University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 8-2010 Hawks versus Doves: The Influence of oliticalP Ideology on the Foreign Policy Behavior of Democratic States Costel Calin [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Calin, Costel, "Hawks versus Doves: The Influence of oliticalP Ideology on the Foreign Policy Behavior of Democratic States. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2010. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/782 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Costel Calin entitled "Hawks versus Doves: The Influence of oliticalP Ideology on the Foreign Policy Behavior of Democratic States." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Political Science. Brandon Prins, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: David Brule, Robert Cunningham, Peter Gross Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Costel Calin entitled “Hawks versus Doves: The Influence of Political Ideology on the Foreign Policy Behavior of Democratic States.” I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Political Science. Brandon Prins, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: David Brule Robert Cunningham Peter Gross Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) HAWKS VERSUS DOVES: THE INFLUENCE OF POLITICAL IDEOLOGY ON THE FOREIGN POLICY BEHAVIOR OF DEMOCRATIC STATES A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Costel Calin August 2010 ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the influence of executive ideological orientation on state foreign policy behavior. I advance an analytical model which asserts that foreign policy decisionmakers act in a manner consistent with the ideological principles presented in their political platforms, party manifestos, and their voters' expectations. Thus, I assert that within developed democracies, the further right a government is, the higher the propensity to behave more aggressively. Oppositely, the further left a government is, the more likely it is to behave more cooperatively. I empirically analyze this theoretical argument by developing three models where the foreign policy behavior is measured uniquely in each separate model. I estimate executive ideology by using two proxies: one which estimates the overall ideology of the executive while the other captures only the foreign policy dimension of executive ideology. To test the hypotheses derived from the theoretical model, I create a new dataset of responses to international crises. Foreign policy behavior is operationalized as an ordinal variable which takes into account a complex range of actions that governments take in the international arena, such as providing aid, mediation, non intervention, condemnation, sanctions, and the use of force. I employ Logit and Orderd Logit statistical analyses on a large-N cross national model. My dissertation focuses on all 22 OECD countries, during the period 1977 to 2001. The empirical findings partially support my theoretical argument, contingent upon the proxy used for executive ideology and the way state behavior is estimated. I find consistent support to my argument if executive ideology is estimated with the proxy which contains only the party manifestos' foreign policy variables. iii TABLE OF CONTENT CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 THE POST-COLD WAR SECURITY ENVIRONMENT ............................................................ 1 ANALYZING THE DETERMINANTS OF STATE BEHAVIOR ................................................... 4 OUTLINE OF THE DISSERTATION .................................................................................... 7 CHAPTER 2 MATERIAL FACTORS VERSUS IDEATIONAL FACTORS IN ........................... 10 FOREIGN POLICY DECISON-MAKING ............................................................... 10 STATE BEHAVIOR AND ITS MATERIAL DETERMINANTS .................................................. 13 POWER AND STRATEGIC BEHAVIOR OF STATES ............................................................. 19 DOES POWER MATTER? EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. ............................................................ 24 ECONOMIC INTERDEPENDENCE AND STRATEGIC BEHAVIOR OF STATES ......................... 26 DOES ECONOMIC INTERDEPENDENCE MATTER? EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. ......................... 31 STATE BEHAVIOR AND THE ROLE OF IDEAS .................................................................. 32 THE WAYS IDEAS INFLUENCE POLICY OUTCOMES ......................................................... 35 Ideas as road map .................................................................................................. 36 Ideas as focal points and glue ................................................................................. 37 Institutionalization ................................................................................................. 38 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 39 CHAPTER 3 GOVERNMENT'S IDEOLOGY AND DECISION-MAKING ................................. 41 IN FOREIGN POLICY ............................................................................................... 41 MAKING SENSE OF "IDEOLOGY" .................................................................................. 44 IDEOLOGY IN POLITICS ................................................................................................ 45 POLITICAL IDEOLOGY AND FOREIGN STATE BEHAVIOR ................................................. 48 Political ideology as a non-factor ........................................................................... 49 iv Political ideology determines foreign policy behavior: an analytical view .............. 54 Political ideology determines foreign policy behavior: empirical evidence ............. 56 DIMENSIONS OF IDEOLOGICAL CONFLICT IN FOREIGN POLICY ....................................... 62 Inclusiveness or exclusiveness of the national interest............................................ 63 The appropriateness of using force in international affairs ..................................... 66 Unilateralism versus multilateralism ...................................................................... 69 ADVANCING A NEW FOREIGN POLICY BEHAVIOR MODEL .............................................. 72 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 75 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................................. 78 DATA AND UNIT OF ANALYSIS ..................................................................................... 79 DEPENDENT VARIABLE: FOREIGN POLICY BEHAVIOR .................................................... 80 Description of types of foreign policy behavior ...................................................... 84 DISCUSSION OF DATA ................................................................................................. 89 KEY INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: EXECUTIVE'S POLITICAL IDEOLOGY ............................... 92 CONTROL VARIABLES ................................................................................................. 96 Power parity .......................................................................................................... 96 Economic interdependence .................................................................................... 97 Contiguity and distance ......................................................................................... 99 Similarity of foreign policy views ........................................................................ 100 Regime type ........................................................................................................ 101 MODELS ................................................................................................................... 102 Model 1 ............................................................................................................... 103 Model 2 ............................................................................................................... 104 Model 3 ..............................................................................................................