The Political Limits to a Military Strategy: A Poliheuristic Analysis of U.S. Crisis Management in Syria (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Studies Perspectives 6(1), 2005
In recent years, more than 40 articles and chapters have utilized Poli-heuristic Theory to analyze critical decisions made by foreign leaders and U.S. presidents. In this paper, I introduce the Poliheuristic Proce-dureFa series of steps that one can use to explain or predict decisions by world leaders. Subsequent articles in this Symposium present examples of poliheuristic analyses of decisions made by Presidents Carter, Clinton, Gorbachev, Mussaref and Saddam Hussein. These case studies provide strong support for Poliheuristic Theory: leaders use a two-stage process in making decisions: they first use simple heuristics to eliminate alternatives based on the avoid-major-political-loss principle, and then use more analytic calculations in selecting an alternative from a subset of surviving alternatives.
Opportunities and Presidential Uses of Force: A Selection Model of Crisis Decision-Making
Conflict Management and Peace Science, 2010
Political vulnerability is thought to influence the opportunities available to the US president to engage in uses of force abroad. Conventional theories linking economic misfortune and partisan opposition to presidential uses of force detail the incentives and constraints facing the president in decisions to use force. In contrast, these theories' strategic counterparts focus on the ability of US adversaries to respond to the president's vulnerability through either avoidance or exploitation. The behavior of US adversaries is thought to critically affect the president's opportunities to use force. Conventional and strategic accounts of the linkage between domestic political vulnerability and the use of force provide contradictory expectations. To assess these theories we identify hypotheses related to four dependent and selection variables corresponding to dispute initiation and reciprocation involving the US. These hypotheses are tested with a two-stage Heckman Probit model to account for selection effects due to strategic interaction. The results are most supportive of orthodox diversionary theory. Our findings challenge the other perspectives evaluated-the strategic conflict avoidance (SCA) perspective, Howell and Pevehouse's party cover approach, and Schultz's signaling model.
The Decisions in Between: A Humanitarian-Crisis Decision-Making Model
Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 2018
The end of the Cold War brought an increase in civil war, genocides, and other humanitarian crises, as well as an increase in global concern and US involvement in intervention into such situations. I argue that the foreign policy decisionmaking process for the US in these humanitarian crises is unique from both regular foreign policy decisions as well as from security crisis decisions. I develop a model of this humanitarian crisis decisionmaking process, situated between the two extant models. I illustrate this new model of decisionmaking with a structured, focused case study of US involvement in Bosnia. I first discuss how the situation would have unfolded based on the regular and security crisis decisionmaking models, then compare those archetypal expectations to how the decisionmaking process actually developed during the Bosnian conflict.
Poliheuristics in the foreign policy decision making
As I was debating which model of decision making offers the best descriptiona foreign policy,a recent news image poppedup in my mind. This was the face of PresidentObama when he watched BenLaden assassinationlive in the White House. This wasthe face of a world leader mortals reallyget to see.This wastheface of the most powerful man who was gambling with his political careeras he watcheda blood bath in Pakistan
Policy Perspectives on National Security and Foreign Policy Decision Making
Policy Studies Journal 41(S1), 2013
This article reviews major decision-making models with an emphasis on basic theoretical perspectives as well as on how these models explain foreign policy decision making and national and international security decisions. Furthermore, we examine how these models have been utilized in explanations of various international crises. Specifically, for each model, we present examples drawn from the literature on applications of the respective model to foreign policy and national security decisions. The theories we have reviewed are as follows: rational choice, cybernetic model, prospect theory, poliheuristic theory, organizational and bureaucratic politics, groupthink and polythink, and analogical reasoning. We also review the Applied Decision Analysis method, and the concept of biases in decision making.
The Theory and Practice of Foreign Policy Decision Making
Political Psychology, 2008
Central to Alex George's work was a concern with the psychology of presidential decision making. Our analysis focuses on George's work at the intersection of leadership psychology and the psychology of judgment in the making of consequential foreign policy decisions, specifically those dealing with issues of war and peace. We begin with a review of the fundamental dilemmas of political decision making, focusing on the various factors that present challenges to leaders seeking to make high-quality decisions. We then move to an analysis of the nature of judgment and the ways in which it both shapes and is shaped by cognitive dynamics and conclude by examining a number of steps designed to help leaders avoid the most damaging blind spots of their own psychologies and cognitive biases.
The Public Presidency and Military Intervention in Syria
2013
On August 21, 2013 an alleged chemical weapons attack was carried out in a suburb of the Syrian capital Damascus. Ten days later, the president of the United States, Barack Obama, announced that he held the Syrian government responsible for the attack and that he had decided to penalize president Bashar al-Assad for what he judged a breach of codified international law. Obama announced he was going to defer to Congress the final decision whether military action was to be taken or not. In the present paper, the Obama administration’s strategy to gather support among members of Congress is examined. In the first part, elementary notions from research on communications strategies of U.S. presidents are presented and discussed. In the second part, evidence for the administration’s communications strategy during the Syria crisis is collected and interpreted in the light of the findings from the previous section. The period under study ranges from the appearance of video footage from the site of an alleged chemical-weapons attack in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta on August 21 to president Obama’s address to the nation on Syria on September 10. Underlying questions are: What schemes and patterns did the Obama administration obey in handling the escalation in the Syrian crisis? Did its strategy reflect secular trends in the evolution of presidential leadership? The study concludes that the communications strategy observed clearly is an instance of “going public”, but that circumstances prevented the administration from climbing the bully pulpit. The permanent campaign hypothesis is thus rejected.
Types of Decisions and Levels of Analysis in Foreign Policy Decision Making
Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making - Chapter 2
Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making presents a decision making approach to foreign policy analysis. This approach focuses on the decision process, dynamics, and outcome, highlighting the role of psychological factors in foreign policy decision making. The book includes a wealth of extended real-world case studies and examples that are woven into the text. The cases and examples, which are written in an accessible style, include decisions made by leaders of the United States, Israel, New Zealand, Cuba, Iceland, United Kingdom, and others. In addition to coverage of the rational model of decision making, levels of analysis of foreign policy decision making, and types of decisions, the book includes extensive material on alternatives to the rational choice model, the marketing and framing of decisions, cognitive biases and errors, and domestic, cultural, and international influences on decision making in international affairs. Existing textbooks do not present such an approach to foreign policy decision making, international relations, American foreign policy, and comparative foreign policy.
Paradigms of Foreign Policy and Political Decision Making: A Critical Review of Three Seminal Works
2014
Several analysts have bemoaned the overemphasis of political and economic theory on the rational choice framework. This is especially evident in foreign policy decision making models. In response, some analysts have proposed alternative theoretical frameworks that hold great promise. This essay considers three of the seminal works in the theory of foreign policy and political decision making, highlighting their respective contributions, their main arguments and the strengths and weaknesses of their various methodological approaches. The works considered are Graham T. Allison’s Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crises (1971), John D. Steinbruner’s Cybernetic Theory of Decision (1974) and Irving L. Janis’ Groupthink (1982). A common thread across all the works considered is their emphasis on the limitations of the rational choice model and their development of alternative explanatory paradigms for the analysis of foreign policy and the political decision making process. In this vein, the future of foreign policy analysis appears bright.
Decision-Making in U.S. Foreign Policy Crises: Presidential Leadership and Outcomes
Political Research Quarterly, 2021
Scholars of foreign policy decision-making have argued that international interactions ultimately are grounded in people acting singly or in groups. Unfortunately, data limitations prevent many of these crucial foreign policy decision-making theories from being rigorously tested and systematically compared with theories from alternative perspectives. A promising approach to remedying this deficiency is the addition of decision-making variables to existing, large- N data sets. In this study, we coded a series of foreign policy decision-making variables for all U.S. cases in the International Crisis Behavior (ICB) data set, and examined how these decision-making variables compared with structural factors in shaping crisis outcomes. The results reveal that when controlling for structural factors such as conflict setting and power discrepancy, foreign policy decision-making variables related to leaders’ traits, advisory structure, and the political context shaped the severity and centra...