemy, to adopt a new foreign policy. To begin to analyze the political foreign policy of the United States, one must first understand the international system. According to Political Realism, a theory of international thought, the state is the key unit within the acts within the system. These states act according to their key norms, which are allowed by the system. However, these sates are also affected the domestic and external factors which control how they act. The domestic factors include political culture, their economic system, the leadership
As with all policy making, many people and organizations have a hand in setting United States foreign policy. The main goals of foreign policy is to use diplomacy — or talking, meeting, and creating agreements — to solve international issues. They try to keep problems from developing into conflicts that require military settlements.
Simon presented the bounded rationality as a result of human and organization constraints. He sees that the managers would not achieve the requirements of rational behavior. He observed that different types of decisions can be processed in different ways, namely: programmed decisions and non-programmed decisions. The programmed decisions category included decisions that occur frequently. Managers are used to these types of decisions and they already have developed some kind of protocols and procedures for making them. These decisions usually are left for the lower posts in the organizational hierarchy.
Rational choice theory is actually more than one theory per se, but the basic similarities among its variants mean that they can be intelligibly amalgamated for the purposes of critiquing its implementation in political science. Therefore public choice theory, positive political science, rational actor models, and the economic approach to politics, among others, refer to what we may call rational choice theory for the purposes of this essay. (See Green and Shapiro 1994, xi.
The international system is a self-help system; states are obliged to look after themselves, because there is no one else to look after them. Waltz does not assume that states are pursuing the increase in their power and the importance of them between others states, necessarily aggressive body, but he does believe that they desire to preserve themselves. This means that they are obliged to be considered with their security, national defence and obliged to regard other states as potential threats (Brown, 2001).