Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Foreign Policy Decision Making Analysis - Coggle Diagram
Foreign Policy Decision Making Analysis
Operational Environment
External Environment
Vertical environment & Implementation
With globalisation (and the rise of soft power), culture has become the arena of contestation, and what is viewed as ‘high’ or ‘low’ politics is very much defined by the actor’s idiosyncratic perspective [recall: Pijovic (2020) – “core” versus “periphery” FP]
High Politics (remember, depends on the actor's perspective)
Political
Domestic politics of states
Global public sphere where international norms and contestation takes place
Expansion of range of actors, also Non state
Economic
Variety of actors
states pay less dominant role (really? research)
Military
Hard Power
Cultural
Soft Power
Diplomatic Tools
Low politics (also depends on actors)
Horizontal Environment & Implementation
Geographical politics
Geography and politics must be considered simultaneously - geographical proximity does not automatically ensure inclusion in region of priority of foreign policy considerations
Middle and small states can aspire to be global, but they must strengthen horizontal environments/regional foreign policy first
Only few states (notably the major powers) have a genuinely global frame of reference and are hard pressed to construct a global foreign policy
Domestic/Internal environment
Putnam's two-level game
Strike a balance between internal and external enivronment: "compatibility-consensus balance" (Hanrieder, 1971)
Domestic objectives may be pursued via particular foreign policies, and vice versa (i.e., foreign policy objectives are pursued via domestic policies)
Consensus and support arising from domestic population is crucial especially in democratic societies to ensure that the policy being implemented will attain its goals
If consensus is missing, policy implementation will be weak as it may be undermined from below, and be at risk