


Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
notes from the lecturer in class, face to face teaching, for the module foreign policy
Typology: Lecture notes
1 / 4
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!



Master in International Relations, Diplomacy and Management International Relations Theories: NQF Level 9 - Credits 20 Course Instructor: Charles Mubita (PhD)
Foreign Policy Analysis is the systematic study of and research into the processes and theories of foreign policy. It is that branch of political science, which deals with the study of and research into the processes and theories of foreign policy.
Foreign Policy Analysis involves the study of how a state makes foreign policy. Because Foreign Policy Analysis involves the study of both international and domestic politics, the academic discipline is located at the intersection of international relations theory and public policy. Foreign Policy Analysis also draws upon the study of diplomacy, war, intergovernmental organisations, and economic sanctions, each of which are means by which a state may implement foreign policy. In academia, foreign policy analysis is most commonly taught within the disciplines of Political Science or Political Studies, and International Relations.
STAGES IN FOREIGN POLICY DECISION MAKING
The making of foreign policy involves a number of stages:
OBJECTIVES OF FOREIGN POLICY
SHORT RANGE OBJECTIVES
They are called Core Objectives as well, because these objectives are attained at all costs. State cannot afford to show any laxity on this count. Among Core Objectives, territorial integrity and political independence enjoys to be the foremost priority of each and every nation-state. Without any physical unity the state would cease to remain a state. So it needs to be and it has to be the foremost objective of a state. The state has to girdle itself to realize these objectives directly, quickly, forcefully and effectively; it has no luxury of time in case of fulfilling these core objectives. It cannot afford the threat to magnify. Moreover, it has to deal with the source of the threat directly i.e. the demand is made on the single state or group of states who might pose threat to the geographical integrity of the country.
In order to maintain one’s geographical integrity, a state must have arms and ammunitions. Whereas in case of conventional weapons, it has to carry out ‘finite’ deterrence in order to deter the enemy from attacking it, in case of nuclear weapons, thanks to their expensive and destructive nature, only ‘minimum deterrence’ is considered enough. The message is “If you undertake a particular action, then the cost of that action would outweigh its gains”. However, some of the strategists advocate the strategy of ‘finite deterrence’ even in case of nuclear weapons as well. They believe in the accumulation of more and more weapons. They advocates of this kind of strategy argue that it is safer to ensure your survival against a danger by developing more and more sophisticated weapons. The strategy ultimately leads to unlimited arms race and arms building. The strategy of minimum deterrence believes in just enough retaliatory capacity to remove maximum danger. There must be enough material to inflict unacceptable damages upon the aggressor, if an attack accrues. The advocates of this strategy contend that by chalking out this strategy, the unnecessary costs of arms building are minimized.
As a matter of fact, question of Pakistan’s solidarity is given utmost priority by Pakistani policy makers. Traditionally, Pakistan’s policy has been India-centric, and its pattern of relations with the rest of the world has been subservient to that factor.
2
A state while pursuing such type of objectives seeks to gain almost at the expense of all other states. Further they have no time restrictions, as time limit is usually employed in pursuit of core and middle range objectives. After the Communist Revolution of 1917 the Russian communist leaders, Lenin and Stalin reiterated that they would endeavour to expand communist ideology through the every nook and corner of the Globe, as to them the capitalist system was defective and exploitative in its very nature. It was the Long Range Objective of Communist Russia, because by doing so they did not set any time limit for the realization of these objectives. So, Long Range Objective are not only time consuming, but are also indefinite and vague i.e. nothing can be ascertained regarding the outcome of the pursuit, so they are unpredictable as well.
Similarly dissemination of capitalist economy and democracy is one of the long range objectives of the US policy. After the end of cold war it was believed that there is no serious rival to the Western Democracy. The “End of History and the Last Man” is a 1992 book by Fukiyama expanding the 1992 essay “The End of History?” published in the Foreign Affairs journal “The National Interest”. In the book, Fukuyama argues the controversial thesis that the end of cold war signals the end of the progression of human history:
“What we are witnessing is not just the end of cold war, or a passing of a particular phase of postwar history, but the end of history as such; that is the endpoint of humankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western Liberal Democracy as the final form of human government.”
The ‘end of history as such’, ‘the evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government’; these were the sort of statements along with Fukiyama’s professed conviction that ‘the ideal will govern the material world in the longer run’ – that rang the alarm.
4