Relations International 2.16-2.23 We use models to predict, not to look backwards Large Groups Assume people in these groups have some things in common -public opinion, American public, etc National character -"warlike" Germans Smaller groups Interest groups Even smaller groups "the elite" Organizations -bureaucracies, media groups -decision making group -political leader of country Most research on "groups" is confined 1) looks only to Western Countries 2) research done mostly after WWII Public opinion usually very poor, but sometimes they latch onto an issue -good example: Panama Canal -Reagan advocated giving it away in 1976 GOP primary race -politicians try to shape or shift public opinion w/ stump speeches -takes time to significantly affect public opinion "Rally around the Flag" -short term effect of public policy is to rally around the leader Cambodia is a good example -before invasion, 9% wanted invasion -after, 50% supported it Four things people look at regarding foreign policy 1) Peacekeeping a. Example of pub argument that leads to shoving; campus police will separate them, won't care why they're fighting, just want to stop fight b. American people are more supportive than otherwise if this is the case 2) Humanitarian a. More supportive here than with peacekeeping 3) Political change a. More supportive here than with Humanitarian
4) Threat to U.S. interests a. More supportive here than with political change Americans averse to casualties and women tend to be more averse to use of force than men Prior to 1991 Gulf War, pollsters knew war was going to start -surveys indicated vast support for removing Hussein from Kuwait -support rises from about 60-80% after action is taken -this suggests that Pres. Bush 41 had about 20 point "rally" Prior to 2003 Iraq War -about 60% support invasion before war -about 77% approval after action is taken Perhaps biggest "rally around the flag/leader" gains came after 9/11 -about 55% approval rating before 9/11; pretty flat -6 weeks after 9/11, rating was almost 90% -again, public "rallied" around the President How public opinion works -most courses/textbooks will have approach to public opinion that is well epitomized by George Keenan: "It is similar to one of those prehistoric monsters with a body as long as this room, and a brain the size of a pin." -Keenan didn't have high regard for public opinion -public opinion, while generally uninformed, is not too bad -aggregate public opinion on any particular foreign policy issue tends to be consistent over a period of time; changes in response to something that happened -public usually grants leader fair amount of slack regarding foreign policy -however, they still resist the leader's policies if he goes to far one way on policy
24 surveys taken of American people taken throughout Vietnam War -much different than today, where there are hundreds regarding Pres. Bush Public opinion during Vietnam protest movement had basically no impact during war "Folklore" on Vietnam Protests change in public opinion turned country against war lead to policy change Others will say that the media played a substantial role in shaping public opinion
Truth about Vietnam and public opinion Media was initially favorable to Vietnam War
Even though it wasn't a TV war, Korean War saw similar drops in public opinion 2.21.2006 Young people were more likely to support Vietnam War, even though support was falling for all age groups More education= more likely to support war (and, in general, to support gov'ts policy) Political beliefs are established before one attends college and usually don't change Problem w/ protestors: people don't like them In 1968, very few people approved of protestors only 25% of people who opposed war had over 50% approval of protestors Polling was conducted extensively through only three wars: Korean, Vietnam, Iraq today Live Media No Sort of Yes Protest movement No Yes Maybe?
Korean Vietnam Iraq
Single most important factor in affecting public opinion about war is # of casualties log10(casualties) For every factor of 10 that casualties go up, support for war drops about 15 points death As rates pick up, Korean/Vietnam/Iraq wars indicate that it takes more casualties to affect people Tet Offensive: a lot of people backed war until Tet; in aggregate, though, it didn't have much affect on public opinion war approval rating dropped 4% after Tet Media can put things on people's agenda (3 levels of paying attention: not, somewhat, are paying attention) Level of awareness Low Awareness Medium Awareness Susceptibility to Influence Low susceptibility, not paying attention If opinion leaders united, follow government; if not , follow leaders with compatible views Low susceptibility; paying attention, but already formed opinion
High Awareness
Public more focused on domestic issues than foreign policy issues Jan. 26-29, 35% focused on foreign, 59% domestic Elites 1) Political power not distributed evenly in most countries 2) We can ID those with and without power 3) Ones that have power are similar in one way or another We talk about "elites" as a single group because of their power "Self-perpetuating" those in elite "choose the new folks" Elite is autonomous and not answerable to anyone Why do we care about elites? They're more likely to make foreign policy and be in upper levels of government Elites pay attention more, have more information Elite views from issue to issue are more consistent than that of general public Political scientists like to compare elite opinion with public opinion Most people can be characterized on foreign policy based on where they stand regarding two dimensions: Cooperative Internationalism -idea that U.S. can't "go it alone" internationally Militant Internationalism -concerns how one feels about "big threats" and if we have to be prepared to use military force to deal with those threats People can be "high" or "low" on CI or MI (so, four choices of where one can be) Easy to survey public opinion, not easy to measure elite opinion Elite's are more likely to be in certain occupations -e.g. CEO more likely to be in elite than night clerk
Support Cooperative Internationalism Accomodationists Elite: 35 Public 21 Elite: 6 Public: 26 Isolationists Elite: 50 Public: 23 Elite: 10 Public: 30 Hardliners Oppose Cooperative Internationalism Internationalists
(left side is "oppose militant internationalism," right side "support militant internationalism")
2.23.2006 Political scientists rarely focus on study of individuals 1991: Robert Masky attempts to grapple w/ naval arms race b/w/ Britain and Germany British determined to have world's largest navy Germany's aggressive expansion Is China the next Germany? One study of individual is the biography, but most political scientists don't do this Non-routine: event that isn't normal; e.g. registrar puts you in Orgo by accident Not clear what's going on: information overload (many countries/intel. agencies have more information than they can absorb) post-9/11: so much information that some reports don't make big impact Surprise/Stress: Stalin would manufacture enemies Killed over half of 1,966 delegates to his party convention Some argue he became paranoid Understanding Soviet Union when he was in power relies on understanding Stalin Woodrow Wilson thought League of Nations would have prevented future wars Wilson ultimately told senators to vote against treaty -this goes back to Wilson's childhood -had a demanding father -couldn't tolerate disagreement (dissent reflected lack of love) submitted to dad, couldn't submit to anyone else; compromise bad Some concern that Versailles Treaty would take away U.S. sovereignty Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge puts amendments to treaty; "killer amendments" Wilson is opposed to amendments b/c he doesn't want to compromise
Saddam Hussein upbringing influenced how he behaved as leader Tortured people in army, had tortuous foreign policy As a universal approach to studying leaders, we have to be cautious; because some leaders had mental/youth problems, that doesn't mean all have issues Psycho-histories: typically tell convincing story about leaders, but don't usually reflect what that leader will due next (e.g. "The Mind of Adolf Hitler")