Leadership
Leadership and
International Relations
Branches of Government
Analysis concerns on executive branch:
1. Leader creates foreign policy
2. Country needs a single voice internationally
3. Head of government control executive branch
Analysis concern on legislature: The influence of
International Courts in
Holding power of pursue - foreign policy is very
limited, meanwhile civil
Government expenditure must liberties and human
rights ruling
be approved by the legislature.
Foreign Policy analysis
Attempts to understand state behavior in terms of
actors and processes at the state and sub-state level (if
any).
Three main areas:
1. Bureaucracies
2. Process of decision making
3. Psychological characteristics of a leader
Decision making as steering
Decision making
Perception Implementation
(filtering)
International and
domestic politics
Making Foreign Policy
• The foreign policy process is a process of decision making.
• States take actions because people in governments
(decision makers) choose those actions.
• Decision making is a steering process in which
adjustments are made as a result of feedback from the
outside world. Decisions are carried out by actions taken
to change the world, and then information from the world
is monitored to evaluate the effects of these actions.
• There are at least 6 (six) models in the making of foreign
policy.
Making Foreign Policy
Rational model Organizational model Bureaucratic politics
model
1. Set objective/goal 1. Skip to identify the 1. Foreign policy
2. Relative importance relative importance decisions result from
3. Calculate the cost and and the goal is to the bargaining
benefit of the manage the status process among
decision quo (low risk). various government
4. Choose the most 2. Standard response with somewhat
benefit and low cost based on Standard different interest
decision (uncertainty/ operational outcome.
the risk might be procedures (SOP)
high) 3. Simply to overcome
the “muddling
through”
Making Foreign Policy
Group Psychology model Crisis Management model
1. Group promote rationality by balancing 1. Crisis is foreign policy situations in which
out the blind spots and biases of any outcomes are extremely important and
individual (leader). time frames are compressed, and it
2. Advisors or legislative committees makes process of decision making is
usually force a state leader to reconsider harder to be predicted than in ‘normal’
a rash decision. foreign policy making.
3. It creates, interest of the state clearly 2. There is no time to think in crisis
objective and reflect the state interest situation, communication become
rather than individual idiosyncrasies. shorter and more like stereotyped.
4. Unlike the other model, this model tend 3. In crisis management model, the
to be over-optimistic about the chances decision makers tend to restrict the
of success for its foreign policy. choice, to save the time.
However, “bias” and “misperception” 4. This model tend to overlook creative
happened, because the decision making options while focusing on the obvious
only refers to small group of people ones (but working under pressure as
(psychology model). time limitation).
Making Foreign Policy
Individual Decision Making Model
1. Many critical decisions made by single decision maker
2. The single decision maker (commander in chief) mostly
provide ambiguity and uncertainty that inherent in
international politics.
3. Could Produce the “mad-man” in global politics.
4. Basically, this model only concern on leader (decision maker)
beliefs and values.
5. Childhood memories or background could shape the
decision makers to employ the foreign policy.
Making Foreign Policy
Individual decision maker
Individual decision maker model This actions of individual decision makers
provides a “mad-man”? are influenced by their personalities,
values and beliefs (these factors mostly
occupied by emotional biases).
Domestic Influences towards Decision
Making
Interest group Public opinion Legislature The military-
industrial complex
It is a coalitions of The range of views It plays an It is the response to
people who share a on foreign policy important role in the growing
common interest in issues held by the decision making, importance of
the outcome of citizens of the state. especially in a technology,
some political issue Public opinion has a country that generally regarding
who organize greater influence on employs democracy the state’s defense
themselves to try to foreign policy in system. Legislature (advance weapons,
influence the democracies could hold electronics, internet
outcome. Often, countries rather government/ system).
organize politically than autocracies decision makers
to promote its countries. But ambitions to
interest. government could enforce the policy.
manipulate the
public opinion
(propaganda).
Group discussion (lesson learned from the history)
BACKGROUND:
Imagine that you are the prime minister of Japan. Since the end of the Korean War in 1953, relations with your neighbor to the
west, North Korea, have been tense. Military tensions have persisted as North Korea has made and then broken several agreements
regarding its nuclear program. North Korea tested a nuclear weapon in 2006 and 2009, and it has also test-fired its short-range and
long-range ballistic missiles directly over Japan in an effort to intimidate your country. Most analysts believe North Korea does
possess the ability to produce at least a few nuclear weapons. For its part, North Korea has long demanded reparations for Japan’s
35-year colonization of the Korean peninsula and for actions taken by Japan in Korea during World War II. Japan has refused such
reparations in the past, but has provided limited aid in an attempt to encourage North Korea to denuclearize. You have held talks
with North Korea in the past two years, but no agreements on any political or economic issues have been reached. In the summer of
2008, the United States removed North Korea from its list of states that sponsor terrorism. This angered many in your country, who
saw this removal as giving in to North Korean demands for more aid in exchange for giving up its nuclear program. Your government
vehemently protested this move by the United States, which the Japanese finance minister called “extremely regrettable.”
DOMESTIC CONSIDERATIONS:
Public opinion in Japan is very sensitive to relations with North Korea. In 2002, North Korea admitted to secretly abducting Japanese
citizens in the 1970s and 1980s, transporting them to North Korea, and using them to train North Korean spies. North Korea claims
that all 13 abductees have either returned to Japan or died, but many in Japan are skeptical of this claim. Many in Japan suspect
more than 13 were abducted and have even demanded that North Korea return the bodies of the deceased. These abductions are
an extremely sensitive issue in Japanese public opinion, and past Japanese governments have demanded a resolution to the
abduction issue before opening formal diplomatic relations with North Korea.
SCENARIO:
Now imagine that the United States is negotiating a new nuclear weapons agreement with North Korea. The United States asks that
Japan contribute extensive foreign aid to North Korea to help ensure that a deal is reached. In return, North Korea will agree to
allow increased inspections of all key nuclear sites and will rejoin the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The United States is placing extensive
pressure on your government to provide what it feels is critical aid.
CHOOSE YOUR POLICY How do you respond to U.S. pressure for more foreign aid? Do you risk a backlash from your public by
increasing aid without having the abduction issue resolved? Do you resist pressure from the United States, your most important ally,
and withhold the requested aid? Can you trust the North Korean government to hold up its end of the bargain after you give the
economic aid? How do you balance a sensitive domestic political issue with a delicate set of international negotiations?
