Advertisement

Leadership in Foreign Policy

  • Andrea K. Grove
Chapter

Abstract

Leo Tolstoy was a magnificent author, and perhaps it could be argued that his aforementioned words portray accurately the world of his time. However, in the contemporary setting of international politics, Tolstoy could not be more wrong. The following pages explore the idea that leaders matter in international politics, and the cases in this book compare that significance in systematic ways.

Keywords

Foreign Policy International Politics International Arena Individual Leader Leadership Strategy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Leo Tolstoy, “Rulers and Generals Are ‘History’s Slaves’” (from War and Peace) in The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Throughout the Ages, edited by J. Thomas Wren (New York: The Free Press, 1995): 55–59.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Daniel I. Byman and Kenneth M. Pollack, “Let Us Now Praise Great Men: Bringing the Statesman Back In,” International Security 25 (2001): 107–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ralph Carter, Contemporary Cases in U.S. Foreign Policy: From Terrorism to Trade (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2002): 3.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: McGraw Hill, 1979).Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    Margaret G. Hermann and Joe D. Hagan, “International Decision Making: Leadership Matters,” Foreign Policy 100 (Spring 1998): 124–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 7.
    Classic pieces in this area include Richard C. Snyder, H.W. Bruck, and Burton Sapin, Decision-Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics (Foreign Policy Analysis Project Series No. 3. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1954);Google Scholar
  7. and Graham T. Allison, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (Glenview: Scott, Foresman, and Company, 1971).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kenneth N. Waltz, “Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics,” in Neorealism and Its Critics, edited by Robert O. Keohane (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986): 343–344.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Irving L. Janis, Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972);Google Scholar
  10. Paul t’Hart, Groupthink in Government, (Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger, 1990);Google Scholar
  11. Charles Hermann, Janice Gross Stein, Bengt Sundelius, and Stephen G. Walker, “Resolve, Accept, or Avoid: Effects of Group Conflict on Foreign Policy Decisions,” International Studies Review 3, no. 2 (Summer 2001): 133–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 10.
    Allison, 1971; Morton Halperin, Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1974).Google Scholar
  13. 11.
    Joe D. Hagan, Political Opposition and Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1993);Google Scholar
  14. Juliet Kaarbo, “Power and Influence in Foreign Policy Decision Making: The Role of Junior Coalition Partners in German and Israeli Foreign Policy,” International Studies Quarterly 40, no. 4 (December 1996): 501–530;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jack Snyder, Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991);Google Scholar
  16. Joe D. Hagan, Philip P. Everts, Haruhiro Fukui, and John D. Stempel, “Foreign Policy by Coalition: Deadlock, Compromise, and Anarchy,” International Studies Review 3, no. 2 (Summer 2001): 169–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 12.
    Jack S. Levy, “The Causes of War: A Review of Theories and Evidence,” in Behavior, Society, and Nuclear War, Vol. 1, edited by Philip E. Tetlock, Jo L. Husbands, Robert Jervis, Paul S. Stern, and Charles Tilly (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989).Google Scholar
  18. 13.
    Bruce M. Russett, Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993);Google Scholar
  19. Margaret G. Hermann and Charles W. Kegley, Jr., “Rethinking Democracy and International Peace: Perspectives from Political Psychology,” International Studies Quarterly 39 (1995): 511–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 14.
    Fred L. Greenstein, Personality and Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Margaret G. Hermann, “When Leader Personality Will Affect Foreign Policy: Some Propositions,” in In Search of Global Patterns, edited by James Rosenau (New York: Free Press, 1976): 326–333.Google Scholar
  22. 15.
    Hermann and Hagan, 1998; Margaret G. Hermann, ed., A Psychological Examination of Political Leaders (New York: The Free Press, 1977).Google Scholar
  23. John D. Stoessinger, Crusaders and Pragmatists: Movers of Modern American Foreign Policy (New York: W.W. Norton, 1979);Google Scholar
  24. Margaret G. Hermann, Thomas Preston, Baghat Korany, and Timothy Shaw, “Who Leads Matters: The Effects of Powerful Individuals,” International Studies Review 3, no. 2 (Summer 2001): 83–132;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. David G. Winter, “Personality and Foreign Policy: Historical Overview,” in Political Psychology and Foreign Policy, edited by Eric Singer and Valerie M. Hudson (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  26. 16.
    Donald A. Sylvan and Stuart J. Thorson, “Ontologies, Problem Representation, and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 36 (1992): 709–732;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Donald A. Sylvan and James F. Voss, eds., Problem Representation in Foreign Policy Decision Making (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
  28. 17.
    Thomas Preston, The President and His Inner Circle: Leadership Style and the Advisory Process in Foreign Policy Making, (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001).Google Scholar
  29. 18.
    Levy, 1989; Joe D. Hagan, Political Opposition and Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1993).Google Scholar
  30. 20.
    An excellent review is Valerie M. Hudson, with Christopher S. Vore, “Foreign Policy Analysis Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow,” Mershon International Studies Review 39, no. 2 (October 1995): 209–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 21.
    Harold and Margaret Sprout, The Ecological Perspective on Human Affairs with Special Reference to International Relations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965).Google Scholar
  32. 22.
    Michael Brecher, The Foreign Policy System of Israel: Setting, Images, Process (London: Oxford University Press, 1972).Google Scholar
  33. 24.
    Andrew Moravcsik, “Introduction: Integrating International and Domestic Theories of International Bargaining,” in Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics, edited by Peter B. Evans, Harold K. Jacobson, and Robert D. Putnam (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993): 16.Google Scholar
  34. Also, see Robert D. Putnam, “Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games,” International Organization 42 (1988): 427–460;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. and George Tsbelis, Nested Games (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  36. 26.
    Margaret G. Hermann, “Ingredients of Leadership,” in Political Psychology, edited by Margaret G. Hermann (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986): 167–192.Google Scholar
  37. 27.
    See n. 12. Also, Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, translated by A.M. Henderson and T. Parsons, (New York: Free Press, 1947);Google Scholar
  38. Thomas Carlyle, “The Hero As King,” in The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Throughout the Ages, edited by J. Thomas Wren (New York: The Free Press, 1995): 53–54;Google Scholar
  39. Alexander L. George, “Woodrow Wilson’s Political Personality,” in Political Leadership in Divided Societies, edited by Anthony Mughan and Samuel Patterson (Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1991): 29–71.Google Scholar
  40. 28.
    Martin Burch and Michael Moran, “The Changing British Political Elite,” in Mughan and Patterson, 1991: 123–135;Google Scholar
  41. Donald D. Searing, “The Socialization of British Political Leaders,” in Mughan and Patterson, 1991: 171–192.Google Scholar
  42. 29.
    Robert E. Kelley, “In Praise of Followers,” in The Leader’s Companion: Insights on Leadership Throughout the Ages, in Wren, 1995: 193–204.Google Scholar
  43. 30.
    James McGregor Burns, Leadership (New York: Harper and Row, 1978);Google Scholar
  44. James McGregor Burns, Transforming Leadership (Berkeley: University of California, 2003);Google Scholar
  45. Bruce E. Cain, “British MPs and Their Constituencies,” in Mughan and Patterson, 1991: 377–397;Google Scholar
  46. Clive Bean and Anthony Mughan, “Voters and Leaders in Australian and British Elections,” Mughan and Patterson, 1991: 423–436.Google Scholar
  47. 31.
    Andrea Grove, “The Intra-National Struggle to Define ‘Us’: External Involvement as a Two-Way Street,” International Studies Quarterly 45 (2001): 357–388;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Andrea Grove, “Theory, Perception, and Leadership Agency: A Multiple Processing Model of Nationalist Mobilization,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 7, no. 2 (2001): 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 32.
    Robert Tucker, “Politics as Leadership,” in Mughan and Patterson, 1991: 29–48.Google Scholar
  50. 34.
    James A. Baker, The Politics of Diplomacy: Revolution, War and Peace, 1989–1992 (New York: Putnam, 1995).Google Scholar
  51. 36.
    For example, work by Finnemore and others argues that international norms can be an important variable. See Martha Finnemore, “Norms, Culture, and World Politics: Insights from Sociology’s Institutionalism,” International Organization 50 (1996): 325–348.Google Scholar
  52. 41.
    For more discussion of this approach and another example, see Ryan K. Beasley, Juliet Kaarbo, Jeffrey S. Lantis, and Michael T. Snarr, eds., Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective: Domestic and International Influences on State Behavior (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2002).Google Scholar
  53. 42.
    Alexander L. George, “Case Studies and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison,” in Diplomacy: New Approaches to History, Theory, and Policy, edited by Paul Lauren (New York: Free Press, 1969): 43–68.Google Scholar
  54. 43.
    See James M. Goldgeier, Leadership Style and Soviet Foreign Policy: Stalin, Khruschev, Brezhnev, Gorbachev (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  55. 44.
    A. Przeworski and H. Teune, The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (New York: Wiley, 1970); Tsbelis, 1990.Google Scholar
  56. 45.
    Alexander L. George, Bridging the Gap: Theory and Practice in Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, 1993).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Andrea K. Grove 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea K. Grove

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations