When new leaders come to office, there is often speculation about whether they will take their countries' foreign policies in different directions or stick to their predecessors' policies. We argue that when new leaders come to power who represent different societal interests and preferences than their predecessors, leaders may pursue new foreign policies. At the same time, in democracies, leadership selection processes and policymaking rules blunt leaders' incentives and opportunities for change. Democracies thus tend to pursue more consistent foreign policies than nondemocracies even when new leaders with different supporting coalitions assume office. Statistical analyses of three distinct foreign policy areas – military alliances, UNGA voting, and economic sanctions – provide support for our argument. In a fourth area – trade – we find that both democracies and nondemocracies are more likely to experience foreign policy change when a new leader with a different supporting coalition comes to power. We thus conclude that foreign policy responds to domestic political interests, and that, even as the interests supporting leaders change, democracies' foreign policies are no less stable than those of nondemocracies and often exhibit greater consistency.

The promotion of democracy by the United States became highly controversial during the presidency of George W. Bush. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were widely perceived as failed attempts at enforced democratization, sufficient that Barack Obama has felt compelled to downplay the rhetoric of democracy and freedom in his foreign-policy. This collection seeks to establish whether a democracy promotion tradition exists, or ever existed, in US foreign policy, and how far Obama and his predecessors conformed to or repudiated it. For more than a century at least, American presidents have been driven by deep historical and ideological forces to conceive US foreign policy in part through the lens of democracy promotion. Debating how far democratic aspirations have been realized in actual foreign policies, this book draws together concise studies from many of the leading academic experts in the field to evaluate whether or not these efforts were successful in promoting democratization abroad. They clash over whether democracy promotion is an appropriate goal of US foreign policy and whether America has gained anything from it. Offering an important contribution to the field, this work is essential reading for all students and scholars of US foreign policy, American politics and international relations.

Democracy and Foreign Policy: The Fallacy of Political Realism challenges the belief that liberal democracy is incompatible with a wise and effective foreign policy. Miroslav Nincic demonstrates that if any such incompatibility exists, it is rooted in the incentives of professional politicians rather than in the impulses that drive the public and its legislative representatives. When we look at the intersection of U.S. domestic political arrangements and the nation's foreign policy, our gaze is often misdirected by erroneous and often harmful assumptions about the appropriate domestic setting for the conduct of foreign affairs. First, Nincic focuses on the effect of democratic practices and institutions on the efficacy and wisdom of international dealings, especially with rival nations. Nincic next examines the pursuit and consequences on some of the central aspects of our democracy, including the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches, civil liberties, and government openness. A challenge to political realists' contention that democracy impedes the sound conduct of foreign policy, Democracy and Foreign Policy will be of particular interest to scholars and policymakers in international relations, U.S. foreign policy, and diplomatic history.

Widely regarded as the most comprehensive comparative foreign policy text, Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective has been completely updated in this much-anticipated second edition. Exploring the foreign policies of thirteen nations—both major and emerging players, and representing all regions of the world—chapter authors link the study of international relations to domestic politics, while treating each nation according to individual histories and contemporary dilemmas. The book's accessible theoretical framework is designed to enable comparative analysis, helping students discern patterns to understand why a state acts as it does in foreign affairs.

This book should be of interest to undergraduate students taking courses in politics and American studies.

Foreign policy begins at home, and in Europe and the United States the domestic drivers of foreign policy are shifting in important ways. The election of Donald Trump as U.S. president, the decision of British voters to leave the European Union, and popular pressures on governments of all stripes and colors to deal with the domestic consequences of global flows of people, money and terror all highlight the need for greater understanding of such domestic currents and their respective influence on U.S. and European foreign policies. In this volume, European and American scholars take a closer look at the domestic determinants of foreign policy in the European Union and the United States, with a view to the implications for transatlantic relations. They examine domestic political currents, demographic trends, changing economic prospects, and domestic institutional and personal factors influencing foreign policy on each side of the Atlantic.

How do political parties affect foreign policy? This book answers this question by exploring the role of party politics as source of foreign policy change in liberal democracies. The book shifts the focus from individual political parties to party systems as the context in which parties’ ideologies receive precise content and their preferences are formed. The central claim is that foreign policy change arises from within transformed discursive contexts of party competition, when a new language of politics that constitutes anew parties’ self-understanding of what they stand for and compete over emerges in a party system. By comparing cases of contested foreign policy change, the book shows how such transformations in party competition determine whether and when international pressures on a state will translate into decisions to institute foreign policy change and what degree of change will be ultimately implemented. With a novel framework which bridges concepts of international relations and comparative politics, the book will be of interest to researchers and students in the areas of international relations theory, foreign policy analysis and comparative politics, and generally to anyone wanting to understand how and when parties, elections and voters contribute to international change.