Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-pfhbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T07:33:54.130Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - The limits of neoclassical realism: additive and interactive approaches to explaining foreign policy preferences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Benjamin O. Fordham
Affiliation:
Binghamton University (SUNY)
Steven E. Lobell
Affiliation:
University of Utah
Norrin M. Ripsman
Affiliation:
Concordia University, Montréal
Jeffrey W. Taliaferro
Affiliation:
Tufts University, Massachusetts
Get access

Summary

The central purpose of this volume is to evaluate the relative weight of domestic and international factors in determining the national security behavior of states. The neoclassical realist agenda that Jeffrey Taliaferro, Steven Lobell, and Norrin Ripsman lay out in their introductory essay seeks to accomplish this task by viewing domestic interests and institutions as an imperfect transmission belt that can frequently ignore or distort objective international circumstances, thereby affecting national policy. As I will argue in this chapter, however, their neoclassical assumption that domestic and international pressures are easily separable and identifiable is problematic. The nature of international threats is determined to a great extent by the interests of the domestic coalition that governs the state, and domestic political and economic interests are affected by international circumstances. Therefore, it makes little sense to treat domestic and international variables in an additive manner, by assuming an objective set of national interests and seeing how domestic political actors respond to them. Instead, I propose an interactive model that considers how the interaction between domestic interests and the international political environment determines foreign security policy choices. My model considers the interaction between subnational political actors and the international environment when theorizing about the preferences of domestic political actors, including state policy-makers. I will illustrate the explanatory advantages of this approach by examining the changing positions of domestic political factions on American national security policy during the Cold War era.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Waltz, Kenneth N., Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw Hill, 1979), p. 122Google Scholar
Snyder, Jack, Myths of Empire (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991)Google Scholar
Schweller, Randall L., Unanswered Threats: Political Constraints on the Balance of Power (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2006)Google Scholar
Cronin, Patrick and Fordham, Benjamin O., “Timeless Principles or Today's Fashion? Testing the Stability of the Linkage between Ideology and Foreign Policy in the Senate,” Journal of Politics 61, no. 4 (November 1999), pp. 967–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmines, Edward and Stimson, James, Issue Evolution (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), p. 93Google Scholar
Posen, Barry R., The Sources of Military Doctrine (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1984)Google Scholar
Walt, Stephen M., The Origins of Alliances (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987)Google Scholar
Leffler, Melvyn P., A Preponderance of Power (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1992)Google Scholar
Taylor, A. J. P., The Struggle for Mastery in Europe, 1848–1918 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1954)Google Scholar
Singer, J. David, Bremer, Stuart, and Stuckey, John, “Capability Distribution, Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820–1965,” in Russett, Bruce, ed., Peace, War, and Numbers (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1972), pp. 19–48Google Scholar
Singer, J. David, “Reconstructing the Correlates of War Dataset on Material Capabilities of States, 1816–1985,” International Interactions 14, no. 2 (1988), pp. 115–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wells, Samuel F., Jr., “Sounding the Tocsin: NSC 68 and the Soviet Threat,” International Security 4, no. 2 (autumn 1979), pp. 116–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, Larry M., “Constituency Opinion and Congressional Policy Making: The Reagan Defense Buildup,” American Political Science Review 85, no. 2 (June 1991), pp. 457–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, John E., “Trends in Popular Support for the Wars in Korea and Vietnam,” American Political Science Review 65, no. 2 (June 1971), pp. 358–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Earl and Black, Merle, The Rise of Southern Republicans (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002)Google Scholar
Condit, Doris M., History of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, vol. II (Washington, DC: Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 1988), pp. 224–40Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P., The Common Defense (New York: Columbia University Press, 1963), p. 55Google Scholar
Gaddis, John L., Strategies of Containment (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), pp. 90–5Google Scholar
Block, Fred L., The Origins of International Economic Disorder (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977)Google Scholar
Block, Fred L., “Economic Instability and Military Strength: The Paradoxes of the 1950 Rearmament Decision,” Politics and Society 10, no. 1 (1980), pp. 35–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaddis, John Lewis and Nitze, Paul H., “NSC-68 and the Soviet Threat Reconsidered,” International Security 4, no. 4 (spring 1980), pp. 164–80, at p. 171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burch, Philip H., Elites in American History, vol. III (New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers, Inc, 1980)Google Scholar
Collins, Robert M., “The Economic Crisis of 1968 and the Waning of the ‘American Century,’American Historical Review 101, no. 2 (April 1996), pp. 396–422, at p. 415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogan, Michael, A Cross of Iron (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 315–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierpaoli, Paul G., Truman and Korea (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1999)Google Scholar
Lo, Clarence Y. H., “Theories of the State and Business Opposition to Increased Military Spending,” Social Problems 29, no. 4 (April 1982), pp. 424–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, Robert O., After Hegemony (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984)Google Scholar
Kindleberger, Charles P., The World in Depression (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973)Google Scholar
Krasner, Stephen D., “State Power and the Structure of International Trade,” World Politics 28, no. 3 (April 1976), pp. 317–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollard, Robert A., Economic Security and the Origins of the Cold War, 1945–1950 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985)Google Scholar
Fordham, Benjamin O., “Economic Interests, Party, and Ideology in Early Cold War Era US Foreign Policy,” International Organization 52, no. 2 (spring 1998), pp. 359–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingast, Barry R., Goldstein, Judith, and Bailey, Michael A., “The Institutional Roots of American Trade Policy: Politics, Coalitions, and International Trade,” World Politics 49, no. 3 (April 1997), pp. 309–38Google Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A. and Kroszner, Randall S., “Interests, Institutions, and Ideology in Securing Policy Change: The Republican Conversion to Trade Liberalization after Smoot-Hawley,” Journal of Law and Economics 42, no. 2 (October 1999), pp. 643–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trubowitz, Peter, Defining the National Interest (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998)Google Scholar
Trubowitz, Peter, “Sectionalism and American Foreign Policy: The Political Geography of Consensus and Conflict,” International Studies Quarterly 36, no. 2 (June 1992), pp. 173–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fordham, Benjamin O. and McKeown, Timothy J., “Selection and Influence: Interest Groups and Congressional Voting on Trade Policy,” International Organization 57, no. 3 (summer 2003), pp. 519–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiscox, Michael J., International Trade and Political Conflict (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002)Google Scholar
Rogowski, Ronald, Commerce and Coalitions (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×