Journals / Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1

THE DECONSTRUCTION OF THE BILLIARD BALL: FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS

BİLARDO TOPUNUN YAPISININ SÖKÜMÜ: DIŞ POLİTİKA ANALİZİ

Pages
177–201
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The last part of the study deals with cultural and emotional dimensions of foreign policy analysis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study approaches foreign policy analysis, which is primarily concerned with developing systematic foundations for foreign policy tendencies of states through generalizable mid-size explanations, from a theoretical and conceptual perspective.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study, in the first place, through a discussion of agent-structure debate, attempts at distinguishing foreign policy analysis from international relations and emphasizes the fact that foreign policy analysis is primarily an actor and process-oriented approach.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The last part of the study deals with cultural and emotional dimensions of foreign policy analysis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study approaches foreign policy analysis, which is primarily concerned with developing systematic foundations for foreign policy tendencies of states through generalizable mid-size explanations, from a theoretical and conceptual perspective. The study, in the first place, through a discussion of agent-structure debate, attempts at distinguishing foreign policy analysis from international relations and emphasizes the fact that foreign policy analysis is primarily an actor and process-oriented approach. An analysis of individual level explanations marked by rational choice and psychological approaches is followed by a discussion devoted to process oriented approaches. Studies that focus on the impact of institutional and domestic political processes with an emphasis on public opinion, media and interest groups are examined. The last part of the study deals with cultural and emotional dimensions of foreign policy analysis.

Özet

Bu çalışma, temel amacı devletlerin dış politika yönelimlerini sistematik temellerüzerine oturtmak için genellenebilir orta ölçekte açıklamalar geliştirmek olan dışpolitika analizine teorik ve kavramsal bir perspektiften yaklaşmaktadır.Çalışmada, öncelikle birey-yapı ilişkisi bağlamında Dış Politika AnalizininUluslararası İlişkiler alanından nedenli ayrıştığı gösterilmekte ve dış politikaanalizinin ağırlıklı olarak karar alıcılara ve süreçlere odaklandığıvurgulanmaktadır. Rasyonel seçim kuramının ve psikolojik yaklaşımların öneçıktığı, karar alıcılar üzerinden dış politika yönelimlerini açıklama yoluna gidenyaklaşımların tartışmasını süreç bazlı yaklaşımların değerlendirilmesi takipetmektedir. Dış politika yapımına etkide bulunan kurumsal süreçler ve ağırlıklıolarak kamuoyu, medya ve çıkar gruplarından oluşan iç politik süreçler üzerindengeliştirilen yaklaşımlar ele alınmaktadır. Çalışma son olarak kültürel ve duygusalboyutunu on plana çıkaran yaklaşımlara değinmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİR, İ. (2022). THE DECONSTRUCTION OF THE BILLIARD BALL: FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1, 177–201. https://ajindex.com/articles/426699

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Allison, G. T. ve Zelikow, P. (1999), Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis, New York: Longman.Barber, J. D. (1985) The Presidential Character: Predicting Performance in the White House, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Baum, M. A. ve Groeling, T. (2010), War Stories: How Strategic Journalists, Citizens, and Politicians Shape the News about War, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  2. Bennett, W. L., Lawrence, R. ve Livingston, S. (2007), When the Press Fails: Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  3. Berinsky, A. (2007), Assuming the Costs of war: Events, Elites, and American Public Support for Military Conflict, Journal of Politics, 69 (4), s. 975–997.
  4. Bueno de Mesquita, B, Smith, A. Siverson, R. M. ve Morrow, J. D. (2003), The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  5. Bueno de Mesquita, B. (2018), Foreign Policy Analysis and Rational Choice Models, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Relations, http://internationalstudies. oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/ acrefore/9780190846626.001.0001/acrefore9780190846626-e-395 (Erişim Tarihi: 15.11.2018).
  6. Bueno de Mesquita, B., Morrow, J. D. ve Zorick, Ethan R. (1997),
  7. Capabilities, Perception, and Escalation, American Political Science Review 91 (1), s. 15-27.
  8. Bueno de Mesquita, B., Siverson, R. M. ve Woller, G. (1992) War and the Fate of Regimes: A Comparative Analysis, American Political Science Review, 86 (3), s. 638-646.
  9. Carlsnaes, W. (2013), Foreign Policy, (Eds.: W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, and B. A. Simmons), Handbook of International Relations, s. 298-325, London: Sage. Chafetz, G., Abramson, H. ve Grillot, S. (1996), Role Theory and Foreign Policy: Belarussian and Ukrainian Compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, Political Psychology 17(4), s. 727-757.
  10. Chiozza, G. ve H.E. Goemans (2003), Peace Through Insecurity: Tenure and International Conflict, Journal of Conflict Resolution 47 (4), s. 443-467.
  11. Cohen, B. C. (1963),
  12. The Press and Foreign Policy, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  13. Dahl, R. (1971), Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  14. DeRouen Jr., K. ve Sprecher, C. (2005), The Domestic Determinants of Foreign Policy Behavior in the Middle Eastern Enduring Rivals, 1948-1998, Foreign Policy Analysis, 1 (1), s. 121-141.
  15. Dixon, W.J. (1994), Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict, American Political Science Review, 88 (1), s. 14–32.