FOREIGN POLICY: A CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING

 

FOREIGN POLICY: A CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING

            Foreign policy is one of the wheels for the international policy process. Foreign policy is not independent, but rather is part of, national policy. It comprises of national interest, which in respect to other States should be promoted. Almost every country determines the path of its external policy in accordance with its strengths and external realities. Foreign policy also includes non-political interactions. The term ‘foreign policy has been defined in a number of ways.

1.      George Modelski defines it as, “The system of activities evolved by communities for changing the behavior of other states and for adjusting their own activities to the international environment”. In its definition, Modelsky only stressed the main foreign policy objectives as those components aimed at changing the current behavior of states. Foreign policy in fact comprises both the modification of current conduct and the continuance of the behavior. It concerns change as well as the state of affairs for the sake of national interests.

2.      Feliks Gross has taken a very liberal view of the term foreign policy. He opines if a state decides not to have any relations with some country, it is also a foreign policy. Its concern is both negative and positive. It is negative when it aims at furthering its interests by not changing the behavior and it becomes positive if it demands a change in the behavior of other states to adjust its national interests.

3.      In the words of Padelford and Lincoln, “Foreign policy is the key element in the process by which a state translates its broadly conceived goals and interests into concrete courses of action to attain these objectives and pressure its interests.” Padelford and Lincoln have explained two functions of foreign policy. Its First function is to attain its broadly conceived goals and second the function is to pressurize the national interests.

4.      In the words of C.C. Rodee, “Foreign Policy involves the formulation and implementation of a group of principles that shape the behavior pattern of a state while negotiating with (contacting) other states to protect or further its vital Interests.” This includes not only the general principles but also those means necessary to implement them. Thus, these principles are those broader interests, which states strive to achieve in international relations.

DETERMINANTS OF FOREIGN POLICY

            Foreign policy is that part of national policy which the states adopt in relation to other sovereign states. All these states are the components of the international system. They are sovereign, independent and to a large extent cling to the idea of Nationalism. Thus, the sovereignty of the states, their inter-dependence, and their domestic and international circumstances Are the three elements that generate and determine the foreign policy and its direction. The first element is the sovereignty of the state which determines the principle of safeguarding the territorial integrity of the states. The element of interdependence necessitates the principle of bargaining in foreign policy as the states endeavor to achieve the maximum possible advantage under all circumstances. The third element, the domestic and international circumstances add the factor of realism. The foreign policy of all states is based on these three principles. Principles of Safeguarding the Territorial Integrity This is the primary duty of a state to protect the property of its citizens and to safeguard their interests whatsoever they are. This duty also involves the concept of security of national boundaries and if necessary to occupy other alien parts of the territory. The state’s aiming at the protection of their own territory pursues the policy of status quo. The state is aiming at subjugating occupied or non-occupied territory may be named as pursuing the revisionist policy. The policy of safeguarding the interests of the citizens inside or outside the state is known as the policy of “prestige”.

Theory of Bargaining

     The Inter-dependence of the states is an important phenomenon in international politics. All the states big or small are dependent on one another for one or the other reasons. This inter-dependence may result in conflict or cooperation so the states under these stresses endeavor to create a situation under which international behavior may not be broken completely. Foreign policy strives to create such a balance with bargaining. For example, India has not recognized Israel to dissuade the countries of the Middle East from interference in case a dispute arises between India and Pakistan.

Theory of the Promotion of National Interest

            It is the pious duty of all sovereign states to promote and further their national Interests through their foreign policies. There may be a little bit of difference between The interests of one state with that of another as they naturally vary according to time, place, and location, but the interests as self-preservation, security, and well-being of its citizens are the common interests on the basis of which foreign policy is generally Formulated.

SPECIFIC DETERMINANTS OF FOREIGN POLICY

                The foreign policy of each state is determined by the above-mentioned general principles, but it cannot be denied that the states have their own specific interests, which necessitate the states to adopt different types of foreign policies. These specific interests are termed as factors, which help, in shaping and molding foreign policy. The specific determinants can be roughly divided into three categories, namely, internal factors, external factors, and Policy Making factors.

INTERNAL FACTORS 

The internal factors can be divided under the following sub-categories-

1.       Historical and National Values

2.       Geography

3.       Public-Opinion

4.       National Capacity

5.       The Structure of Society

6.       The Political Organization

 

Historical and National Values

            Foreign policy is shaped and conditioned by history alone. The nation inherits a style and culture, which in their turn influence and decide the course of actions; the nation has to follow in relation to other sovereign states.

Geography

            Geography is the factor that directly determines the national goals and aspirations and hence is one of the most potent factors in influencing the formulation of foreign policy. Geographical factors, like the size and the location of a country, its natural resources, and the number of its population contribute to the power of the nation, which in turn shapes its foreign policy12. The foreign policy of Britain in the presecondary world war period was centered on the principles of Balance of Power, superiority on the seas, and expansion of empire. These aspects of the policy were the natural corollary of geography. Britain is surrounded from three sides by the sea and on the fourth side lays the English Channel that separates it from the rest of Europe making it an island. The location of Pakistan, adjacent to the Soviet Union and China has undoubtedly molded her position in international politics and given her an influence out of proportion to her size and population. Nepal’s position as an independent buffer state between India and China has also posed problems for India largely Explicable in terms of Nepal’s location. Although geography was and remains to be an important factor in foreign policy yet in recent years, owing to scientific and technological advancement its importance is receding. The inventions of supersonic jets, I.C.B.Ms, and rockets have made the mountains and seas evincible. However, it does not mean that geography has lost its importance altogether, it still plays a significant role. Soviet Union’s historic concern about the East European countries is because of geography and the USA’s deep involvement in the South American States is again because of geographical proximity.   

Public Opinion

             Public opinion shapes foreign policy, provided it is clear and well-shaped. It could be a significant factor only in developed states. In developing or underdeveloped states either it does not reflect on foreign policy issues or it is too naïve to play a significant role. Studies of public attitudes conclude that the vast majority of people even in highly literate societies are unknowledgeable, uninterested, and apathetic with regard to most issues of world affairs14. Other studies suggest that government, university, and private programs that have sought to create wider public knowledge and appreciation of the complexities of international politics have seldom met with success. The strong opposition of the American public to the government’s policy on Vietnam led Nixon to adopt a policy of gradual withdrawal of US forces from Vietnam. With Lord Strong, who was Permanent Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, we may say that the public ventilation of issues of foreign policy, often at awkward moments, hampers the flexibility, resourcefulness, and imagination with which diplomatic relations might otherwise be more fruitfully conducted16.

National Capacity

            National capacity means the military preparedness of the state, its technological advancement, and modern means of communication. Economic development and enlightened political institutions are also associated with national capacity. National capacity is the pivot of foreign policy. It determines as well as implements it. In fact, foreign policy is directly associated with national capacity. If the state increases its national capacity, its foreign policy will need a big change. It will strive to achieve a status of distinction in international relations; if it decreases, the state will have to compromise with its poor status. For example, at the end of the Second World War Britain became a less powerful state in Europe as well as in the world. This change in national capacity has brought overwhelming diversions in British Foreign Policy  

The Structure of Society

            National morale is recognized to be an important element in the power of a state and, therefore, in the successful conduct of foreign policy. It is evident that a homogeneous society makes stronger national unity and morale than a heterogeneous one, sharp division in society-divisions between rich and poor, divisions based on religion, regional imbalances make it difficult for a government to count on that immediate and nation-wide cooperation from society, which is so essential for a successful foreign policy. Such cooperation is demanded in particular when the society’s wealth and personnel have to be explained in the prosecution of a war. The structure of society has another implication for the analysis of foreign policy: a plural society with its members following different religions as in India indicates a policy of secularism with inevitable repercussions on both domestic and foreign policy. 

The Political Organization

            The internal political structure of a country has an important impact upon the country’s approach to international affairs, as is evident from a comparison of the decision-making processes in an absolute monarchy or a dictatorship on the one hand and in a parliamentary democracy on the other. It is true that as David Hume puts it, it is an opinion only that government and this maxim extends to the most despotic and most military governments as well as to the freest and most popular. A despotic government has greater power, through censorship and the promulgation of regulations, to prevent the expression of undesirable opinions than a free government does. Indeed, the distinguishing mark of a free government is the very freedom that allowed the citizens to express their options on public policy, domestic or foreign. There are besides, established institutions such as an elected parliament, political parties, and a free press for the expression of opinion.

EXTERNAL FACTORS

External factors are of two types-

Ø   Flexible: (changeable) International Environment, International Organizations, and World Public Opinion

Ø   Rigid:(unchangeable)Reaction of the States 

International Environment

            The establishment of friendly and cooperative relations between nations are the aims of a sound foreign policy; the complexity of the task arises from the very nature of international politics. The multiplicity of attitudes and their interactions apart from the difficulty of conducting foreign policy arise from the fact that a state has no sure means of controlling the behavior of other sovereign states. It can persuade, promise or deny economic and military aid, it can threaten another state with the use of force and, nevertheless, it cannot be certain the state will act in the way it desires. There is another source of the difficulty. The world is continuously changing, new events and personalities create fresh foreign policy problems for all concerned. To select instances at random, the impact of the October Revolution of 1917, the rise of Communist Power in China in 1949, the rise of De Gaulle to power in France in the fifties, and the emergence of new states in Asia and Africa since Foreign Ministers of the time. Yet it has been rightly said that there is both continuity and change in the foreign policies of all states, for every nation also has its history and its traditions. The political leader, who not only merely reacts to events but also acts on his own, anticipating events, has a certain limited advantage over another who is caught by events.

 International Organizations

            International organizations have started playing important role in foreign policy formulation. The states have to take note of international law, treaties, and contracts so that their violation may not jeopardize the policies. Communist China, for a long time, showed utter disregard for these factors and consequently could not secure its due position in the field of international relations. Only after 1971, she recognized their importance and that move on the part of Communist China has introduced new dimensions in international politics.

World Public Opinion

            World public opinion is a very dynamic element. Like a flicker of light, it influences foreign policies very occasionally. Only if the domestic public opinion supports the world public opinion it becomes an important determinant of foreign policy. The establishment of democratic institutions, the increase in the standard of living, the scourge of the First World War, and the expansion of education have made world public opinion a significant factor in foreign policy. The States never dare pursue interests contrary to world public opinion. At least they will pursue only those interests, which are not opposed, to world public opinion. The opinion is a factor, which faces many obstacles in crystallization. The first and foremost is the ideological division of the world in which the acting good or bad of one part becomes naturally adverse to another part. The role of propaganda, the absence of a free press, and the economic backwardness of a large number of states thwart the evolution of real public opinion.

Reactions of the States

            The states have to take notice of the interests of other states while formulating their policies. They will never endeavor to pursue those interests, which are totally opposed to the fundamental interests of other states. Hitler in 1939 committed a blunder when he refused to be guided by the British reactions and events ahead with his Polish invasion. The result is well known. Japan’s failure in assessing American reactions to the Pearl Harbor incident again brought disaster to Japanese policy, which had intelligently avoided offending the USA up to that period.

POLICYMAKING FACTORS

            In the formulation of foreign policy, the political leaders including all other policymakers play a decisive role. As the final shape of foreign policy is the handwork of these elites, the impact of their views and personality is but natural. Policymakers define the situation not only in terms of conditions abroad but also in terms of what is feasible bureaucratically. They receive information from various government agencies and the alternatives they consider are often alternatives that have been drafted and debated by lower officials of various government departments. Henry Kissinger has suggested that there are three important styles of foreign policymaking today-

Ø   Charismatic revolutionary

Ø   Ideological

Ø   Bureaucratic- pragmatic.

The dictators generally try to change the public opinion in their favor through a controlled press. Leaders like Mussolini, Hitler, Mao-Tse-Tung, and Ayub Khan have done the same. Generally, the policymakers have to consider internal problems, public opinion, external circumstances, and reactions of other states. In these tasks, a number of departmental experts assist them. Policymaking factors can be divided under the following sub-categories-

Ø   Head of the Government and Foreign Ministers

Ø   Legislature

Ø   Foreign Office and Other Services

Ø   Ideologies

Head of the Government and Foreign Ministers

            In a totalitarian state foreign policy depends upon the whims of a dictator. In a democracy, the public is not competent enough to participate in it effectively. American President Truman used to say that the President is the maker of foreign policy. In a parliamentary democracy, the Prime Minister wields this authority. India’s foreign policy of Nehru-era was nothing but Nehru’s ideas on foreign policy. The influences of Disraeli, Asquith, Churchill, and Atlee can be noted in British Foreign Policy. Personality equations play a very significant part in politics and administration. This sometimes makes the foreign minister more important than the President or Prime Minister. Dr. Henry Kissinger virtually became the symbol of American foreign policy in Nixon and Ford period.

Legislature

            The legislature is the last authority in decision-making and the strings of pursuing are under its control. The post-second world war period has seen a new aspect of foreign policy, i.e. the economic aid and assistance to promote the national interests. For that matter, the executions of foreign policy depend upon the legislature for sanctions of huge amounts. The USA is the chief donor of economic assistance. This has made the Senate a powerful factor in the formulation of foreign policy.  Again, the treaties though concluded by the executives, Prime Minister or President but they must be satisfied by the legislatures before they are applied. This again makes the legislature an important determinant.

Foreign Office and Other Services

            In a state characterized by a highly developed foreign affairs bureaucracy, there are also unlimited possibilities for foreign officers, military organizations, or intelligence agencies to take actions formulated independently by the top political leadership. In theory, the ministers make the policy and the permanent official merely execute it, but in practice, the officials formulate the policy and the ministers are only advice-sender. Neville Chamberlain clashed with the foreign office over his policy of Appeasement; he removed Lord Vansittart from his post of Under Secretary. Nevertheless, where policies are less firm and clashes less pronounced the advice of the officials carries much weight. Foreign policy is not conducted by diplomacy alone, it relies heavily on the scientists who supply them with up-to-date weapons, on economists, and especially today, on intelligence and propaganda services. In the world of today,  weapons are not used, on the contrary, they are produced only to deter. Here the scientists start playing an important role. In the same manner, the governments have to rely upon the information rendered by the intelligence agencies. The role of the Central Intelligence Agency of the USA is now an open secret. We know from the newspaper revelations that this agency was responsible for the Coup in Chile, the invasion of Cuba in 1961, the U-2 reconnaissance flight over the Soviet Union, and the murder of many heads of the government of hostile states.

Ideologies

            Ideology is the basis as well as the goal of foreign policy. The states establish their political and economic institutions based on ideology and endeavor to translate those very principles in the sphere of foreign policy. The ideology prescribes for policymakers both national roles and an image of the future state of the world. It establishes the long-range goals of a state’s external behavior, to be promoted through diplomacy, propaganda, revolution, or force. Its relevance to day-to-day problem solving and to the development of specific actions in concrete situations, however, may be only very slight. In this realism, a Communist government operates like any other. As is obvious, a particular ideology has a goal, which the state strives to achieve in international relations. The ideological division of the world between the Soviet bloc and the American bloc has focused on two types of foreign policies. One is communist-oriented and the other non-communist. A sort of affinity can be traced among the states of identical ideologies while there is a feeling of animosity among the states adhering to contradictory ideologies. This is the root cause of the cold war and post-war tensions.

NATIONAL INTERESTS AND NATIONAL VALUES

            National interest is the big concept in foreign policy. These are the aspirations of the state, which are to be achieved through foreign policy. Their respective national interests govern the policymakers. National interests are the governing factors, which loom large in diplomatic conferences, bilateral or multilateral. The success and failure of all these conferences depend upon the national interests involved. Lord Palmerston was too right to say that friendship or enmity is never permanent in foreign policy, it is the national interests that are permanent and it was the pious duty of the states to follow them. The time-honored definition of national interest as ‘the general and continuing ends for which a nation acts’ could be accepted as a working definition’. The particularistic element in the national interest of different nations and even of the same nations at different times stems primarily from the stage of social and economic development, which it has reached. The interests of one nation are necessarily not opposed to the interests of other states. States, in pursuing their national interest are bound to take into account universal ideals and principles of internal national law and morality, such as peace, justice, keeping the nation’s word, the sanctity of treaties and non-intervention in other nation’s affairs, freedom, and a decent standard of living for all men

FOREIGN POLICY OBJECTIVES

            The concept of objective, which is essentially an “image” of a future state of affairs and a future set of conditions that governments through individual policymakers aspire to bring about by wielding influence abroad and by changing or sustaining the behavior of other states. If all the objectives of foreign policy are to be explained by one single word, that word is undoubtedly the ‘National Interest’, but this word is too ambiguous to lead us to any clear understanding. Paul Seabury opined that ‘the national interest can indicate such ideal objectives which the states pursue through their foreign policy or it can simply be the interpretation of the policymakers or its meaning may be different to different individual and groups. In principle, the foreign policy is always formulated based on national interests but in practice, the policy may drift far off from these goals under the pressure of the international environment and power patterns.

            The objectives of foreign policy are divided into three categories namely-

Ø   Core values and Interests

Ø   Middle Range Objectives

Ø   Universal Long-Range Objectives

Core Values and Interests

            Core values and interests determine the foreign policy of a nation. The basis of these objectives is those necessities and beliefs on which the existence of the state depends. Core values and interests can be described as those kinds of goals for which most people are willing to make ultimate sacrifices. They are usually stated in the form of basic principles of foreign policy and become articles of faith that society accepts uncritically. These necessities and beliefs are as follows-

National Security

            National security is the primary goal of a foreign policy. The treaties, contracts, and alliances, which the states conclude with another state, rest on this objective. In 1823, the then President of the USA declared the famous Monroe doctrine which aimed at checking the interference of European powers in the affairs of Americans. The concept of national security is not confined to territorial integrity or security of national borders. It may include the security of cultural and political institutions and beliefs and values. Most policymakers in our era assume that the most essential objective of any foreign policy is to ensure the sovereignty and independence of the home territory and to perpetuate a particular political, social and economic system based on that territory. After self-preservation and defense of strategically vital areas, another prominent “core value” or interest is ethnic, religious, or linguistic unity. Irredentist movements, subversion, and sometimes-racial warfare are often the products of frontiers that divide ethnic, language, or religious groups.

Economic Development

            The promotion of the economic interests of a nation is the fundamental goal in foreign policy as this is directly associated with the state’s existence. Therefore, the state would always strive to adopt a course of action, which brings economic prosperity thereby making its armed forces well equipped, citizens much relaxed, and the state a significant factor in international politics. It will be no exaggeration to mention that the national interests are more economic than political and foreign policy more guided by economic factors than by political ones. War, imperialism and colonialism, treaties, alliances, and contracts are totally based on the idea of economic prosperity. India at the dawn of its independence shrewdly opted for a policy of non-alignment to seek the help of both the blocs for its economic prosperity.

Middle-Range Objectives

            The primary commitment of many modern governments must be to pursue those courses of action that have the highest impact on domestic, economic, and welfare needs and expectations. It may be difficult to gain much public support for other types of objectives such as glory, territorial expansion, or power for its own sake. The middle-range goal has no particular time element, but most of today’s leaders in developing countries hope that they can begin to catch up with more economically advanced countries within their own lifetimes. The middle-range objectives include international cooperation, prestige, and protection of the interests of the nationals. These objectives can be illustrated as follows-

The Interests of Pressure Groups

            The existence of pressure groups with global interest is a new phenomenon in politics, which has a significant influence on foreign policies also. The pressure groups yield a considerable influence on their respective governments, which has to include the interest of these pressure groups in foreign policy to bring stability in national politics, or to assure the support of these groups in dominating the domestic policy scene. India’s repeated assurance to the Arab World to support them against Israel is because of the pressure of the Muslim factor in Indian politics. As one British diplomat has claimed, most important decisions are often made, not as part of a concerted and far-sighted policy, but under the urgent pressure of some immediate crisis. Recent empirical studies demonstrate that changes in public attitudes follow government actions, which imply that governments are instrumental in creating the “mood” that also, constrain them. Non-Political Cooperation In the field of international relations cooperation is more than necessary today. Therefore, the objectives of a foreign policy inevitably include economic, cultural, and social cooperation. The economic aid to the developing states and the facilities the states give to the foreign students to pursue higher and technical education will explain this.

Promotion of National Prestige

            The objective of this type includes those policies of states, which are meant to focus an impressive image on the states abroad. The states generally resort to propaganda through mass media to create the desired effect. The competition between the two Super Powers to reach the planets is motivated by this desire. The success of any of them in its mission would certainly prove the scientific and technological superiority of one over the other. In the past, as today, this was done primarily through diplomatic ceremonial and displays of military capabilities, but increasingly in our era prestige is measured by levels of industrial development and scientific and technological skills. Industrialized countries and major powers can increase their international prestige through a number of policies and actions, including expansion of military capabilities, distribution of foreign aid, diplomatic ceremonies including reciprocal visits by heads of state and industrial and scientific exhibition and particularly through the development of nuclear weapons and the capacity to explore outer space.

Territorial Expansion

            The policy of territorial expansion includes imperialism and colonialism, which the states adhere to meet their economic and political aspirations. From the 18th to 20th century, the European States had adopted the policy of imperialism to capture the markets, raw materials and to claim superiority in European affairs. Territorial expansion becomes an end in itself, whether or not it fulfills any strategic, economic, or social needs. Others do not occupy foreign territory but seek advantages, including access to raw materials, markets and trade routes, which they cannot achieve through ordinary trade or diplomacy. In modern times, the traditional imperialist policy has undergone a change and this can be explained by illustrating its two prevalent forms. The first is a policy that aims at the increase of areas of influence, while the other seeks to capture the economic resources reducing the other state to the status of dependency. The economic or dollar imperialism of the Western European Countries and of the USA falls in this category, while the Russian policy of imperialism can be covered in the former type expansion of areas of influence or ideology.

Universal Long-Range Objectives

            These are objectives aiming at restructuring the international system. The plans and dreams, which an ideology forms to establish the international system of its own liking is the distant goal of foreign policy. Hitler’s liking is the distant goal of foreign policy. Hitler’s idea of ‘Thousand Years Reich, the idea of world revolution in Socialistic Countries, the plans of the USA to make the world safer for democracy are undoubtedly the foreign policy goals but with some distinction. As Lenin and of the great modern visionaries, wrote in 1920, “We have always known as shall never forget that our task is an international one and that our victory [in Russia] is only half a victory, perhaps less, until and upheaval takes place in all states including the wealthiest and most civilized.” While they but the long-range goals always color the primary and middle-range goals are the policies immediately to be pursued, foreign policy is the ambitions which the states may achieve in distant future and/ or them the states never press too much in the present.