In the Modern Age No State Can Avoid Involment in Internal Relations

8/3/2019 In the Modern Age No State Can Avoid Involment in Internal Relations

1/17

Introduction

In the modern age no state can avoid involment in internal sphere.

This Involment must be systemic and based on some well defined

principles. The principles and purpose of state is reflected in the

foreign Policy .The importance of the foreign policy has been

highlighted by Scholars in various ways. According to one scholar, a

state without a foreign policy is like a ship which is drift in any

direction by the storms of events?

Meanings of Foreign Policy:

According to Paddle ford Lincoln; A state foreign policy is the

totality of its dealings with the external environments.1

Professor F.S Northedge says that foreign policy consist of actions

and decisions and actions which Involve to some appreciable extent

relations between one state and the others.2

The Brookings Institute used the term foreign policy to refer to the

the complex and dynamic political course that a nation follows in its

relations to others states.3

The most important actors within the global system continue to be the

central governments of Sovereign states. Each central government has

relationships with other central governments and other international

actors. These relationships are summarized as that country's foreign policy.


2/17

Objectives Of The foreign Policy:

The Main Objectives of the foreign policy is as follows;

The foreign policy seeks to protect the territorial integrity of the

country and protect its national National Interests of its Citizens,

both within and outside the country. The foreign policy objective also

seeks links with other members of the International Community and

adaptation of policy of conflict or Cooperation towards them with a

view to promote its own interests. The foreign policy also aims at

Promotion of economic interests of the country.

As the status of a state is in international community is largely

determined by its economic status, the state tries to pursue a foreign

policy which can contribute to their economic prosperity and enable it

in turn to play a more effective role in international Community .Most

of the treaties and agreements concluded by the states in

international community are essentially designed to promote the economic

interests of these states. The importance of this factor is evident

from the fact that Pakistan opted to join the western Alliance during

the cold war because Pakistan had wanted to promote is economic

developments. The foreign policy also enhance the Influence of

the state by expanding its area of influence or reducing the other


3/17

states to the position of dependency . The policy of U.S and USSR after

World War II period have been largely motivated by this

considerations.5

Determinants of States Foreign Policy

The foreign policies of a given state depend on its power, its

Objectives and its leadership.

Power is an elusive concept but widely used in political science.

Power may be defined as the ability to persuade others to do things

that they would not do ordinarily unless pressured to do so. Within

domestic politics, power is usually based on numbers, wealth, and

organizational Skills. A small group that is well organized may

exercise considerable influence even without Large sums of money. In

international politics, power depends on both geopolitical factors

and Idiosyncratic factors.6

Inequalities of State powers The192 or so states of the world vary

greatly in power. The may be categories into superpowers (US); major

powers (EU--Germany, France, United Kingdom; Japan, Russia, China, and

India; middling powers (Israel, Iran, Pakistan, Poland, Spain,

Republic of South Africa, Brazil, Argentina); and minor or small

powers (Serbia, Denmark, Cuba). 7

There are also micro-states and various territories that are not


4/17

self-governing or not Independent such as client states,

dependencies, and colonies. Since its origins in 1648,

the global state system has been dominated by the great powers

and their foreign policies.8

Objectives of State foreign policies

The objectives of states vary greatly but all states seek to

preserve themselves, maintain their independence and security.

Leadership: It does matter who is elected President of the

United States or who rules China. Leaders and the elites who

support them help to shape the foreign policy of countries. It

is probable that a President Al Gore would not have preemptively

attacked Iraq. On the other hand the aggressive tendencies of

a leader are clearly limited by the Power base available. 9

In making decisions, leaders must take account of two categories

of determinants that impact on their foreign policies. These

are the global or external and the internal or domestic influences.10

Determinants of Foreign Policy:

Foreign policy of a country is influenced by several factors; these factors are classified into two broad

categories, viz, internal and external. Internal factors: The experts of international relations have

explored these factors which influence the foreign policy of any state. Internal factors are

as under .10


5/17

1. Size (the size of state territory as well as its population)

a. Geography (includes its fertility, climate, location in relation to

other land masses and water ways).

b. Culture and history.

c. Economic development.

2. Social structure (A society which is divided on the basis of wealth religion, regional imbalances etc. can

not pursue effective foreign policy.)

3. Public mood

4. Technology

5. National capacity (depends on its military power, its technological advancement and economic

development.)

6. Political organization (quick foreign policy decisions in autocratic system

as compared to democratic systems.

7. Political accountability

8. Leadership

EXTERNAL FACTORS:

Apart from internal factors which influence foreign policy of any country as mentioned earlier a number

of external factor also exercise marginal / considerable impact on the formulation of foreign policy of

country. External factors are as under .11

Power structure: International organization

Power structure:

The power structure prevailing in the world politics also greatly influences the policy of a country. I this

regard three possibilities can be envisaged .First, a number of powers may enjoy great power status and

their relations may be based on balance of power system,Secondly,there may be only two powers which

dominate the world scene and the other states may compelled to join either block .Thirdly, more than to

states attain great powers status and two powers at the poles are less able to command strict allegiance

to the those in the orbit. The nature of the power structure prevailing in the world has an impact on the

foreign policy of country. High lightening this point Prof.Rossenau says: wherever a nation is located in

the prevailing hierarchy of world politics, rules governing the conduct of its foreign relations tend to be


6/17

embedded in the arrangements whereby the great powers cope with their conflicts or otherwise

interact to frame and shape the major issue of an era.

International organization.

The contemporary International organizations have also greatly influences the foreign policy of a

country. While formulating its foreign policy the country have to take into consideration the

international law, treaty, contract

Stages in decision making

The making of foreign policy involves a number of stages:

Assessment of the international and domestic political environment

Foreign policy is made and implemented within an international

and domestic political context, which must be

understood by a state in order to determine the best foreign

policy option. For example, a state may need to respond to an

international crisis.

The foreign policy of small states is seen as responsive to the

constraints and opportunities of the international system,

rather than to domestic politics. The reason for this seems to

be the assumption made in previous research that small states

are typically faced with external threats to national security.

This makes them more attentive to the characteristics of the

international environment, and less constrained by the domestic

political process. By contrast, domestic politics are assumed to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_crisishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_crisis


7/17

play a greater role in the study of the foreign policy of great

powers.12

According to Otubanjo (1999:9)

the forcespeculiarto the state,foreign policy is being

made. The domestic environment includes geographical location

of the state, its peculiarity, natural and human resources,

the nature of the political system, quality of leadership, the

nature of the interaction among groups in the society etc13

The American foreign policy regarding Middle East is the

product of numerous domestic factors and the pro-Israeli

lobbi.14

Similarly U.S changed her foreign policy in Vietnam after

Assessing her domestic environment.

The Former president of Pakistan Perviz Musharaf wisely

assessed the International environment and Guessed that

Pakistan would have faced the combined military might of the US and

India if it had not allowed American troops on its territory to

fight Taliban in Afghanistan after 9/11 terror attacks. former

military ruler Pervez Musharraf has said.15

"I do not regret at all. I think it was a very correct decision and

if I am told for the same situation I will take the same decision,"


8/17

he said.

While his decision was prompted by his conviction that Taliban and

its thoughts were not conducive for Pakistan, he was also concerned

about the prospects of US troops operating from India to attack

Taliban in Afghanistan violating Pakistan's sovereignty.

"Certainly the US was going to attack Afghanistan that was clear.

Where can they attack from? Through India and India was all set and

ready to extend all kinds of facilities,"

Musharraf said.

"If they come from India and we are not with them and what happens.

Pakistan then has to oppose the might of US and India together.

Because they had to go through Pakistan if they have to reach

Afghanistan and our sovereignty will be violated whether on land or

air, from wherever.

Our sovereignty will be violated," the former military ruler said.

"So quite clearly that was not in the interest of Pakistan at all

and Pakistan could not face the threat of the force that would have

violated our sovereignty or had been opposed to us,"

he said.

While analysing what impact the decision to permit US troops from

Pakistan he has taken into consideration the consequences for


9/17

Pakistan siding with Taliban.

"I analysed what the impact would be of siding or not siding. Of

basically that the first question that came to my mind was whether

we want to Talibans Pakistan?.

Goal setting

A state has multiple foreign policy goals. A state must

determine which goal is affected by the international and

domestic political environment at any given time. In addition,

foreign policy goals may conflict, which will require the state

to priorities.Te stated United States policy goals for the Middle

East are as follows in order of importance:

1) Provide an uninterrupted flow of oil

2) Survival and security of the State of Israel

3) The security and stability of friendly Arab states

4) Preventing the spread of terrorism

5) Preventing the development and proliferation of weapons of

mass destruction. 17

Similarly the foreign policy goals of Pakistan after 9/11, was

to save the Kashmir cause, atomic assets and improve its


10/17

economy. In the words of Perviz Musharaf.

India would gain a golden opportunity with regard to Kashmir. The

Indians might be tempted to undertake a limited offensive there; or,

more likely, they would work with the United States and the

United Nations to turn the present situation into a permanent status

quo. The United States would certainly have obliged.

Second, the security of our strategic assets would be jeopardized. We

did not want to lose or damage the military parity that we had

achieved with India by becoming a nuclear weapons state. It is no

secret that the United States has never been comfortable with a

Muslim country acquiring nuclear weapons, and the Americans

undoubtedly would have taken the opportunity of an invasion to

destroy such weapons.

And India, needless to say, would have loved to assist the United

States to the hilt. third, our economic infrastructure, built over

half a century, would have been decimated.18,203

In a Washington, DC, speech entitled "A New Strategy for a New

World" delivered July 15, 2008, Obama stated five main foreign

policy goals:19,

1. Ending the war in Iraq responsibly.

2.Finishing the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban.


11/17

3.Securing all nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and

rogue states.

4.Achieving true energy security.

5.Rebuilding our alliances to meet the challenges of the 21st century

for example the f p goals of US In the cold war was to

contain communisim and after 9/11 to combat the so far called

terrorism and to topple governments the so far called axis of

evils.

Determination of policy options

A state must then determine what policy options are available

to meet the goal or goals set in light of the political

environment. This will involve an assessment of the state's

capacity to implement policy options and an assessment of the

consequences of each policy option. For example the policy

options avalible to US after 9/11 to use military force

against The alleged culprits.They also stoped the accounts of

terrorists. Resognize and support those groups in nations who

support democracy in foreign nations. To overthrow the

governments of Hostile Nations,Like Libiya ,Iraq .The Foreign

plicy options available to Pakistan after 9/11 was to join the

U.S because otherwise Pakistan was weak and could not face


12/17

mighty U.S.In the words of Perviz Musharaf.

First was our military weakness as compared with the strength of

the United States. Our military forces would be destroyed.

Second was our economic weakness. We had no oil, and we did not have

the capacity to sustain our economy in the face of an attack by the

United States.

Third, and worst of all, was our social weakness. We lack the homo-

geneity to galvanize the entire

nation into an active confrontation. We could not endure a military

confrontation with the United States from any point of view

My decision was based on the well-being of my people and the

best interests of my country

Pakistan always comes first. I war-gamed the United States as an

adversary. There would be a

violent and angry reaction if we didn't support the United

States. Thus the question was: if we do not join them, can we

confront them and withstand the onslaught? The answer was no, we

could not, on three counts.20,201,202)

As the world's only superpower, America's foreign policy inevitably

has a major impact be it positive or negative - on contemporary

international affairs. Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, George


13/17

W. Bush's decision to move away from multilateral decision-making

toward a more aggressive, pre-emptive style of foreign policy.

In February 2004, in the context of recent revelations about

clandestine nuclear programs in Iran and Libya, and the role of

the A. Q. Khan network in proliferation of sensitive nuclear

technology, Bush proposed seven initiatives of his foreign

policy.21

1. Passage of a UN Security Council Resolution requiring states toenact WMD-related controls, which led to UN Security Council

Resolution 1540;

2. Expansion of the G8 Global Partnership to eliminate WMD andsecure WMD materials worldwide;

3. Reliable access to nuclear fuel, accompanied by a ban ontransfers of enrichment and reprocessing technology to

countries that do not already have such facilities;

4. Making the (IAEA) Additional Protocol a condition for nuclearsupply, and ratification of the U.S. Additional Protocol;

5. Establishing a Special Committee of the IAEA Board of Governorson safeguards and verification to strengthen compliance and

enforcement; and

6. Excluding countries under investigation for nonproliferationviolations from serving on the Board or the Special Committee.

Formal decision making action

A formal foreign policy decision will be taken at some level within a

government. Foreign

policy decisions are usually made by the executive branch of

government. Common
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Q._Khanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1540#WMD_use_and_controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1540#WMD_use_and_controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_proliferation#Additional_Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_branchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_branchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_proliferation#Additional_Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1540#WMD_use_and_controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1540#WMD_use_and_controlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Q._Khanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran


14/17

governmental actors or institutions which make foreign policy

decisions include: the head of state (such as a president) or

head of government (such as a prime minister), cabinet, or

minister. In Pakistan formal decision is taken on foreign policy by president,

prime minister,chief of army srtaf ,ISi, Presure groups and political parties,22

Foreign policy decisions are shaped by many factors. The real world is

complicated,and many variables are taken into account when decisions are

made. The role of information processing, framing, and cognitive biases in

decision making points to the need for a psychological approach to

FPDM.Factors such as the personality and beliefs of leaders, leadership

style, emotions, images, cognitive consistency, and the use of analogies

influence and shape foreign policy decision making. Overall, these factors

call into question the explanatory power of the rational model. Decision

makers are not necessarily irrational but rather are limited in their

ability to carry out all the steps of the rational mode.23

Psychological factors

Decisions at the highest rungs of government are usually made by small

Groups Or powerful individuals. Psychological factors can potentially have

great impact on decisions made by these small units (Cashman 1993). The

Impact is even greater if the decision making occurs during a crisis, the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_ministerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_(government)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_(government)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_ministerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_state


15/17

government is a Dictatorship, or the country is newly independent or

experiencing regime change. Kennedys decision during the Cuban Missile

Crisis was influenced primarily by the relatively few members of

EXCOM.Winston Churchills dominances a decision maker during World War II

is another example of crisis decision making. If the government is a

dictatorship, the personal characteristics of the leader can be paramount.

Thus, the personal idiosyncrasies of powerful autocratic leaders such as

Fidel Castro of Cuba, Mao Tse-tung of China, KimJong-Il of North Korea,

Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union, Hafez al-Assad of Syria or Saddam

Hussein of Iraq becomes important. If a country is unstable, small

decision units or individuals can be important .24, p 97,98,

Implementation of chosen policy option

Once a foreign policy option has been chosen, and a formal

decision has been made, then the policy must be implemented.

Foreign policy is most commonly implemented by specialist

Foreign policy arms of the state bureaucracy, such as a Ministry of

Foreign Affairs orState Department. Other departments may also

have a role in implementing foreign policy, such as departments for

trade, defense, and aid.

References:

1, Norman J padelford and George A .Lincoln, The Dynamics of International politics, p.195
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Foreign_Affairshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Foreign_Affairshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Departmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_(military)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aidhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aidhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_(military)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Departmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Foreign_Affairshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Foreign_Affairs


16/17

2, Joseph Frankel, The Making of foreign policy(Oxford University Press), p.1

3, Brookings Institute, Major problems U.S foreign Policy (1952-1953), p.3

4, Kegly and wittkopf, World Poltics(Cengage Learning).8th

Ed (2001),

5, International Relations (Bookhives) , p, 67, Parkash Verma

6, International politics,Dr. Harold Damerow(web page), , August 23, 2007

7, IBID

8, IBID

9, IBID

10, International Relations (Bookhives) , p, 67,68, Parkash Verma

11, IBID,71,72

12,(The Fall of the Danish Footnote Policy Fredrik Doeser, PhD

The Swedish Institute of International, Diva-9298)

13,( Otubanjo F. (1990) Foreign Policy Analysis Turkish Journal of

International Relations, Vol. 6, No.3&4, Fall & Winter 2007.)

14, rand paper,27,carles Williams.

15, (David Barrets Uncertains warriors.

16, Perviz Musharaf,In the Line of Fire, SIMON & SCHUSTER,201,202.

17, Source: Council of Foreign Relations contained in the report titled Middle East Policy and the

Peace Process

18, Musharaf, In the Line of Fire, SIMON & SCHUSTER, 203

19, Barack H. Obama A New Strategy for a New World" delivered July 15, 2008.

20, Musharaf, In the Line of Fire, SIMON & SCHUSTER, 202

21, G.W Bush, Cooperation on law enforcement for interdiction of WMD trade, known as the

Proliferation Security Initiative; 2004

22, Nisar Ahamad Pak foreign policy

23,24, Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making (CAMBRIDGE UIVERSITY PRESS), Alex Mintz, IDC-

Herzliya, Israel, Karl De Rouen Jr.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proliferation_Security_Initiativehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proliferation_Security_Initiative


17/17

In the Modern Age No State Can Avoid Involment in Internal Relations

Documents

Transcript of In the Modern Age No State Can Avoid Involment in Internal Relations