Factor Affecting Foreign Policy Decision
Psychological Factors
Psychological factors that shape foreign policy decision making encompass cognitive consistency, evoked sets, emotions, images, belief systems, analogies, leaders’ personality and leadership style.
Psychological factors shaping foreign policy decision making:
- Cognitive consistency
- Evoked set
- Emotions
- Images
- Belief systems and schemes
- Analogies and learning
- Leaders’ personality
- Leadership style
Cognitive consistency
Decision makers often exhibit cognitive consistency, relying on information consistent with their pre-existing images and beliefs. This can lead to overconfidence and the dismissal of alternative perspectives, influenced by factors like family background and education.
Evoked set
Evoked sets are things that are already known as a set of information (white paper, presidential decree, etc.). Evoked sets influence the first thing decision-makers think about when they receive new information.
Emotions
Emotions, such as fear, anger, and desire for revenge, can profoundly impact decision-making and are influenced by both domestic and international events. Leaders are known to be influenced by mass opinion which is also influenced by domestic and international events. This emotional analysis can also be seen from how decision-makers make public speeches
For example: when Bush gave a speech a week after the 9/11 incident, his speech often contained repetitions of caring for mothers and children which indicated his empathetic attitude and repeated repetition of North Korea as the cause of terrorism which indicated his hatred for North Korea. Which can be seen that emotions are also influenced by existing pressures.
Images
Images, or stereotypes, obtained from strategic balance, perceived opportunity or threat, and perceived culture, simplify decision-makers’ views but may also introduce bias.
Belief, belief systems, and schema
Belief systems and schemas influence foreign policy preferences, potentially hindering the consideration of better alternatives. Belief can prevent the formation of better alternatives and become biased. Moreover, belief influences how leaders process information
Analogies and learning
Analogies and learning involve leaders equating current events with past occurrences, impacting decision-making shortcuts. However, learning from analogies can lead to flawed results if the situations are not sufficiently similar.
Leaders’ personality
Leaders’ personality traits, encompassing temperament, cognitions, motives, and social context, significantly influence foreign policy decisions. For example, insecurity can shape leaders’ policy choices and affect how they handle emotions.
- Temperament: a person’s style of behavior and typical way of responding
- Cognitions: factors such as beliefs, values, and attitude
- Motives: goals and defense mechanisms
- Social context: observation of factors such as gender, class, race, culture, ethnicity, and generation
Leadership style
Analyzing leadership style is crucial in understanding decision-making processes. Leaders may be responsive to constraints, either challenging or respecting them, and demonstrate openness or closure to information. Motivations, whether problem-focused or relationship-focused, further shape decision-making. For instance, an accommodative leadership style, as seen in Indonesia’s President Jokowi, emphasizes building relations and overcoming differences with other actors. Jokowi’s policy, marked by respecting constraints and being open to information, reflects his accommodative approach in international relations.
Responsive to constraints
- Challenges constraints: leaders face existing problems more
- Respect constraints: leaders only follow previous leaders’ decisions or avoid problems
Openness to information
- Closed: closed to information (could be because the media in that country is limited)
- Open: open to information from anyone
Motivation Problem focus (focus on solving problems) - Expansionistic: focuses on spreading its power to other countries - Incremental: focus on flexible solutions and avoid obstacles that would limit leaders - Directive: focus on your own view - Reactive: focuses on what could possibly be done at the time of the incident and considers the opinions of other important actors Relationship focus (focus on building relationships) - Evangelistic: focuses on persuading others to follow one’s thinking - Charismatic: focuses on carrying out the agenda by involving other people in the process - Consultative: focuses on what other actors will do - Accommodative: focus on overcoming differences with other actors
Example of Leadership Style analysis:
Indonesia’s president Jokowi’s policy in his first period tends towards continuing the state attitude of the previous president, meaning his response in facing constraints is RESPECT CONSTRAINTS (can be seen from him continuing the maritime policy of sinking ships). Information openness in the Jokowi era is open, which means OPEN TO INFORMATION. Jokowi’s policy is more about establishing relations with other countries such as China and he is more focused on multilateral and bilateral which means he is ACCOMODATIVE
International, Domestic, and Cultural Factors
Decision making is a complex process influenced by many factors. From heads of state deciding on foreign policy to corporate executives developing business strategy, decision makers must take into account variables at the international, domestic, and cultural levels. This paper will provide an overview and analysis of some of the key international, domestic, and cultural factors that impact decision making.
On the international stage, foreign policy choices are shaped heavily by strategic considerations, alliances, deterrence, and regional power dynamics. Domestically, internal politics, economic health, and public opinion pressure constrain decision makers. Furthermore, deep-rooted cultural tendencies can sway choices differently across societies. By understanding these factors, we gain insight into how and why decisions are made the way they are.
International Factors in Foreign Policy Decision Making
Foreign policy decisions are typically made in a strategic setting, weighing a country’s own interests and goals against the anticipated actions of other nations. Countries tend to make foreign policy moves in response to or anticipation of the moves of allies, enemies, and other international powers.
For example, U.S. foreign policy during the Georgian crisis in 2008 was implemented largely in response to Russia’s actions in Georgia. The U.S. provided support to Georgia in part to take a stand against Russia’s aggression. Similarly, U.S. policy on missile defense shield installations in Europe is made with consideration of how it will affect decisions by Russia as well as European allies like Poland and the Czech Republic. Factors like the global arms race, the deterrence of adversaries, the type of regime an adversary has, strategic surprises, and of course the state of key alliances all play into foreign policy decisions. Ultimately most major foreign policy moves are made strategically with other state actors in mind, weighing anticipated responses and changes to the global status quo.
Domestic Factors
As public opinion, economic conditions, and domestic political concerns often determine what actions are feasible for leaders, domestic factors frequently have a decisive influence on foreign policy decision making.
A government’s foreign policy choices are constrained by the mood and priorities of its populace. Public opinion can limit options, as leaders want to pursue policies with a reasonable level of popular legitimacy and support. However, the public itself is influenced by media framing and elite debates that shape how foreign policy choices are perceived.
A country’s domestic economic conditions also factor heavily into its foreign policy. Foreign policy decisions are commonly made based on economic interests and impacted by budgetary constraints. For example, economic motivations and trade interests were an impetus behind the U.S. “opening” of China under Nixon.
Furthermore, domestic political dynamics frequently affect foreign policy. Concerns like maintaining coalitions and preparing for upcoming elections lead politicians to favor some decisions over others. Interest groups lobby and influence representatives to back policies that will benefit them. The varying ideologies within a diverse ruling party or coalition also shape what options are on the table.
Economic Interests
Foreign policy decisions are often influenced by the state’s economic interests. For example, a nation may use foreign policy to gain access to markets for its goods and services. By promoting free trade agreements and lowering trade barriers, a country can potentially sell more of its exports.
Similarly, foreign policy can aim to ensure access to raw materials, energy resources, and other economic inputs. Securing a steady flow of oil and other commodities is a frequent goal. Military interventions or security partnerships may also be pursued when economic assets are threatened.
Governments additionally craft foreign policy to benefit major domestic industries. Policies that help nationally strategic sectors like technology, manufacturing, agriculture etc. are prioritized. Foreign aid and development programs may even be shaped around helping recipient countries purchase exports.
There are often economic motivations behind foreign policy choices. Countries want access to resources, markets and opportunities abroad. Supporting trade, local industries and commerce is a key domestic political concern as well. Ultimately, economic power and growth are major priorities for any nation.
Cultural Factors
Culture and values play an important role in how decisions are made across different societies and geographic regions. Each culture exhibits a distinctive style and approach to decision making that reflects their values, norms, and leadership philosophies. Understanding these cultural differences is key for successful international relations and cross-cultural business engagement.
Research by management scholar Maris Martinsons found significant differences between American, Chinese, and Japanese business leaders in their cultural approaches to decision making. These provide insightful examples of how culture shapes thinking on decisions.
American Decision Making Style
The American decision making style emphasizes individualism, direct communication, quick decisions, and tolerance for risk and failure. This reflects American cultural values of autonomy, action-orientation, and innovation. Americans tend to make decisions quickly to enable progress, accept the associated risks, and take responsibility for the outcomes.
Chinese Decision Making Style
Chinese decision making emphasizes collective consensus and harmony. The cultural values of community and hierarchy lead to decisions being made slowly and cautiously with extensive group consultation. Chinese leaders avoid risk and fear “losing face”, so make conservative choices after careful deliberation. Decisions reflect the needs of the group over individuals.
Japanese Decision Making Style
Japan’s decision making style emphasizes collective responsibility, consensus, and saving face. Japanese cultural values like harmony and respect for authority figures lead to extensive group consultation and joint decision ownership. Decisions are made slowly and conservatively to avoid mistakes and maintain the group’s reputation.
Cultural values clearly influence how leaders in different societies approach important decisions. Understanding these differences allows for more effective cross-cultural relations and international collaboration. Flexibility to bridge the cultural divides can lead to better informed choices.