1. TOPIC 3: LEVEL OF ANALYSIS IN FOREIGN POLICY
SSA 2024 FPA & IR
TOPIC 3:
LEVEL OF ANALYSIS IN FOREIGN POLICY

2. At the end of this unit, you be able to:
1. analyse the reasons behind government actions through understanding on level of analysis in FP. 2. highlight forces behind government decision

3. Why do states behave the way they do in the international system?
Big question in IR & FPA:
Why do states behave the way they do in the international system?

4. How to answer the question?

5. LEVEL OF ANALYSIS
How you examine state behavior?

6. Where Do We Focus Our Study of Foreign Policy?
Three levels of analysis:
Individual-level: People make policy
State-level: States make policy
System-level: International Arena encourages/discourages certain types of behavior
(Waltz, 1959: Chapter 6).

7. Man, the State, and War—Kenneth Waltz (1959)
Classified theories of IR into 3 categories, or levels of analysis.
first level - international politics as being driven primarily by actions of individuals, or outcomes of psychological forces.
second level - international politics as being driven by the domestic regimes of states.
third level - effect that international anarchy was exerting on state behavior. there is no sovereign body that governs nation-states.

8. LEVEL OF ANALYSIS
Levels of analysis are the recognition of the existence of different levels of analysing FP.

9. 1. Individual level analysis
Focus on leader & decision makers
Personality traits, beliefs, values as factors explain FP decision

10. Human decision-making process
people making decisions (as a species, in groups, idiosyncratically) - leads to policy making.

11. understanding that humans seldom make a rational decision.
How do basic human traits influence policy?
understanding that humans seldom make a rational decision.

12. influenced by cognitive, emotional, psychological, biological factors, as well as rational calculations.

13. E.g: British choice in Iraq has been characterized as ‘Tony’s Blair War’

14. based on our attitudes about the positions we have
1. Role Behavior
based on our attitudes about the positions we have
self-expectations (how we expect ourselves to act) & external
expectations (how others expect us to behave).

15. 2. Decision-Making Behavior within Organizations
Groupthink – pressure within organizations to achieve consensus (Schafer & Crichlow, 2002).
E.g: Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld favored sending a small force to invade Iraq in Disagreeing, General Eric Shinseki (head of the U.S. Army), told Congress that several 100,000 troops would be needed.

16. 2. State level analysis
national states & their internal processes as primary determinants of the course of world affairs

17. occurs within the context of a political structure
emphasizes the characteristics of states & how they make FP choices and implement them (Hudson, 2005)
cultural , historical legacy, religious, social traditions, or economic/geographic of the state
How subnational actors influence FP (Chittick & Pibgel, 2002)

18. 2.1 Type of Government and the FP Process
Authoritarian regime - FP centered in the hands of the leader (president/PM/Sultan).

19. Democratic regime - open with inputs from legislators, media, public opinion, opposition parties.

20. The debate in early 2007 over whether to send yet more troops to Iraq highlighted the question about who should have power
to make such decisions. President Bush said he was the “decider” and increased troop levels even though doing so was opposed by a majority of Congress & a strong majority of the public, including these protesters. Does this seem proper democratic governance to you?

21. Policy is made differently during crisis and noncrisis situations.
2.2 Type of Situation and FP Process
Policy is made differently during crisis and noncrisis situations.
crisis situation - decision makers surprised by an event, feel threatened (especially militarily), & believe they have only a short time to react (Brecher & Wilkenfeld, 1997)
noncrisis situations - domestic actors trying to shape policy, dominated by the political leader & his advisers

22. societies, traditional values (Paquette, 2003)
2.3 Political Culture & Making FP
societies, traditional values (Paquette, 2003)
E.g: Sinocenterism (China’s FP) – Chinese see themselves & their country as political & cultural world

23. 2.4 Actors in FP-making
“Washington is like a Roman arena in which gladiators do battle,” ( Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, 1982)

24. president, prime minister
Heads of Government & Political Executives
president, prime minister
political executives - ministers of foreign affairs (secretary of state) & ministers of defense

25. which organizations within a state influence FP behavior
Organizations bargain with each other
E.g: U.S military interest in Iraq War

26. Decision makers depend on staff for information
Bureaucracies
career governmental personnel
Decision makers depend on staff for information

27. pressure the government to adopt those views as policy
Interest Group
private associations of people who have similar policy views
pressure the government to adopt those views as policy
Cultural group, economic group
E.g: American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) - securing U.S. economic/military assistance to Israel

28. The people
the role of the people is complex (Everts & Isernia, 2001).
E.g: U.S got out of Vietnam in the 1970s - opposition of many Americans to continued involvement in that war.

29. 3. System level Analysis looking at the international system
E.g: cold war had two powerful states – U.S & USSR

30. choices reasonable within the realities of the international system (Moore, 2003)

31. 3.1 Power Relationships
international systems defined in part by how many powerful actors each has (Wilkinson, 2004).
power pole - (1) a single country/empire, (2) alliance, or (3) a global IGO (UN), or (4) a regional IGO, such as the EU.

32. The dynamics of International System

34. 5.2 Economic Realities
economic realities of the international system help shape FP
E.g: increasing economic interdependence promotes peace , countries need each other for their mutual prosperity (Schneider & Gleditsch, 2003)

35. Natural resource production
U.S. military reaction to Iraq’s attack on Kuwait in 1990 influenced by the importance of petroleum to the prosperity of the U.S & its economic partners

36. SYSTEM LEVEL ANALYSIS
STATE LEVEL ANALYSIS
The state is the most powerful actor among other actors.
The state is the Powerful actor.
International system pressures states to behave in certain ways.
States are relatively free to decide what policies to follow regardless of international system pressures.
International events are highly influenced by the position of the state in the world political map and what pressures it faces from outside.
International events are highly influenced by how different states build their own policies.
Ex. US intervention in Iraqi-Kuwaiti crisis can be understood by the economic importance of Kuwait.
Ex. Nixon's visit to China in 1972 could be explained by the tripolar system rules of the game.
Ex. US intervention in Iraqi-Kuwaiti crisis can be understood by the presidential- congressional relations in the US.
Ex. Nixon's visit to China in 1972 could be explained by the fact that it was a presidential elections year and such a diplomatic victory would help.

37. CONCLUSION
levels of analysis as very important - better understand what factors can affect decision-making at every level in world politics
Individual-level analysis - view the people who make policy.
State-level analysis - states the most important international actors, world politics best understood by focusing on
how FP is influenced by the political structure of states,
policy- making actors & the interactions among them
System-level analysis - examines how the realities of the international system influence FP