«Brent E. Sasley Department of Political Science McGill University, Montreal November 2006 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial ...»
Individuals and the Significance of Affect:
Foreign Policy Variation in the Middle East
Brent E. Sasley
Department of Political Science
McGill University, Montreal
A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements
of the degree of Doctor ofPhilosophy (Ph.D.)
© Copyright Brent E. Sasley, 2006
Library and Bibliothèque et
1+1 Archives Canada Archives Canada
Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l'édition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Canada Canada Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-32323-6 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-32323-6
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives exclusive license allowing Library and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public par télécommunication ou par l'Internet, prêter, communicate to the public by telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans loan, distribute and sell th es es le monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non- sur support microforme, papier, électronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats.
paper, electronic and/or any other formats.
L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur The author retains copyright ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse.
this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation.
reproduced without the author's permission.
Conformément à la loi canadienne ln compliance with the Canadian Privacy Act some supporting su
This dissertation seeks to exp and our understanding of variation in foreign policy. Although we have a series of large, extant literatures dealing with the sources of foreign policy, there has been less attention paid over the last decade to understanding why states change their behavior. At the same time, the thesis argues that foreign policy change is best understood as a result of the role of individual decision-makers and the role that emotion plays in their foreign policy calculations.
Foreign policy depends on the decisions made by individualleaders. The type of individual thus determines the specifie policy. Here individuals are categorized as ideological or adaptable. Ideological individuals are more rigid in their belief structures, are more likely to select policies that fit with their extant understandings of the world and the position of their state in it, and more likely to rely on the emotional or affective appeal an object or issue holds for them.
Adaptable leaders are more flexible, not tied to specifie ideologies or reliant on emotion to guide their thinking, and thus more likely to choose or leam ideas that best respond to changing environmental conditions. At the same time, how a state's decision-making institutions are structured tells us how likely it is that an individual's own predilections matter. In polities where decision-making is centralized (e.g., in the office of the prime mini ster), individuals have greater leeway to put their ideas (whether based on their ideological outlooks or shifting environmental circumstances) into practice, while in de-centralized polities other actors constrain the leader from autonomous decision-making. In such cases, it is
Finally, the role of ideas is taken into consideration, as the dominant national ideas about foreign policy regarding a specifie issue-area he1p us better understand the context in which individuals make (or change) foreign policy.
This mode! is tested against altemate explanations-systemic imperatives, Constructivism, public opinion, poliheuristic theory, and prospect theory-in two case studies: the Israeli decision to pursue and sign the 1993 Oslo Accords, and the 2002 decision by the Islamist govemment in Turkey to actively lobby for rnernbership in the European Union. Both foreign policies represent significant variation, and both provide important theoretical and empirical puzzles for scholars.
Cette dissertation cherche à augmenter notre arrangement de variation de la politique étrangère. Bien que nous ayons une série de grands, literatures existants traitant les sources de politique étrangère, il y a eu moins d'attention prêtée pendant la dernière décennie à l'arrangement de pourquoi les états changent leur comportement. En même temps, la thèse argue du fait que la modificaton de police étrangère est mieux est comprise en raison du rôle de différents décideurs et le rôle d'émotion joue dans leurs calculs de politique étrangère.
La politique étrangère dépend des décisions prises par différents chefs. Le type d'individu détermine ainsi la politique spécifique. Ici des individus sont classés par catégorie soit idéologiques ou adaptables. Les individus idéologiques sont plus rigides en leurs structures de croyance, sont plus pour choisir les politiques qui équipent de leurs vues existantes du monde et de la position de leur état dans lui, et plus probable pour compter sur l'appel émotif ou affectif d'un objet ou d'une issue qui se tient pour elles. Les chefs adaptables sont plus flexibles, non attachés aux idéologies spécifiques ou dépendant sur l'émotion pour guider leur pensée, ainsi plus probable pour choisir ou apprendre les idées qui répondent mieux à changer des conditions environnementales. En même temps, comment des établissements de la prise de décision d'un état sont structurés nous indique comment probablement c'est que les propres prédilections d'un individu importent. Dans les polities où la prise de décision est centralisée (par exemple, dans le bureau du premier ministre), les individus ont une plus grande marge de sécurité pour mettre leurs idées (soit basé sur leurs outlooks idéologiques ou
polities décentralisés d'autres acteurs contraignent le chef de la prise de décision autonome. Dans ces cas-ci, il est probable que les idées d'un individu se conforment à ceux des acteurs de contrainte. En conclusion, le rôle des idées est pris en compte, comme idées nationales dominantes au sujet de la politique étrangère concernant un issue-secteur spécifique aidez-nous à mieux comprendre le contexte dans lequel les individus définissent (ou changement) la politique étrangère.
Ce modèle est examiné contre des impératifs explication-systémiques alternatifs, le Constructivisme, l'opinion publique, la théorie poliheuristic, et la perspective théorie-dans deux études de cas: la décision israélienne pour poursuivre et signer les ententes 1993 d'Oslo, et la décision 2002 par le gouvernement islamiste en Turquie pour inciter activement à l'adhésion dans l'union européenne. Les deux politiques étrangères représentent la variation significative, et toutes les deux fournissent des casse-têtes théoriques et empiriques importants pour des disciples.
Ph.D. programs and, especially, dissertations can be tough to get through, and 1 would not have done so without the moral, social, intellectual, and financial support of many people. My first thanks go to my supervisor, Steve Saideman. He took me in under irregular circumstances and went beyond the calI of duty in carefully reading my (excessively) long drafts. He was responsive to aIl my questions, strengthened my research design and my theoretical understanding of the issues, and taught me a great deal about thinking and writing on foreign policy analysis. Thanks also to my proposaI committee (Harold Waller, Rex Brynen, and Mark Brawley) for making me think more broadly and deeply about the role of ideas in policy making. Michael Brecher was also very helpful in providing advice at an early stage, and 1 learned much from him as a student. 1 also want to thank the external reviewer of my dissertation, for prompting me to think more systemically about foreign policy decision-making.
My friends in the pro gram sustained me from the beginning and made the doctoral experience that much more enjoyable and stimulating: Rachel Brickner, Brian Greene, Bill Wieninger, Cori Sommerfeldt, Matt Hennigar, and James Devine. Rachel was crucial for getting me started on my proposaI, and Brian was especially helpful and generous with his time when 1 had theoretical or methodological questions. They aIl exemplified what should be the norm of cooperation between both graduate students and scholars.
l've also been fortunate enough to have a wider group of associates and friends who've helped me over the years in a number of ways. George MacLean
intellectual support and helpful critiques of my work. Mira Sucharov gave me sorne good ideas about the Israeli case study. Bernard Reich provided very good suggestions for getting me started on my interviews, while Zev Cohen got the baIl rolling for me. Barry Rubin has done far more for me for my entire academic career than l can properly thank him for. Everyone l interviewed in Israel was patient and free with their time. The members, facilitators, and supporters of the 2004 AIS-ISIME Dissertation Workshop also helped me better understand how to present my work.
l was lucky enough to have a great deal of institutional support, as weIl.
Allen Mills at the University of Winnipeg got me a job when l needed one. The Document Delivery folks at the University of Manitoba were always patient despite the work overload l always thought l gave them. Nirit Moskovich of the Peres Center for Peace worked hard, over long distances, to set up interviews for me, as did Keren Ribo of the Global Research in International Affairs Center.
Eyal Ben-Ari gave me a place to work at the Harry S. Truman Institute for the Advancement ofPeace, while Anat Mishali and Jenny Nelson were unfailingly in good humor whenever l needed help from them. Moshe Fuksman and everyone else at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center were extremely cooperative in helping me obtain interviews with many people.
l am also very grateful for financial support for my fieldwork from the following institutions: At McGill University, the Research Group in International Security (which also provided funding for conference trave1 throughout my time
Studies-and especially its director Rex Brynen, who was most understanding and encouraging when it came to supervisor issues. The Centre for Defence and Security Studies (University of Manitoba) and the Dean's Office (University of Winnipeg) also provided funding. The generous support of the Canadian Friends of Hebrew University (especially Brenda Gurvey and Merle Goldman) and the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba was critical in getting me to Israel.
Last and most definitely not least, I would not have gotten through this whole process without the strong support of my family. My parents, Ken and Shelley, and my in-Iaws, Issy and Bonny Kahanovitch, were patiently supportive in many ways, particularly in the crucial area of financial support, which was absolutely necessary for me to (finally) finish. I am more grateful than they can ever know. My sisters, Elana and Samantha, were also always very encouraging and supportive, as were my aunt and uncle Faye and Harvey Singer.
It is not conventional to thank animaIs for one's work, but as anybody who has written a dissertation knows, it can be very isolating work. Odin, our RottBernese cross, by his unfailing presence made the long hours of research and writing just a little less lonely. I must thank my daughter Arielle, both for letting her room double as my office for the first two years of her life, and for showing me that it was aIl worth it in the end.
Finally, my deepest appreciation goes to my wife Yael. Her consistent kindness and patience essentially kept me going at sorne critical moments. She moved back and forth with me without hesitation, and although she was not my
Adalet ve Kalkznma Partisi-Justice and Development Party AKP Adalet Partisi-Justice Party AP Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi-Republican People's Party CHP DOP Declaration ofPrinciples on Interim Self-Government Arrangements Demokrat Parti-Democrat Party DP Irgun Zvai Leumi-National Military Organization Etzel
Fazilet Partisi-Virtue Party FP GNA Grand National Assembly Mapai Mifleget Poalei Eretz Israel-Workers Party of the Land of Israel Milli Güvenlik Konseyi-National Security Council MGK Milli Nizam Partisi-National Order Party MNP Milli Selamet Partisi-National Salvation Party MSP Partiya Karkerana Kurdistan-Kurdistan Workers Party PKK PLO Palestine Liberation Organization Saadet Partisi-Felicity Party SP Türk Silahlz Kuvvetleri-Turkish Armed Forces TSK WBG West Bank and Gaza Strip Refah Partisi-Welfare Party WP WZO World Zionist Organization
Foreign policy analysis (FPA) and International Relations (IR) have given little consideration to foreign policy variation. Sorne attention was paid to it in the 1980s and early 1990s (see Carlsnaes 1993; Goldmann 1988; C. Hermann 1990;
K. Holsti 1982; and Rosati, Hagan, and Sampson 1994). But despite the slim hope acknowledged by sorne that, by the mid-1990s, this was beginning to change (Rosati, Sampson, and Hagan 1994, 7-8), this early anticipation has not panned out. Rosati, Sampson, and Hagan's earlier assessment that "the study of foreign policy change remains largely an unexplored area of great significant and promise as a tool to enhance the understanding of the dynamics of world politics" (1994,