Public Opinion and Foreign Policy Essay Example for Free

Public Opinion and Foreign Policy Essay This research is a review of an article by Douglas C. Foyle’s Public Opinion and Foreign Policy: Elite Beliefs as a Mediating Variables. In addition, the latter part of this research evaluates the article and provides recommendations for further possible scholastic contributions. Foyle’s research is focused on the subject area of public opinion and its correlation and influence to foreign policy. The increasing interest of scholars about this subject matter has been immense and is widely acknowledged in recent scholarly contributions in recent times (Foyle 141). Thus, in this research, Foyle seeks to narrow down his focus on the correlation of the influence of public opinion to foreign policy and the elite beliefs of policy makers. This, in its context, establishes the beliefs of policy makers as the mediating variable that determines the possibilities of public opinion to influence foreign policies. Thesis Foyle argues that the beliefs of decision makers on the matter of the influence of public opinion on foreign policies have an actual effect to decision making (141, 144, 164). The research elaborates on this by citing findings which suggest that the influence of public opinion may vary on a number of factors. The factors according to Russet, includes both the decision time and the type of issue under consideration (144). In its argument, the research regards decision makers as the top level policy makers, frequently cited in the study as the leaders who are at the top of the hierarchy; are likely to participate, and has final authority for the decision (144). Public opinion, however, are determined through various representatives such as editorial opinion, polls, letters, etc (144). Foyle cited V. O Key’s definition of public opinion as â€Å"those opinions held by private persons which governments find it prudent to heed. †. Consistent with Key’s perspective, Philip Powlick, relying on interviews with State Department and National Security Council (NSC) officials, discovered policy makers did vary in how they operationalized public opinion. He reported officials relied more often on the news media and elected representatives as indicators of public opinion. They used mass opinion (such as polls and letters) to a lesser extent and other elites and interest group activity least of all. (144) On the other hand, Foyle refers to beliefs as the perceptions of the policy makers on the desirability and importance of public opinion in influencing decisions in foreign policies (145). Furthermore, Holsti defines a belief system as â€Å"the set of lenses through which information concerning the physical and social environment is received. † Also, Vertzberger believes it â€Å"usually include principles and general ideas on the nature of the social and physical environment that constitutes policymaker’s field of action† (144). Logic In this light, the belief system is analyzed with a theoretical framework containing two dimensions; normative beliefs and practical beliefs (141, 145). In this study, both concepts are utilized and measured as the logic which supports Foyle’s argument. Normative beliefs measure the desirability of the public opinion to influence policies in the perspective of the policy maker. According to Foyle, this belief is composed of the judgment of an individual on whether input from public opinion is desirable or not in affecting foreign policy choices (145). On the other hand, practical beliefs measure the level of necessity of public support for a foreign policy to be successful (141). It presents the point of view of policy makers towards the idea of support from the public as to whether it is necessary or not for the success of a foreign policy. This logic further observes the correlation of elite beliefs and the influence of public opinion to foreign policy by using both the normative and practical beliefs as defining dimensions in which forms four possible distinct belief systems; delegate; executor; pragmatist, and guardian. (Foyle 145). These four systems are ideologies that illustrates an individual’s take on both the desirability of public opinion in affecting foreign policies and the level of necessity of the public support. One of the these systems are the delegates who are defined as policy makers who believe public opinion is desirable in influencing foreign policies, and public support is necessary for the success of these policies (145). Executors, however, are defined as those who believe that public opinion is desirable, thus input from others is acceptable but support is not necessary for the success of a policy (146). On the other hand, pragmatists are the ones who do not credit public opinion entirely but they consider public support as a necessity for a chosen policy (146). Lastly, guardians are the ones who block the connections of both the importance of public opinion and the requirement of a public support (147). These four systems are used as a tool to measure the classification of a policy maker in how it views the relationship of the input of public opinion and choices on foreign policies. With all these components utilized as the logic of the study, Foyle believes that categorizing policy makers into these belief systems, and understanding their individual beliefs on the relationship of public input and foreign policies, would further prove his arguments in this study. Also, this logic examines the feasibility of using normative and practical beliefs as a predictor of decision maker’s behavior (147). Research Method The study uses qualitative content analysis to evaluate the interaction between the beliefs and behaviors of policy makers. (147) Foyle employs extensive archival materials available on the beliefs and behavior of President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. Foyle believes that a qualitative content analysis of Eisenhower’s and Dulles’s normative and practical public opinion beliefs establishes them as pragmatists. Based on these beliefs, I outline predictions of decision-making behavior for these two individuals and compare these predictions with decisions made during the Chinese offshore islands crisis in September 1954. (147) There were several steps taken to administer the collection of data and its evaluation. According to Foyle, beliefs can hardly be measured directly, thus it must be inferred from the data which, in this kind, should be retrieved from available statements by the policy makers being examined (148). In this light, the study examined public and private communications, public writings and speeches. These are found in several public sources and archives to come up with a clear characterization of the individual’s beliefs (148). In addition, three types of data were used to consider elite beliefs on public opinion; (1) private communication before and after taking office; (2) public statements before taking office; and (3) unprepared extemporaneous statements in office (149). Since there are reservations to the reliability of the qualitative content analysis, Foyle made use of two methods to deal with this issue (149). Foyle ensures that the beliefs analyses are completed initially before the detailed examination of behavior are reported. This succession, according to Foyle, makes sure that there are no influences by the examination of behavior on the beliefs analysis. In addition, Foyle employed an external party to measure the validity of the analysis and to ensure that there are no unintentional influence findings by that analyst (149). To determine the influence of beliefs to policy maker’s behavior, process training and congruency testing were utilized (Foyle 150). The procedure starts with the identification of the predicted theoretical relationship between the dependent and independent variables. Thereafter, the outcomes of the observations between the dependent and independent variables are determined and examined in relation to the theory’s predictions (150). Therefore, if the outcome is in accordance with the theory, there exists a relationship between the variables.