Beyond Identity: Social Relations for International Con ict and Cooperation
Dissertation
Presented in partial ful llment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of e Ohio State University
By
Kathleen E. Powers, B.S., B.S., M.A.
Graduate Program in Political Science e Ohio State University
Dissertation Committee: Richard K. Herrmann, Advisor Christopher Gelpi Kathleen McGraw William Minozzi ©Copyright by
Kathleen E. Powers
Abstract
How can groups overcome con ict and cooperate with one another in international pol- itics? Strong group identities contribute to con ict — from nationalism driving WWII to sectarian ethnic groups inciting violence in Iraq. As a result, scholars oen turn to the seemingly simple solution of bringing competing groups together as a single community — uniting rivals France and Germany under a common European identity is meant to sustain cooperation on the continent. I argue that this approach is fraught with difficulty: nation- alism within a state promotes militaristic foreign policy, and communities formed among heterogeneous states are both difficult to maintain and potentially problematic as trust only extends to representative community members.
I argue that different social relations shape the meaning, and ultimately the effects, of identity. On one hand individuals can understand their identity group as a community, where maintaining the group’s unity requires a separation between “us” and “them” and justi es intergroup con ict but not cooperation. On the other, relations can be de ned by equality and reciprocity, among individuals who see themselves as one of a set of equals that compose the group. e latter produces a conceptually and practically distinct understand- ing of social identity — one that can accommodate diversity not only within but also outside of the group. I argue that bridging competing groups with equality produces cooperation while avoiding the con ictual pitfalls associated with strong community identities.
ii I test this argument and the microfoundations of cooperation and con ict in three em- pirical chapters. e rst two present the results of online survey experiments, and demon- strate that the relationship between strong national identities and foreign policy preferences depends upon the relational content that underlies the national identity. e third analyzes public opinion data from a cross-national survey of individuals in European states to probe the type of transnational identity that fosters cooperation in a transnational group.
Across the three studies, I nd that identities based on equality promote cooperative ten- dencies, while identities based on community can produce more con ictual preferences.
iii Acknowledgements
My road to the PhD has been full of many twists and turns, most of which I would not have been able to navigate without the support and advice of the people who surround me.
I owe a great debt to my advisor, Rick Herrmann. He has supported me since he per- suaded me to come to Ohio State years ago. Rick has been a reliable sounding board for ideas, and I have learned and grown as a scholar in each of our many conversations. His connection to foreign policy and constant search for concrete examples of theory in action has changed the way I write and approach my work — for the better. I thank him for being as generous with his time as he is with feedback, and will continue to hone research throughout my career with his advice in the background.
Chris Gelpi arrived in Columbus at precisely the right time to shape how I thought about my dissertation. I thank him for believing in the project from its earliest stages, and for the thoughtful insights that have had a profound impact on the direction of this project. He taught me to sharpen the way that I discuss my contributions, and his infectious enthusiasm leaves me newly invigorated about my work each time I meet with him.
I thank Kathleen McGraw for spurring my enthusiasm for political psychology. I learned most of what I know about public opinion and the broader world of political psychology from her courses, each of which introduced me to the fascinating questions behind my cur- rent agenda. I am also indebted to her for always reminding me to think rigorously about research design. Her keen eye for valid experimental instruments has shaped the way that I approach each of my projects, and they have improved immeasurably as a result.
iv I thank William Minozzi for his detailed feedback on my research and for pushing me to become a better writer and scholar. Perhaps more importantly, I thank him for bringing a unique perspective to my work, on that leads me to think differently about my theories and evidence each time I step into his office. I thank him, too, for his cumulative advice about various aspects of professional academic life — from setting medium- and long-term goals, to creating realistic timelines and remembering to read e Cra of Research.
I thank my graduate student colleagues, who enriched my time at OSU intellectually and otherwise. Sebastien Mainville provided me with reliable and helpful comments on my work, stimulating academic discussions, and friendship throughout our years as members of the IR cohort. Regular coffee trips with Carolyn Morgan immensely improved my