Realist Constructivism:Understanding Foreign Policy Intent

realism;constructivism;foreign policy;china;pakistan;iran;Global Security Studies

Bleau, Paul M.Stout, Mark ;

Johns Hopkins University

关键词: realism;    constructivism;    foreign policy;    china;    pakistan;    iran;    Global Security Studies;   

Others  :  https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/38052/BLEAU-THESIS-2014.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

瑞士|英语

来源: JOHNS HOPKINS DSpace Repository

【 摘 要 】

International Relations theory is a guide for understanding state behavior, which is especially important when dealing with potentially threatening countries whose intentions are difficult to decipher due to a perceived influence of ideology.Realism suggests that state behavior is essentially the pursuit of power and decisions are pragmatic calculations of self-interest, while Constructivism asserts that ideas drive behavior.Rather than being mutually exclusive, some scholars argue that Constructivism can play a complementary role within the Realist worldview by focusing on the ideas that drive the decisions of actors pursuing their self-interests, contextualizing foreign policy behavior.I argue that J. Samuel Barkin’s Realist Constructivism hybrid is better suited to explain the role of ideology in state foreign policy, thereby clarifying intent, than Classical Realism alone, which acknowledges ideational variables, but does not go far enough to explain.To test this hypothesis, I measure to what extent ideology—a term used in the Constructivist sense, signifying a system of ideas, to include culture and religion—influences the foreign policy of China, Pakistan, and Iran.Respectively, Confucianism, Islam, and revolutionary Shia Islam are the ideologies I evaluate.These cases were chosen due to the perceived influence ideology has on their foreign policy, which often leads to them being portrayed as threats.I predict that ideology, while not being the sole motivator for a decision, will function as an intervening variable in justifying or explaining why that particular Realist pragmatic decision was made.My research shows that the foreign policy of China, Pakistan, and Iran demonstrate the intervening role of ideology.For China, Confucianism explains why Beijing chose a particular pragmatic policy.For Pakistan and Iran, their Islam-based ideologies are used to justify or create a narrative for what are ultimately rational decisions.I conclude that Realist Constructivism is better than Realism alone because it goes further in explaining intent.Policymakers would be wise to keep this in mind lest they misperceive the role of ideology as leading to irrational behavior, resulting in miscalculated threat perceptions.