Political Science 252
Introduction to Foreign Policy Analysis
Class notes
Week 1 - 2
Please read!
These are the notes that I made whilst in the lecture. They are a combination of both
the sides given (Property of Dr Corneliuson) and my own notes that I have added along
the way while she was speaking. This means that there are additional explanations etc.
Please also revise the reading notes as these notes do not contain those additional
notes that will be important for the test as well.
Table of Contents
Table of Contents 1
Week 1 2
Lecture 1: Monday 16 September 2
Introduction 2
Lecture 2: Tuesday 17 September 4
Content introduction 4
PART ONE: Introduction and Orientation 4
The High Politics of our era 4
Two viewpoint on State’s orientation on international politics 5
As a research field, FPA does what? 6
FP Actors seen in International setting 8
Sources of foreign policy 8
Foreign Policy for what (purposes) 8
Lecture 3: Friday 20 September 10
Theoretical approaches 10
Approaches in FPA 10
One key difference however: 10
Micro-level 11
Meso-level 11
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 1
Macro-level 11
Week 2 12
Lecture 4: Monday 23 September 13
Approaches in Foreign Policy Analysis 13
Realism 13
In terms of realism, Foreign Policy is determined by 2 main factors: 14
Neorealism 14
From the viewpoint of foreign policy, arguments were made that: 15
Critiques 15
Lecture 5: Friday 27 September 17
Conceptual approaches continued 17
Summary of Realism critiques 17
Traditions in FPA 19
Week 1
(16-20 September)
Lecture 1: Monday 16 September
Introduction
This is an introductory module to the field of Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA). The focus is
on how and by whom foreign policy is made and how foreign policy processes and
choices can be explained. There is analysis of the interplay between foreign
policymaking and other aspects of international relations, as well as the international
(external) and domestic (internal) factors that often underpin foreign policymaking.
We make use of a specific case study – that of South Africa’s foreign policy post-1994 –
to appraise who are the main actors in the foreign policymaking process, and the
political, ideological, economic and cultural or social factors that can shape this
process.
The module will be presented in two parts. In the first, a conceptual overview is given
of the role of foreign policy in state affairs, and within the broader international system.
In the second part, attention shifts to contemporary foreign policy making in South
Africa (i.e. from 1994 to present).
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 2
Two Parts of the module:
1. Conceptual theoretical
2. Application to South Africa’s foreign policy approach
A1 Test: 30 September
Scope (admin)
● Written test (short questions/ essay)
● 2 sections: choose 1 section and answer accordingly
○ Section A: Short questions, defining and giving examples
○ Section B: Essay question applying the content of the course to a case
study. Choose the case study yourself and make that clear (and why)
and then apply certain concepts and frameworks.
● Total of 50 marks (10-15 mark questions)
● Monday class is cancelled.
Scope (content)
● Work covered in the slides available on SUNLearn already
● Week 1 readings only (Alden Chapter 1; Hill Chapter 2; Hill Chapter 2)
● What the field of FP initials and what it covers
● Theoretical approaches: levels of analysis and what it entails
● Be able to define and explain what things are
● Basis of the test is the theories
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 3
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 4
Lecture 2: Tuesday 17 September
Content introduction
PART ONE: Introduction and Orientation
➢ Context and determinants of foreign policy
➢ Actors
➢ Interplay between international and domestic environments
➢ Theories
PRESCRIBED READING
● Alden, C. & Aran, A. (2017). Foreign Policy Analysis: New Approaches (2 nd ed.)
Hoofstuk / Chapter 1.
● Hill, C. (2015). Foreign Policy in the 21 st Century (2 nd ed.) Hoofstukke /
Chapters 1 & 2.
The High Politics of our era
(Pre-covid-19)
● Apparent reordering of international power balance
○ Questions about the future of liberal, rules-based international order
established under US hegemony postWWII
● A general shift in states’ foreign policy orientation in line with geopolitical shifts
● Pronounced geopolitical shifts and what this implies for foreign policy ahead.
High politics - Issues of vital importance. Usually revolves around national security i.e.
how can we safely defend our state security.
● Covid-19 reordering of the great powerhouses
● After the Cold War, the power balance has shifted greatly.
● Questions about the future liberal world-hegemony post WW2.
Hegemony - Order without physical violence. (A form of soft/ slow violence)
○ A form of non-physical violence
● The land of the oligarchs and russia hegemony. People with large wealth can
enforce their dominance.
● General geopolitical shift (how do we align ourselves in our own geopolitical
sphere; benefitting from the resources we possess in a maximum way; trading
ensures that we benefit in accordance with the resources we have.
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 5
Geopolitical shifts
● Non physical; certain states from certain areas align with other states to pool
resources (strategic alliances)
● e.g. BRICS and BRICS plus+
● Countries with different resources to forge a group and have more bargaining
power
Two viewpoint on State’s orientation on international
politics
1. “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests
are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.”
● We cannot align ourselves eternally with one geographical state. How you
align yourself cannot always be the same.
● Lord Palmerston, House of Commons Speech, 1948.
● E.g. We depend on China for tech but not other areas.
2. More multilateralism - important to see global solutions to global challenges.
- Multilateralism: grouped negotiations that consist of more than 2 countries
- The structural condition of interdependence dictates this
- (the nature of the agreement will influence how effective these policies and
agreements are.
- E.g. NATO and BRICS (2) - Some have less power than others
If you were a foreign policy advisor to South Africa’s president which course or
principle would you advise him to follow and why?
- focus on equality and democracy which must be perpetuated.
Recent Foreign policy events in South Africa
- Ramaposa attends the FOCAC (Forum on China-Africa Cooperation) Forum in
Beijing.
- South Africa - Norway bilateral consultations hosted in RSA, August 2024
- The Deputy Minister visited Indonesia to conduct a working visit.
- Minister Lamola participated in the Tokyo conference on African Developmental
Ministerial meeting in Tokyo.
“Regular trundle” of South Africa’s foreign policy machinery
● Interest in maintaining beneficial relations with Global North and the Global
South.
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 6
● Multilateralism is important.
We can deduce from examples:
● Foreign policy straddles numerous levels of actorship and decision making
○ State and non state, govt, individuals, firms
○ as well as issues: climate change, conventional security threats.
● Traditional channels of diplomacy important (e.g. multilateral/ bilateral
summits), but increasingly too the non-traditional (social media e.g. Trump on
Twitter)
● Everyday events can have great effects on states’ foreign policy.
As a research field, FPA does what?
States and other actor’s explicit articulation of their international gaols and objective
addressed to other in the international system
- Explain how and why states conduct themselves the way they do in the
international sphere. Articulation of international goals
- how and why in the domestic sphere.
- States and other actors explicit articulation of their international goals and
objectives addressed to others in the international system
- Foreign policy white papers (published) drafts
- Strategy documents - everything governed internally by these
documents that take the course of action for everything the govt does
- statements by the head of state
- communiques (e.g. BRICS summit of G20 summit) - joint press statement
that summarizes what has happened and the conclusions/ agreements
- Speeches (e.g. P.W. Botha’s Rubicon speech of 1985 —> there was large
international pressure to end apartheid; he ended up ‘crossing the
rubicon’ or not going back; doubling down on the regime).
- Voting positions in multilateral forums (e.g. UN Security council and
Russia’s position and vetos; US withdrawal from the human rights council
because of China)
Diplomacy: the practical articulation of an actor’s external aspirations, purposes and
policies. Entails the official practices through which actors (generally, but not
exclusively states) interact with each other.
- traditionally, foreign policy and diplomacy were the preserve of state activities,
but increasingly other actors have foreign policy (transnational) impacts
- Non-state actors
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 7
- Multinational Corporations
- Al Shabaab, ISL,
- Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, NGOS, celebrity diplomacy.
- coeercive extremist diplomatic groups that influence foreign policy
by the threats they pose.
- Humanitarian aid organisations/ UN etc. - activist groups or
democratic negotiators
- Sub-state actors (provincial or city governments, trade missions, twin
city pacts)
- Benjamin Barber - If Mayors Ruled the World: Dysfunctional
Nations, Rising Cities (2013)
- In an interdependent world with interdependent cities, city
governments are more efficient than the nation state.
Therefore increasing importance today of:
- Economic diplomacy (state and non-state)
- Two-track diplomacy (NGOS lobbying governments such as international
campaign to Ban landmines; through indirect campaigns)
- Track-three diplomacy (NGOS interactions with each other and private
companies)
- Celebrity diplomacy (Bono, Bob Geldoff)
- Science diplomacy (doesn’t happen very often e.g. Cold War and nuclear
technology and alarmist opinions. Scientific organizations formed to warn about
the dangers of nuclear weapons and the importance of disarmament.)
- Distinction between ‘high politics’ and ‘low politics’ less relevant
- Low politics = issues that aren’t as relevant right now
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 8
FP Actors seen in International setting
Sources of foreign policy
Foreign Policy for what (purposes)
Taken from Hill (2015):
● Protection
○ Maintaining sovereignty and territorial integrity in a complex and
anarchic world order
○ Tools of conflict resolution
○ Collaborate towards international stability
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 9
● Ways of facilitating domestic welfare/ prosperity
○ If a wider international environment is favourable, such domestic goals
can be better achieved.
● Managing scale
○ Given the complex nature of the world system and its many challenges,
international cooperation is important. Therefore, appropriate foreign
policy and foreign policy tools are required
● List of 7 expectations for foreign policy
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 10
Lecture 3: Friday 20 September
Theoretical approaches
The study of state’s positions on international relations. The political unit/ actor of the
state is the focus. The states position and approach to acting upon, existing in and
responding to the international environment. Sometimes that international system is
a zero-sum game (realism). How do states interrelate with each other in terms of their
policies and strategies that they use (or try to use) to engage with other states in the
international order. Sub field of International Relations.
*Realism - FP is defined by the state solely.
Case study: The current leadership of Russia under Putin.
● Invasions are intended to meet certain foreign policy goals.
● There is explicit and written policy in the public domain, but also unwritten
behavioral indications of a state’s foreign policy.
Approaches in FPA
1. Levels of analyses - state (domestic/internal), non-state actors
(external/internal, international system (broader/external).
● Main unit of analysis remains the state. But, we look at the state in relation to
other units or ‘settings.’
2. Theoretical frameworks: different ways of conceptualizing the focus of FP.
● Realism
● Pluralism
● Liberalism
● Critical frameworks
FPA is a sub-field of IR, therefore it reflects the intellectual traditions and trends of IR.
● Means we can see the same kinds of theoretical frameworks dominating in the
field of FPA.
● Similar debates and issues concerning epistemology, methodology, and/ or the
role of values.
● Can class approaches in terms of IR’s major perspectives
One key difference however:
(makes it a singular/ discrete field of investigation i.e. what distinguishes it from the
field of IR)
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 11
● Lies in prevailing levels of analysis
● Demarcates different areas that give a lens through which we can analyze
Foreign Policy decisions.
● Whereas IR is mostly state-centric and focuses on state-level or systemic
explanations
● FPA encompasses analysis at the levels of:
○ Micro-level (individual)
○ Meso-level (domestic context - middle)
○ Macro- level (systemic)
Micro-level
Focus: The individual decision-maker (individual leadership) in foreign policy. Foreign
policy is determined by the decisions/decision-making processes of individuals as the
most important determining factor.
E.g. Putin/ Trump
● Analysis of psychological factors, cognition, personality
● Also known as the study of foreign policy decision-making (FPDM)
Meso-level
Focus: Domestic context and determinants of foreign policy. Foreign policy is the
outcome of all things that happen in the domestic context or environment.
E.g. Citizens, grass-roots/ civil society, ministries (trade, environment, etc), interest
groups (lobbying groups, domestic interest groups, activists, trade unions), democracy
in a broader sense.
● “The black box of the state” is not as unitary as suggested by realism.
● Role of domestic politics or public opinion
● Role of domestic interest groups
● Role of bureaucracies in foreign policy decision-making
Macro-level
Focus: The position of states within the broader systemic/ international system factors.
Foreign policy is shaped by systemic factors. Foreign policy analysis explores the
composition of the international system through which we can understand the ecisions
made within states.
● Explains foreign policy as an outcome of:
○ Power distribution in international system (strong democracy OR
communist; centralisation or distribution)
○ State attributes
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 12
○ State (national) interests (focus that defines foreign policy, goals and
objectives
● Realism and Neorealism
Week 2
(23-27 September)
➢ Micro level analyses
○ The role of the individual leader, personality cognition
➢ Meso-level analyses
○ The role of bureaucracies and state organizers
PRESCRIBED READING
● Alden & Aran (2017). Hoofstuk / Chapter 2.
● Hill, C. (2015). Foreign Policy in the 21 st Century (2 nd ed.) Hoofstukke /
Chapters 3 & 4.
● perplexity
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 13
Lecture 4: Monday 23 September
Approaches in Foreign Policy Analysis
Realism
In chronological terms, FPA was first dominated by insights from Realism and Neo-
Realism (macro-perspectives); then Liberalism and Pluralism; and later Critical
Perspectives.
● As an intellectual enterprise, FPA was created in an attempt to explain its
decisions made in terms of the international or systemic level.
Especially shaped by the work of Hans J. Morgenthau (Politics Among Nations [1948];
In defense of the National Interest) and Kenneth Waltz; as well as Henry Kissinger
(American Foreign Policy, 1969; Diplomacy).
It is a very influential perspective in International Relations, especially in today’s
culture of systemic conflicts etc. These conflicts are less bipolar (Cold War), this is now a
hegemonic rivalry between the USA and China (hot - real conflicts or cold - trade wars).
There are conflicts that are systemic in making. These states should be oriented in
terms of the power order or systemic differences of today.
Systemic - the international system; the way it changes and the power positions of
different states that exist within this system.
“Realism is all about Power politics”
Points of departure
● Defines an international system defined by anarchy (there is not one singular
policeman
● The main actors of politics within the international system are nations.
● Given the condition of anarchy (no overarching leviathan/ definitive rule setter,
states always need to act in their own national interest (own best interest) and
will always behave rationally (cost-benefit)
The conditions dictate what the priorities of states are within the international system.
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 14
In terms of realism, Foreign Policy is determined by 2 main
factors:
1. Maintaining the balance of power (especially under conditions of Cold War and
Mutually Assured Destruction. This is achieved by being cautious and careful in
policy through forging alliances and not engaging in destructive acts (‘Don’t kill
what you can’t hurt)
2. The foreign policy is always in the interest of serving the nation state
(sovereignty and security)
a. Leaders should always be pragmatic and not led by ideology. Ideology is
important, but pragmatism is more important.
Ideological orientations - e.g. wanting to be the most powerful country in the world.
This means we are informed by our goals and not what is practical or in our best
interest.
Neorealism
● Variation of classical realism
● Understands the international system as being a system of international
rivalries.
● Because there is no set rules, states rival each other for influence or dominance
● Therefore, foreign policy should accommodate relative distributions of power in
the world.
● States should strive to maximise their power vis a vis other states, and their
Foreign policy should reflect this.
● As realism would say it is a ‘zero-sum game,’ Neorealism would say that Power
politics is a powerful balancing act that is much more strategic in the way it is
formulated.
● The international order is the ‘billiard ball’ table. It is the idea of an
international system composed of individual states that bash up against each
other to win and take others out.
● Rational Actor Model
○ Assumes that foreign policy is the result of state actors deliberating on
maximizing gains and minimizing costs (maximizing utility).
○ Given the anarchical system (serving state interest first), how do they go
about formulating policies and engaging with other states at the least
cost to myself and the most gain to my state.
○ Actors are always engaging in this theoretical thought process.
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 15
Later, other scholars began to criticise the assumptions and claims of Realism:
From the viewpoint of foreign policy, arguments were made
that:
Critiques
1. The behaviouralist approach does not have satisfactory explanations
Behavioralism focuses on measurable and observable things and uses them to
explain the world. Foreign policy outputs (such as actions or decisions) are the main
focus of understanding the foreign policy. This is the epistemological approach that
Realism is grounded in
➔ But what if the world is an objective or grounded reality?
➔ What if things are not tangible/ real in foreign policy or the world?
➔ What about factors such as psychology of individual decision-makers
➔ It is also to study the process, not merely the output of decisions.
➔ Society is an aggregate of individuals, but realism does not account for human
aspects and only looks at a macro scale.
Foreign policy as the result of human agency, what is the process of human agency and
decision-making. How does this process shape Foreign Policy.
2. Critique of rationalist and Rational Actor Model
There is little evidence to show that states always act rationally (minimise cost and
maximise gain). Who is to say that states are rational actors driven by utilitarian
(cost-benefit) considerations.
3. Important to unpack the ‘black box’ of foreign policy decision-making. This
means that foreign policy is not only understood in terms of the macro-level.
Micro influences are very important. We tend to look at the state as a unified
decision-maker, but we must break it up into its constituent parts:
● Bureaucracies / ministries
● Executive vs legislative vs judicial authority in a given state
● Interest groups, the media and public opinion
● Psychology and cognition
4. Through the influence of neoliberalism
Another flaw of realism is that it forgets the fact that we are interdependent within the
international environment. Because of this, states must formulate FP to take other
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 16
states into consideration. The neorealist and realist views forget that states also
cooperate (this is made the focus of Liberalism).
● Important to factor in complex interdependence
● look at the role of international institutions and non-state, sub-state actors on
different levels (e.g. UN, WTO, etc.)
● In order to give account of cooperation in states’ conduct and foreign policies
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 17
Lecture 5: Friday 27 September
Conceptual approaches continued
*Distinguishing between the factors and the broader field
*We are studying the field: how states conduct themselves in their relations with other
countries.
Summary of Realism critiques
- Static view of states: offers little room for cooperation between states as they
are self-serving in terms of influence; often bash up against each other through
the ‘billiard ball’ view.
- Rationality is flawed: because states want to maximise their own interests, they
always conduct actions rationally (cost benefit). BUT, states do not always act
rationally as they are also human.
- Behaviourism: Only considers the ways state states behave (their outputs)
without considering external factors.
- “The black box:” Need to dismantle the idea of the monolithic state. There are
many other factors at play.
- Collaboration of the international system: States are also heavily engaged
with communal action and collaboration.
LATER ON CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES STARTED TO SHAPE THE FIELD OF FPA
- Marxist theory (IR explained in terms of class, economic exploitation,
neocolonialism)
- Feminist theory (critiques the gendered nature of the international political
system and domain.
Constructivism - objects the idea that an objective reality exists and that it is in a
natural state of affairs. Rejects taking this system at face value. Asserts that reality is
socially constructed by humanity.
● The state is a socially constructed entity
○ Constructivism asks the question of what is a state and how it has come
to be.
○ *Realism takes the existence of nation states as face value
○ Their answer is that humans have created states as a system of
organisation and they are not naturally existing entities that exist as the
sole actors in international systems.
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 18
○ States are what people make of them.
● Rejects the condition of anarchy that realism asserts.
○ Anarchy is a situation created by international actors as a framework of
engagement.
○ Anarchy is a commonly accepted idea of the common condition. Because
of this prevailing idea, states then orient themselves in a certain way in
the international order.
● Questions the idea of values and how they are factored in (very important)
○ Value - something that is of significance/ importance for an actor. Used
to direct our lives. Can also be defined as a foundational system of beliefs
○ Important in the lives of human agents as it helps us to guide our lives
○ Important for state actors and political decision makers. They play into
the way in which and reasoning given for decisions.
○ E.g. Religion. In countries such as Iran, values of religion form the basis
of political position and Foreign policy approaches.
○ E.g. Conflict. Often driven by differing values
● Draws a distinction between material power and ideational power in FP.
○ Distinguished from Realism: power = important and is the key ordering or
guiding factor to relations. COnceptualised in one way: the capability and
influence a state has over another as a result of its size. (Materialist or
hard power)
○ Constructivists assert that the power of ideas is very important and can
be used to influence decisions. These forms of power are more ‘soft.’
○ Material power - power by virtue of attributed (what we have) [HARD
POWER]
○ Ideational power - power to persuade/ persuasion or influence. (Often
represented in symbols/ appeal/ ideas) [SOFT POWER]
○ *Soft power can be expressed through appeal too*
○ TERMS COINED BY JOSEPH NYE
○ E.g. The influence and power that the Vatican city holds as the pope
represents an entire system of belief.
○ E.g. Taylor Swift. Holds soft power as she is liked for her music,
appearance, etc. She represents something to people and appeals to
others.
○ E.g. The popularity and prevalence of Korean culture. The culture is
spread throughout the world through its appeal.
● States interests (and their FP) reflect their identity (and vice versa)
○ Realists assert that states have interests
○ COnstructionists want to know how these are formed:
■ Through beliefs or identity
■ Understanding that human agents make up the world.
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 19
○ Their interests are not objective, they are created and constructed
○ E.g. Present-day hegemony of Saudi Arabia as a projected identity
internationally. This influences how leaders interact politically with
neighbouring nations
○ Present day Russia - Putin’s ideology and concpetion of the world, history,
the mission of Russia in the world (as set of idenities) help to define
Russia’s state interests and its courses of action.
Traditions in FPA
*Key ideas, key claims, the relation of claims to factoring into the FP domain.
*Homo economicus - homo sapiens (reference to human beings), a concept from
economics which is akin to the idea of the rational-actor model. The individual
economic being always conducts business rationally to maximise gains and minimise
losses.
Realism Liberalism/ Pluralism Critical/ Reflective
(1900-Present) (1960s-Present) approaches
(1980s-Present)
Black box Comparative FP Constructivism
Billiard ball view Societal sources of FP Postmodernism
Actor- general theories - Bureaucratic politics Post-colonial approaches
the actors is not only the
state, it is broken into
many parts
Cognitive decision-making Feminist/gendered
critiques
Focus not on outcome by Class-based/ Marxist
the process critiques
Not actor-general but
actor specific
Critique of *homo
economicus conception of
human behaviour and
decision-making.
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 20
Property of Ella Bosman - Please do not share! 21
