With world affairs so troubled, what kind of foreign policy should the United States pursue? Benjamin Page and Marshall Bouton look for answers in a surprising place: among the American people. Drawing on a series of national surveys conducted between 1974 and 2004, Page and Bouton reveal that—contrary to conventional wisdom—Americans generally hold durable, coherent, and sensible opinions about foreign policy. Nonetheless, their opinions often stand in opposition to those of policymakers, usually because of different interests and values, rather than superior wisdom among the elite. The Foreign Policy Disconnect argues that these gaps between leaders and the public are harmful, and that by using public opinion as a guideline policymakers could craft a more effective, sustainable, and democratic foreign policy. Page and Bouton support this argument by painting a uniquely comprehensive portrait of the military, diplomatic, and economic foreign policies Americans favor. They show, for example, that protecting American jobs is just as important to the public as security from attack, a goal the current administration seems to pursue single-mindedly. And contrary to some officials’ unilateral tendencies, the public consistently and overwhelmingly favors cooperative multilateral policy and participation in international treaties. Moreover, Americans’ foreign policy opinions are seldom divided along the usual lines: majorities of virtually all social, ideological, and partisan groups seek a policy that pursues the goals of security and justice through cooperative means. Written in a clear and engaging style, The Foreign Policy Disconnect calls, in an original voice, for a more democratic approach to creating such a policy.

A former American diplomat reveals a disconnect between Washington policymakers and those who work in US embassies. When the world awoke on November 28, 2010, and read the first of the 251,287 State Department cables made public by WikiLeaks, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini warned, “It will be the September 11th of world diplomacy.” The WikiLeaks scandal certainly stirred tempers around the world, but it was not the implosion that many leaders expected: rather, it shed a new spotlight on the work of the U.S. foreign service. In To the Secretary, Mary Thompson-Jones explores the most fascinating and overlooked of these cables to offer an unparalleled window into the day-to-day work of U.S. diplomats, demystifying the lives of those who implement America’s foreign policy across the globe. From the story of Bulgaria’s Aleksi “the Tractor” Petrov to disappearing ballot ink in Ukraine, a Honduran coup d’état, or disaster relief for a devastated Haiti, To the Secretary depicts the work of ambassadors and foreign service officers through their firsthand narratives dealing with crises, corruption, and testy world leaders. Negotiating distinctly un-American customs and corridors of power, these shrewd brokers in embassies from Argentina to Zimbabwe worked tirelessly to promote American diplomacy in a world frequently hostile to the United States. To the Secretary also reveals the disconnect that diplomats face at home, guided by conflicting approaches from multiple Washington stakeholders intent on their own agenda, often unaware of realities on the ground. In an honest assessment of America’s foreign policy challenges, Thompson-Jones describes the deepening gulf between decision makers in Washington and their diplomats in the field. From misinterpreted analyses of anti-Americanism to Washington’s unwillingness to send resources to support diplomatic activities that could make a difference, To the Secretary shows what policymakers can learn from diplomats abroad—and how this can strengthen America’s place in an unstable world.

This “eye-opening analysis” explains how and why America’s culture wars and partisan divide have led to dysfunctional US policy abroad (The Atlantic). In this provocative book, Peter Gries challenges the view that partisan elites on Capitol Hill are out of touch with a moderate American public. Dissecting a new national survey, Gries shows how ideology powerfully divides Main Street over both domestic and foreign policy and reveals how and why, with the exception of attitudes toward Israel, liberals consistently feel warmer toward foreign countries and international organizations—and desire friendlier policies toward them—than conservatives do. The Politics of American Foreign Policy weaves together in-depth examinations of the psychological roots and foreign policy consequences of the liberal-conservative divide; the cultural, socio-racial, economic, and political dimensions of American ideology; and the moral values and foreign policy orientations that divide Democrats and Republicans. Within this context, the book explores why Americans disagree over US policy relating to Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, and international organizations such as the UN.

This book refutes the claim that American foreign policy has varied considerably across time and space, arguing that key policy goals and underlying ideological and political factors have not significantly changed over the last hundred years.

The same aspects of American government and society that propelled the United States to global primacy have also hampered its orderly and successful conduct of foreign policy. This paradox challenges U.S. leaders to overcome threats to America's world power in the face of fast-moving global developments and political upheavals at home. The fully updated Fifth Edition of Steven W. Hook’s U.S. Foreign Policy: The Paradox of World Power explores this paradox, identifies its key sources and manifestations, and considers its future implications as it asks whether U.S. foreign policymakers can manage these dynamics in a manner that preserves U.S. primacy.

This book examines how foreign policy analysis can be enriched by 'domestic realm' public policy approaches, concepts and theories. Starting out from the observation that foreign policy has in many ways become more similar to (and intertwined with) 'domestic' public policies, it bridges the divide that still persists between the two fields. The book includes chapters by leading experts in their fields on arguably the most important public policy approaches, including, for example, multiple streams, advocacy coalition, punctuated equilibrium and veto player approaches. The chapters explore how the approaches can be adapted and transferred to the study of foreign policy and point to the challenges this entails. By establishing a critical dialogue between approaches in public policy and research on foreign policy, the main contribution of the book is to broaden the available theoretical 'toolkit' in foreign policy analysis.