Foreign Policy Experts Research Articles

(Not) Coming of age? Unpacking the European Union’s quest for strategic autonomy in security and defence

ABSTRACT Russia’s large-scale aggression against Ukraine brought back the debate about the European Union’s strategic autonomy ambitions in security and defence. The notion had slipped off the EU’s radar following the post-2016 thematic shift in strategic autonomy discussions to global economic interdependencies. Our article contributes to an appraisal of the strategic autonomy debate in security and defence since Russia’s full invasion of Ukraine, while also tracing the emergence and revival of the concept over the past 25 years. By unpacking the EU’s quest for strategic autonomy as a process of maturation since the late 1990s, we examine the extent to which the EU has grown into an autonomous security and defence actor. We further discuss the implications of maturation for EU security and defence policy. Drawing on 20 semi-structured interviews with policymakers and foreign policy experts in seven member states, our study brings the underexplored aspect of national acceptability of EU external action to the fore. We show that significant progress has been made regarding both ideational and material aspects of EU security and defence policy. Yet, prevailing differences in underlying national beliefs, perceptions and goals about security and defence continue to hamper the Union’s further maturation.

Cheap Tweets?: Crisis Signaling in the Age of Twitter

Abstract World leaders are increasingly turning to social media to engage in crisis signaling. This raises important questions about the effects of emerging communication technologies on international politics. In particular, are threats issued via social media seen as more or less credible than those issued through traditional channels such as government press releases? Using survey experiments fielded both on unique samples of foreign policy experts in the United States, India, and Singapore and on US public samples, we find that threat medium generally generates no significant difference in perceived credibility among national security experts and members of the public. Put differently, tweeted threats are not seen as “cheaper talk” than threats issued through more traditional channels. This project extends work on crisis signaling, elite decision-making, and the domestic politics of international relations by taking into account an increasingly common technology.

Exploring the Diplomatic, Social, and Cultural Nexus between Pakistan and Russia in Global Geopolitics

The idea of enduring animosity in international diplomacy is a misconception. Instead, global relations frequently shape new partnerships and diminish old rivalries, altering regional geopolitical dynamics. Pakistan and Russia exemplified this shift during the Cold War accordingly, evolving from separation to extensive cooperation across various sectors. The socio-cultural bonds and diplomatic ties between Russia and Pakistan have significantly influenced the global landscape. However, these connections have evolved due to geopolitical shifts, historical milestones, and regional conflicts, influencing their fluctuating nature. Currently, both countries are engaged in collaborative efforts to bolster their relationship, particularly in critical areas like military cooperation, energy, and regional trade. This research utilized historical methods based on secondary data from assorted research journals. Furthermore, it offers significant findings reshaping foreign policy of ties, regional nuisance, military exchanges, and socio-political and diplomatic touches in international geopolitics. This collaboration marks a significant point in reshaping the geopolitical landscape as Russo-Pakistan navigates this evolving relationship, reflecting the ongoing dynamics of globalism. The present study investigates the relations between Russo-Pakistan and yields substantive suggestions and implications for future diplomatic goals. This research would be supportive to delve into further facets of Russo-Pakistan dimensions and dynamics corresponding to geopolitical nuances. Ultimately, the conclusions of the exploration would play a crucial role in illuminating issues concerning peace, friendliness, and harmony within the global realm. Consequently, the results would also pave the way for future investigations. It facilitates the opportunity to input new paths for upcoming erudite scholars, research proficients, and foreign policy experts.

Devil on the doorstep v. bandits in the backyard: Iranian and American theory-laden perceptions and judgements during three US-led Middle East operations

ABSTRACT This article employs conceptual tools from the philosophy of science to shed new light on prolonged Iran-US hostility. Iranian and American elites evidently have negative attitudes towards the other nation, but these attitudes lack systematic and theoretical analysis. We apply the post-positivist concepts of theory-laden perception and judgement to anticipate the impact of established attitudes on foreign policy experts. After considering the cognitive training of each foreign policy community in the 1980s, the article hypothesises each group’s perceptions of and judgements about the other’s behaviour during Operation Desert Storm (1991), Operation Enduring Freedom (2001), and Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003). The concurrence of theory-laden judgements with each nation’s actual decisions indicates the likely contributions of American and Iranian foreign policy experts to the lack of substantial long-term bilateral cooperation, while the instance of a lack of concurrence indicates the possibility of future change. Our cross-disciplinary methodology demonstrates the utility of venturing outside the traditional boundaries of international relations scholarship.

Diplomacy in a social media environment: the bargaining model revisited

ABSTRACT Social media presents a unique challenge for foreign policy experts. Unlike the platforms offered to diplomats and ministries of foreign affairs (MFAs) in legacy media, not only does it democratize the flow of information, but also changes the speed and volume at which information travels. In the realm of bilateral negotiations, MFA representatives must contend with the potential of social media to shape and change audience preferences and bargaining ranges in the processes of negotiations themselves. By conducting qualitative interviews with trade negotiators and policy officers in the Canadian department of foreign affairs, this article emerges new insights and challenges posed by social media for MFAs and unpacks how social media changes the traditional bargaining model in diplomatic negotiations. The insights gleaned from these practical experiences have the potential to better inform policymakers on how to leverage the advantages offered by social media platforms as well as mitigate its harms.

Still lacking self-reflection after all these years? (De)stabilizing factors of transatlantic relations according to German and US foreign policy experts between 2011 and 2017

This article compares the trends and theoretical positions found in the recent academic literature on the status and trajectory of transatlantic relations with the beliefs of 96 German and US foreign policy experts. The qualitative data are derived from open-ended in-depth interviews about the political, economic, and cultural factors that influence transatlantic cooperation and friction. Conducted in Berlin in 2011 and in Washington, D.C., in 2017, the interviews correspond with optimist and pessimist perceptions found in the academic literature and align roughly with realist, respectively, liberal/institutionalist and constructivist theoretical positions in International Relations theory and left/right political leanings. The study concludes with suggestions about the prospects for transatlantic relations, and the methodological benefits of comparing beliefs of foreign policy actors with theoretical paradigms and trends in the academic literature.

Community of Fate? Visegrád Cooperation Viewed from Bratislava and Prague

The Visegrád Group has become increasingly known in the European Union as a controversial coalition that is often critical towards the mainstream direction of EU integration. This article aims to look beyond this image and examine how political parties and foreign policy experts in Czechia and Slovakia perceive the role of the Visegrád Group in their foreign policies. Using a narrative analysis of programme documents and the results of an expert survey, the article concludes that the prevailing inclination in both countries is towards an instrumental narrative as opposed to a more strategic or values-based one based on a shared identity.

An opportunistic Russia in the Middle East, a view from China

As Sino-American competition and Russo-American tensions continue to rise, many believe that China and Russia have established an increasingly well-coordinated division of labour to undermine the United States. Yet, this discussion has long neglected the analysis of Sino-Russian relations in the Middle East despite the importance of that region. Hence, this article investigates how Russian actions there are perceived in China through the analysis of the debate among Chinese foreign policy experts. Russia is seen as an opportunistic actor whose behaviour is only partially consistent with Chinese interests. However, problems related to China’s own Middle East policy and the pressure caused by the rivalry with the United States in Asia greatly limit China’s capability to adopt a more assertive approach. These findings prompt important considerations about the dynamics of the triangular Sino-Russian-American relations. They also help us to understand Chinese foreign policy and the evolution of world politics better.

The position of the leading US political forces on the issue of post-Soviet integration (1991–2021)

After the collapse of the USSR the United States sought to include the post-Soviet space in the American sphere of influence. Washington had to take into account the integration processes in the region. The purpose of this study is to consider the positions of leading US political forces on the issue of Washington's policy regarding post-Soviet integration. Americans did not pay significant attention to US policy regarding post-Soviet integration and did not discuss it directly (with the exception of a short period of time after the collapse of the USSR). US policy regarding post-Soviet integration was formed as part of larger tasks to realize its interests in the region. The President, Congress, NGO and foreign policy experts took part in developing the US position on post-Soviet integration. Public sentiment also played a role. The final decision lay with the president. He relied on the advice of his team and was forced to take into account the position of Congress, which acted as an obstacle to intensifying US policy in the post-Soviet space. NGO and US expert circles generally shared Washington's position regarding post-Soviet integration, but criticized the imperfections of government policy. Their opinions were taken into account only in general terms. Through its policies the country's leadership sought to satisfy the needs of citizens, but the opinion of ordinary americans did not dictate the adoption of decisions that would diverge from the position of Washington. The divergent positions of the President, Congress, members of different parties and fellow party members on the principles and priorities of American participation in the affairs of the post-Soviet region hindered the adoption of a final decision on specific US steps regarding post-Soviet integration. However the opinion about the potential threat of post-Soviet integration to American interests was shared by all the leading political forces in the country.

Национальная сила стран мира: оценка и прогноз

The present paper follows up an earlier study on modeling and assessing the national strength of the world countries. This integral index is the most informative and popular indicator in the world that characterizes the aggregate potential of a particular country and at the same time makes it possible to compare the level of its power and socio-economic development with similar indicators of other states. In the past national strength calculations were carried out by well-known political figures, such as foreign policy strategist and director (from 1975 to 2013) of the main Office of Net Assessment (ONA) of the US Department of Defence, Andrew Marshall [1], founder of political realism, Nicholas John Spekeman [2], one of the leading US foreign policy experts, Hans Morgenthau [3], founder of neorealism theory Kenneth Neil Waltz [4], author of the theory of offensive realism John Mearsheimer [5] and others. To date, dozens of methods for assessing national strength have been developed, the first of which was put forward in 1741. In the article first of all we’ll consider the most well-known foreign results and then present our own ones. In our opinion, it is important to make calculations of the integral indicator of national strength on an ongoing basis, as well as to compare our country’s potential with alternative estimates of analytical centers of geopolitical opponents.

A Q Methodology Analysis of Chinese Policy Makers' Perceptions of China's Foreign Policy Decision-Making Process concerning South Korea's THAAD Deployment

This paper explores the diverse ways Chinese policymakers view the foreign policy process in China. Two approaches characterize conventional accounts of the foreign policy decision-making process. One of these, based on Graham Allison's rational, organizational, and bureaucratic politics models, focuses on intragovernmental aspects of foreign policy decision-making processes, while the other highlights extra-governmental domestic and foreign factors. However, these approaches have neglected the question of who leads foreign policy and how state, society, and grassroots interact through coalition. We interviewed Chinese scholars and foreign policy experts using Q statements to explore China's foreign policy response to South Korea's deployment of THAAD. Our findings offer new theoretical insights into China's foreign policy process by identifying statedriven, grassroots-based, and state-society coalition models.

STRATEGIES OF USA-PAKISTAN RELATIONS IN THE POST 9/11 PERIOD: HURDLES AND PROSPECTS

From that moment forward, the Pak-US relationship will be rocky, and it will challenge both countries' foreign strategies. As a result of its dire needs, Pakistan has come to rely heavily on the United States (US). After the country's liberation, Pakistan may play a significant role in the region. However, it was still difficult to imagine being in a relationship. The lack of trust between you and me is a significant factor in determining the nature of any future commitment. September 11 altered the trajectory of relationships and the depth of commitments. This event marked a turning moment in the mending of fences between the two parties. Since then, various factors have influenced who is responsible for what. The inclusion of the manual shows serious dedication. The willingness to commit is based on the extent to which one is helped. The US military's strategic outreach to Pakistan during the War on Terror solidified US interest in Pakistan and transformed it into a technologically advanced partner. Frustrations also contribute to a decline in teamwork. After 9/11, the globe saw both bright and less promising times due to three central defining moments: the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the rise of the US as a global champion, the consolidation of territorial security, and the fear-based oppressor onslaught. This war against mental oppression envisioned a new alliance between the US and Pakistan; during this time, Pakistan faced challenges and emerged as a crucial ally for Americans in South Asia's war against fear. The relationship between the US and Pakistan was a cornerstone of American foreign policy. The approach to South Asia prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The US provided Pakistan political, economic, and military aid during the Cold War. The re-arming of Islamic militants against the Soviets posed new problems for the US. U.S. foreign policy experts' sense of urgency following the September 11 attacks led them to rethink their country's ties to Pakistan. Fears that Osama bin Laden and Islamic mercenaries are hiding near Pakistan's borders have been a top issue for Americans. Expanded US-India collaboration has been effectively constrained by the long-term goal of containing China and thwarting terrorism. Given those presumptions, this research looks into the ties between the US and Pakistan. Keywords: Bilateral connection, Pakistan, South Asia, United States of America, War on fear, 9/11.

Trivial Tripwires?: Military Capabilities and Alliance Reassurance

How can states most effectively reassure their allies? Existing studies assessing signals of commitment focus on the role of resolve in making assurances credible. This sidelines important questions about the role of capability. We argue that reassurance effectiveness is the product of both capability and resolve, and suggest that high resolve cannot offset low capability. We introduce a new typology of reassurance measures based on the interaction of military capability and resolve, and test which types of measures are most reassuring using an original survey fielded on European foreign policy experts and a case study of US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization reassurance initiatives in the Baltics. We find that high-resolve, low-capability signals such as tripwire forces in allied territory are not viewed as any more reassuring than high-capability, low-resolve signals such as forces stationed offshore. Our study casts doubt on the reassurance value of tripwires and contributes to scholarship on interstate signaling.

Planetary health diplomacy and transdisciplinary research

Abstract Given the urgent need for multilateral action for planetary health, the scope of planetary health research must be broadened. Key challenges are currently addressed through disconnected approaches and fragmented policy making. Planetary health is an integrative approach that can enhance synergies across multiple fragmented agendas, notably related to health, environment, human rights, and security. It is high time to boost an overlooked area: planetary health diplomacy. This involves measuring progress beyond gross domestic product, broadening the understanding of security to include planetary health, and reforming international organisations to ensure the protection of a rule-based international order. Efforts to address them lack a truly holistic narrative. The science of planetary health goes beyond the currently politicised climate change agenda. So far, planetary health studies have privileged natural science in order to become more impactful. However, the insights gained through this work deserve to be translated into actionable policies for decision makers. More social scientists are therefore needed in this process. Scholars of international relations are under-represented in the planetary health community. The absence of political scientists, lawyers, foreign policy experts, diplomats, and civil servants who are committed to translating planetary health knowledge into effective action comes at a high cost. Policy decisions are being reshaped in the context of evolving pandemic recovery planning, and strategies to advance planetary health that do not take account of unfolding shifts in global power relations are doomed to fail. With only a decade remaining to shift gears towards achieving the SDGs, there is no time to spare. de Paula, N. (2021). Planetary health diplomacy: a call to action. The Lancet. Planetary Health, 5(1), e8-e9. doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30300-4.

Tracking Chinese Perceptions of Vietnam's Relations with China and the United States

executive summary: This article sheds light on trends in Chinese assessments of U.S.-Vietnam relations and security cooperation to discern patterns in the security dynamics between the three countries. main argument Since the turn of the century, Chinese foreign policy experts have consistently assessed that while there will always be certain tensions in the China-Vietnam relationship, economic and geopolitical realities prevent Vietnam from aligning against China or collaborating with the U.S. to any significant extent. Although some Chinese experts began to question the durability of China-Vietnam ties following Beijing's expansive nine-dash-line claim over much of the South China Sea in 2009 and a series of standoffs over disputed waters starting in May 2014, the general Chinese assessment that Vietnam will not work too closely with the U.S. to counter China continues to prevail. policy implications • The consistency of Chinese analysts' perceptions strongly suggests that China is unprepared for major and abrupt shifts in Vietnamese hedging in the future. Chinese elites likely view the predictability of U.S.-Vietnam relations as favorable to their government's foreign policy and military strategy. Thus, any significant change in Hanoi's security cooperation with Washington would surprise and rattle Beijing. • Although Vietnam is unlikely to oppose China outright, it is also unlikely to collaborate with Beijing on security issues. This dynamic appears irreversible, barring a wholesale revamping of Chinese security policy in the South China Sea that includes recognition of and respect for Vietnam's exclusive economic zone and territorial claims. • China is unlikely to disrupt regional peace and stability over closer U.S.-Vietnam cooperation. Therefore, raising the U.S.-Vietnam partnership from "comprehensive" to "strategic" in Vietnamese parlance, as has been discussed in the past, would be unlikely to register much reaction from Beijing.

Setting the Strategic Cat among the Policy Pigeons: The Problems and Paradoxes of Western Intervention Strategy

In theory, the idea of strategy is easy to comprehend but in practice it is a hard taskmaster because it often involves calculations of political values that are rarely amenable to the kind of rationalistic application of “expert” opinion to which Western nations invariably default when considering overseas interventions. Based on remarks to the Oxford Changing Character of War Centre, this research note argues that foreign policy experts frequently find themselves out of touch with the sentiments of their own populations, which in part is responsible for the poor strategic outcomes that Western foreign policies have incurred in recent years. A number of remedies are suggested, based principally on returning Western policy making to a tradition of prudential realism.

An Examination of American Diplomacy During the Tehran and Yalta Conferences

Since the end of World War II, the United States has been a leading proponent of liberal internationalism and Western democratic values around the world. Modern historians generally agree that the post-war order, which produced multi-national institutions and promoted democracy, free trade, and peace, was largely shaped by the United States and the other two Allied powers, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union. This paper explains how the Tehran and Yalta Conferences served as early examples of President Franklin Roosevelt’s vision for international cooperation and American global leadership. Specifically, this essay analyzes how Roosevelt used these conferences to unite the other Allied powers in an effort to end World War II and establish the foundations for the liberal international post war order. To demonstrate the significance of these conferences and their role in the development of the liberal post-war order, conference minutes between the leaders of the Allied powers and their respective foreign policy experts are analyzed. Academic writings from military and international historians are also used to evaluate the execution and outcomes of the agreements reached during these conferences.

Дискуссия о коллективных благах в контексте современных вопросов глобального управления

This article is dedicated to three interconnected concepts – “collective goods”, “free rider” and “hegemony” in the context of modern politics. We analyze three theoretical approaches to the problem of provision of collective goods by hegemonic states. These approaches are: neoliberal, (neo) realist and World-System Theory. Basing on these theoretical premises, we analyze the debate about free-ridng in the Western political discourse (especially among US allies) and we point out that particular interests of US can be disguised as “collective goods”. Basing on this, we analyze discussions about free-riding both in the Western world (among NATO and EU members) and among US allies in the Pacific region (Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand). We point out that in fact US can use the concept of collective goods to push their own agenda. Than we move to popular in western political science idea that China is a global free rider – for instance in the sphere of sea lane security and global energy security. Basing on A. Kennedy works, we demonstrate that China in fact does not wish to make western powers pay the costs of collective goods. China is rather afraid that western powers will exploit his resources. This idea is supported with the evidence, gathered during in-depth interview with Chinese diplomats and foreign policy experts. Having said that, paper points out that mentioned cases mark the importance of the concept of trust. Trust is well-studied in the field of behavioral economics, but IR theory doesn`t usually takes the concept of trust into account. Also this paper raises a question about including historical and cultural topics in the theory of international relations. Basing on analysis of different ways to incorporate economic arguments in IR theory, authors point out that modern IR theory lacks economic argumentation. Paper concludes with the idea that IR theory should capitalize on behavioral economics. Acknowledgements. This paper is a part of MGIMO University research program no. 1921-01-02.

После Брекзита: к обновлению глобальной роли Британии

In the middle of March, 2021, the UK prime minister presented to Parliament the integrated review of security, defence, development and foreign policy of Britain. The vision it pictures amounts to the final renunciation of the famous Churchill’s three circles doctrine. To better explain this thoroughgoing paradigmatic change, it might be useful to consider the meanings assigned of it by those immediately involved. In this article, it is argued that Brexit was in no small part the result of the UK being unable to turn round the development of the regional integration process on the European continent in directions, corresponding to British preference. With the withdrawal of the country from the EU having been accomplished, the reappraisal of its global role became an existential problem for London. In particular, conspicuous divergence between the foreign policy courses of Britain and the EU appears unavoidable in the observable future. Paradoxical, seemingly irrational nature of this experience, inter alia, prompts its interpretivist analytical treatment. Thus, in the article, rationale and reflection delivered by British key politicians and foreign policy experts, as concerns the ideas of “Global Britain”, “Anglosphere” and “Indo-Pacific tilt”, are contemplated not as direct assertions of intent, but as important reference points for timely modification of national foreign policy strategy. Talking about “Anglosphere” comes across like searching for a substitution to the European Union to serve as a framework for British foreign policy, while the “Indo-Pacific tilt” narrative comes laden with hopes for making Brexit a true story of success. The Conservative government perceives the country as a liberal and cosmopolitan middleranking power with exceptional foreign policy potential, soaring to new global heights amidst multilateral networks and bilateral partnerships it is precast to further cultivate.

Who's Out of Touch? Media Misperception of Public Opinion on US Foreign Policy

Abstract Although experts in the United States are often criticized as being “out of touch” for failing to understand the political views of average Americans, arguably no group has been more susceptible to this charge than the media. In this article, we exploit unique paired surveys to measure how accurately US foreign policy media experts assess public opinion compared to other foreign policy experts on the critical issue of American engagement in the world. We find that while experts, on average, substantially underestimate how favorable US citizens are toward international engagement, the media is more inaccurate than other types of experts. We suggest potential reasons for these findings that may serve as the basis for future research. Overall, our study contributes to a growing literature on elite misperceptions of the public and underscores the particular inaccuracies of the media in understanding the attitudes of Americans.