Search

This article explains how right-wing populist leaders in Hungary, Poland, Russia and Turkey have transformed their states' foreign policy institutions through personalization and politicization. We examine the transformation of foreign policy institutions in the four cases and make two contributions. First, we differentiate between disparate types of personalization by proposing the term 'hyperpersonalization'—populist leaders' reliance on security institutions in foreign policy decision-making—which distinguishes the populist transformation of foreign policy institutions in Russia and Turkey. We argue that lower levels and speed of autocratization lead to politicization combined with milder cases of personalization of the foreign policy bureaucracy, while higher levels and speed of autocratization lead to higher levels of personalization in the foreign policy institutions. Second, we lay out the steps and patterns of populist politicization and hyperpersonalization that bring 'deinstitutionalizing restructuring' to foreign policy institutions. As we illustrate, this deinstitutionalizing restructuring involves concurrent bureaucratic expansion and bureaucratic retrenchment. The process is accompanied by a populist narrative that this restructuring is done to realize the 'popular will' or to regain 'full sovereignty'. We conclude the article with the policy implications of this populist transformation of foreign policy institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic and policy debates on alliances are yet to incorporate insights from foreign policy analysis (FPA) literature. Generally, bilateral relations between allies are either analyzed with insights from traditional IR theories (such as realism) or with policy-oriented work that does not engage any scholarly literature (focusing on only the day-to-day issues of international politics). I argue that FPA theories that make linkages between scholarly work and policy-oriented questions in an evidence-based and analytical fashion are capable of accounting for the most significant policy questions of modern international politics. This article analyzes US–Turkey relations in, arguably, their worst decade, with a role theoretic outlook. I claim that despite being close political and military allies since the 1940s, US–Turkey bilateral relations are witnessing their worst decade since the Arab uprisings in the MENA, due mostly to ideational factors that shape foreign policy. The conflictual relations originate from a change in US and Turkish foreign policy-makers' role conceptualizations vis-à-vis their countries' roles in the MENA region after the Arab uprisings and the role conflict this has caused with one another. Misaligned interests during the Arab uprisings, especially after 2014 in the Syrian civil war, have exacerbated the bilateral ties further. Drawing insights from elite interviews conducted in Turkey (2014–2016), Washington DC, and Ankara (2018–2020), I explain the sources of conflict in US–Turkey relations with a role theory perspective and offer policy prescriptions in conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What determines the consequences of economic sanctions? Is there a common explanation for these consequences? This article provides a comprehensive review of the fragmented literature focusing on the consequences of sanctions. We critically discuss the complex relationships between types of sanctions and sanction senders and their targets, as well as the structural factors that account for the specific consequences of different sanction cases. A discussion on the thematic, methodological, and theoretical shortcomings of the existing literature on sanction consequences follows. We argue that a "common approach" to sanction consequences research should be framed within the framework of international interdependence. We also present several nascent trends and propose new directions for sanction researchers and other disciplines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cyprus problem is one of the most protracted and complex conflicts in the world. This article uses poliheuristic (PH) theory to analyze Turkey's decision-making during the Cyprus crises of 1964, 1967, and 1974. We utilize the PH model (Mintz 1993 , 2004) and its method to systematically examine the decision-making process and outcomes during the three crises. We present primary evidence from governmental archives and secondary from media sources. The two hypotheses derived from the PH literature are supported by evidence. Results confirm Turkish decision-makers employed two-stage decision-making during each crisis. In the first stage, Turkish leaders followed the noncompensatory rule and eliminated options that could incur losses. In the second stage, their calculations were more in line with expected utility maximization. Implications of the case study in terms of PH model, foreign policy analysis, and international relations theory are discussed in the conclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the significance of the subject, studies on the foreign policy preferences of European populist radical right leaders are scarce except for a handful of examples. Are European populist radical right leaders more hostile than other world leaders or comparatively friendly? Do they use cooperative or conflictual strategies to achieve their political goals? What are the leadership types associated with their strategic orientations in international relations? Using the operational code construct in this empirical study, we answer these questions and depict the foreign policy belief systems of seven European populist radical right leaders. We test whether they share a common pattern in their foreign policy beliefs and whether their foreign policy belief systems are significantly different from the norming group of average world leaders. The results indicate that European populist radical right leaders lack a common pattern in terms of their foreign policy belief systems. While the average scores of the analysed European populist radical right leaders suggest that they are more conflictual in their world views, results also show that they employ instrumental approaches relatively similar to the average group of world leaders. This article illuminates the microfoundations of strategic behaviour in international relations and arrives at conclusions about the role of European populist radical right leaders in mainstream International Relations discussions, such as idealism versus realism. In this sense, the cognitivist research school complements and advances structural accounts of international relations by analysing leadership in world affairs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an introduction to the theoretical underpinnings of expected utility and game theory approaches in IR studies. It goes on to explore their application to a specific research subject, international bargaining on Iran's nuclear program. In this application, the article presents forecasts about Iran's nuclear program using a game theoretic, bounded rationality model called the expected utility model (Bueno de Mesquita 2002). Three analyses were made in December 2005, September 2006 and March 2007. All three forecasts appear to be in line with real-life developments regarding the issue. The results show that Iran has been losing international support since the analyses started, and the last forecast suggests a pro-US position supported by all major international actors. Also, all three analyses suggest that Russian and Chinese support is vital to curb the Iranian nuclear program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political Islam and Islamist organizations have broadly gained strength across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) in the post-Cold War era. Following the Arab uprisings, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), generally viewed as the world’s largest and most influential Islamist organization, has shaped the wider landscape of MENA politics. This study examines MB leadership by comparing M. Morsi of Egypt, R. Ghannouchi of Tunisia, and K. Meshaal of Gaza as examples of Islamist leaders to explain their political belief systems and predict their foreign-policy behavior. We use the operational code approach, a content-analysis software and statistical tests to conduct the study. Results show that the three leaders’ foreign policy beliefs are analogous to the averages of world leaders. Results also partially support the hypothesis that their foreign-policy propensities are similar to each other. We conclude that despite the conventional portrayal of MB leadership, these leaders use negotiation and cooperation to settle their differences in foreign affairs, and the best way to approach them is to engage in a Rousseauvian assurance game that emphasizes international social cooperation. Results also suggest important implications in terms of mainstream international relations theories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Operational code analysis was originally designed to analyse the Soviet Politburo members’ political strategies and was codified by George and Walker, Schafer and Young. The approach has mostly been used to analyse individual world leaders, rather than specific political groups. In this article, I use the operational code construct to analyse political Islamists’ belief systems. I discuss issues regarding using the operational code construct in a non-Western political and cultural setting. The first difficulty of using the operational code analysis to analyse political Islamists’ strategies is the diversity of the movement, which led to a certain “level of analysis” problem. Second, whether to use computerised analysis or traditional hand coding was an important decision. Third, some procedures of the operational code research agenda, such as coding only transitive verbs, at times seemed to be in conflict with Turkish and Arabic sentence structures and verbs. Lastly, since the “Western” foreign policy analysis (FPA) theories are not frequently applied in the “global south” cases, I did not have a large body of literature to use while conducting my research. This article discusses the “boundedness” of the operational code analysis in analysis of non-Western individual leaders and political movements by discussion of these issues and others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores religious discrimination against ethnic groups and foreign policy crisis linkages as part of the broader foreign policy approaches developed by McGowan and Shapiro (1973) and James and € Ozdamar (2005, 2008). Informed by the literature suggesting that domestic policies of repression and inequality may result in similar patterns of behavior internationally, this study tests whether states characterized by high levels of religious discrimination against ethnoreligious minorities are more likely to initiate or become involved in foreign policy crises with other states in general. A broad range of data sources, including an independently collected religious discrimination index, are used to test the hypothesized relationship between religious discrimination and international crisis during the period 1990–2003. The results suggest that religious discrimination is an important predictor of initiating and becoming involved in international crises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On March 1, 2003, the Turkish parliament rejected a government motion that would involve Turkey in the Iraq war and allow U. S. forces to use Turkish territory in an offensive against Iraq. This decision has been considered as a significant departure from traditional Western-oriented Turkish foreign policy. We investigate the reasons behind this rather unexpected foreign policy decision. Method To systematically examine the decision-making process and the outcome, we utilize the 'decision-units framework.' We present primary and secondary evidence from government and media sources and utilize interviews conducted with some of the high-level decisionmakers that were involved in decision making at the time. This article combines traditional methodological tools, such as elite interviews and process tracing, with novel approaches in foreign policy analysis studies. Results The nature of the decision-unit, decision-making rules, the extraordinary circumstances surrounding the AKP (Adalet and Kalkinma Partisi-Justice and Development Party) leadership, and the absence of a strong and decisive leader shaped the outcome. Conclusion The Turkish parliament's decision on its role in the Iraq war is an interesting and informative case for foreign policy studies. It challenges the conventional wisdom on parliamentary influence in foreign policy making in parliamentary regimes. Under certain circumstances-even when a single-party enjoys parliamentary majority-parliaments can be major players in foreign policy decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Wider Black Sea Region has gone through a very significant transformation since the end of the Cold War. Although there have been some successful attempts to provide political, economic and military cooperation, the regionalization attempts are usually considered to be semi-successful at best. This paper begins with a brief historical discussion to provide the background for analysis in the last two decades. Then, four major principles that should guide Turkish foreign policy within the Wider Black Sea Region are discussed, including possible benefits and difficulties associated with them. These principles are: promotion of the BSEC; improvement of bilateral relations with Russia and its inclusion in all multilateral initiatives; prevention of great power rivalry and interstate or civil wars in the Black Sea region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the current security challenges and military balance in the Black Sea region. The region, which has been going through vast political and economic transformations since the end of the Cold War, has become a platform for great power rivalry in the last few years. NATO expansion and Russian resistance to it, combined with the existing protracted conflicts, resulted in the first major regional war in a decade. The Russia-Georgia war of 2008 proved that regional actors still perceive the use of force as an acceptable tool of foreign policy. The changing military balance and abrupt increases in military expenditure from some actors suggest that the likelihood of other interstate conflicts in the region is high. Providing security and stability in the Black Sea seems more difficult than the pre-August 2008 war period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the relationship between Iran and the U.S., examining the significance that Iran's nuclear program plays in the efforts of both countries to co-exist with each other. An overview of Iran's history is given, focusing on the period beginning in 1947, when Iran gained full sovereignty over its territory, until 2009. Factors that influence U.S. policy towards Iran include the geopolitical position of Iran vis-à-vis the Soviet Union during the Cold War and the oil and gas resources possessed by Iran. The nationalization of Iran's petroleum reserves in 1951 is also discussed.

The article reports on a study providing a framework to facilitate the comparative study of foreign policy and ethnic conflict, especially in context of Turkish foreign policy with Syria influenced by Turkey's own Kurdish citizenry. As reported, the study, which provides a systematic way to study various micro and macro level variables, says that foreign policy cannot be analyzed successfully without paying special attention to domestic factors.

Ethnic conflicts with a strong religious component do not have merely domestic or foreign causes and consequences. As a result, internationalization of ethnic conflict has become an important subject of inquiry both in terms of pure research and policy-oriented studies. This article presents a case study of Indian-Pakistani relations over Kashmir, used to evaluate the role of religion and the explanatory power of the approach presented here. The aim of the study is to apply a foreign policy approach that simultaneously incorporates domestic and external factors in an analysis of how and in what ways religious elements of the Kashmir question affect India's foreign policy. The approach, an application of “systemism,” contributes to current developments in the realist school of international relations through its emphasis on the need to look at both international and state levels in combination. Earlier applications of realism, as both neotraditional and structural realism clearly demonstrate, tend to remain restricted to one level or the other. In this approach, a religious dynamic can have a domestic source yet be effectively examined in terms of international ramifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay evaluates the English School—a prominent approach to the study of international relations—as a “research enterprise” ( James 2002 ). Our exploration begins with an introduction of a “continuum of aggregation” that conveys a given research enterprise, such as the English School, at different conceptual levels. The English School's axioms along with its negative and positive heuristics are identified and evaluated based on the classics and more recent works from Wight, Bull, and others. Conclusions and prospects for further development of the English School complete the review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]