US foreign policy during the Cold War has been analysed from a number of perspectives, generating large bodies of literature attempting to explain its origins, its development and its conclusion. Within the discipline of International Relations these debates have tended to be led by scholars focusing on events at the system level. However, there are still many questions left only partially explained. In large part this is because these accounts restrict themselves to a single level of analysis, either the international system, or the structure of the state and society. The first level of analysis, focusing on the role of individuals, has largely been excluded from International Relations. It is often left to historians to incorporate the role of individual decision makers into their studies. The problem for international relations students, however, is that their arguments run the risk of determinism. They come close to advocating that the course of history is shaped by these external forces and there is little if no room for alternate courses to be steered. They have, intentionally or otherwise, removed human agency and choice from the equation. This thesis argues that structural theories, and any approach that limits itself to one level of analysis, are inadequate to explain the development of US foreign policy. Instead, it is necessary to incorporate the first level of analysis in order to bring human agency back into International Relations and provide a more detailed explanation of US foreign policy. The present study proposes an analytical framework which incorporates presidential agency into a multi-level analysis of US foreign policy during the Cold War. Drawing on Foreign Policy Analysis, International Relations theory, presidential studies and the historiography of US foreign policy, this thesis constructs a multi-level case study comparison of the foreign policies of Presidents Truman and Reagan. It argues that the worldview of the president is central to agenda setting in US foreign policy making and that the management style of the president influences both decision-making and the implementation of US foreign policy. Evidence to support this is drawn from detailed empirical analysis of Truman’s foreign policy of containment in Korea and Reagan’s foreign policy of rollback in Nicaragua.

This thesis represents an attempt to make an original contribution to knowledge about transatlantic institutions and transatlantic governance. It investigates attempts in the 1990s to foster a 'new transatlantic dialogue' between the EU and the US, through three bilateral agreements: the Transatlantic Declaration (1990), the New Transatlantic Agenda (1995) and the Transatlantic Economic Partnership (1998). The thesis questions whether and to what extent the relationship has been institutionalised into a structure for transatlantic governance, and how the composition of transatlantic institutions impacts the way the transatlantic actors govern. Consideration is given to both 'who' governs in transatlantic relations and 'how', as evidence is sought to prove or disprove the claim that a decentralisation of decision-making powers has resulted in 'policy setting' and 'policy shaping' by lower level civil servants and non-state actors participating in transgovernmental and transnational institutions. Three policy sectors-the EU-US anti-trafficking in women campaigns, the EU-US Mutual Recognition Agreements and the EU-US banana dispute-serve as case studies for the transatlantic policy process.

Current studies of regional integration in North America claim that this process is limited to the entering of intergovernmental agreements that aim to expand and enhance crossborder flows of goods and capitals between Mexico, Canada and the US. Such studies claim that the political effects of the process on nation-states are limited and constrained by the decisions of the national governments. In contrast, this thesis argues that the actions of transnational actors have increased the policy interdependence between the three countries in the arenas of environmental protection, labour cooperation and protection of foreign direct investment. Transnational actors have used, applied and interpreted the rules originally created by the intergovernmental agreements –NAFTA, NAAEC, BECA and NAALC– and have subsequently demanded additional and improved rules. Regional institutions have in turn responded to these demands by supplying new and improved regional rules. In doing so, transnational actors and regional institutions have furthered the policy interdependence between the three countries. This phenomenon, known in other contexts as institutionalisation, demonstrates that the process of regional integration in North America is more substantial than previous studies claim. In addition, it illustrates the relevance of the theories of Liberal Intergovernmentalism and Supranational Governance to the analysis of the emergence and development of the North American integration process.

This thesis conducts an in-depth empirical analysis of the way in which energy was constructed as a security issue in the United States and China between 2004 and 2012. The core argument is that energy security is contested: it means different things to different people in different contexts. State energy security discourse and practice in both states constructed energy largely as a national security issue, emphasising the need to secure the state in economic and/or strategic terms by providing secure energy supplies at stable prices. This is found to be problematic and ‘negative’, as encouraging competition over finite fuels perpetuates insecurity for states, and fails to secure human beings and the environment. Thus, it does not produce security. However, there are a number of competing marginalised energy security constructions, which forward a more ‘positive’ notion of energy security – emphasising sustainability and human welfare. By illustrating the contested nature of energy security, this thesis contributes the first in-depth critical empirical analysis of energy security constructions. It thus brings together insights from critical approaches to security with the empirical area of energy security to understand how energy security is constructed, while raising important theoretical questions about the importance of context for understanding the value of security and the potential for moving towards more ‘positive’ energy security discourse and practice.

The objective of this thesis is twofold. First, by employing the norm ‘life’ and ‘death’ cycles grounded in constructivist scholarship, the research aims at determining to what extent the domestic norm against assassination in the United States has been weakened in the light of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the advent of new technologies, namely Predator drones. To that end, the study conceptualizes the norm and provides a historical look of targeted killings as a foreign policy tool. It traces and evaluates normative assumptions about assassination as a tool of state policy from the 1970s to the end phases of Barack Obama presidency, concluding that there has been substantial erosion to this normative prohibition. Secondly, the presented thesis also attempts to make a more theoretical contribution by observing mechanisms by which the normative change transpired, demonstrating that in the case of targeted drone strikes, the government relied on quasi-secrecy in order to avoid overt justification. The study concludes that there is a strong link between government initiated quasi-secrecy – a tool that was applied deliberately and strategically, and successful legitimization of a practice that otherwise might have appeared highly controversial.

This thesis focuses on US-Italian relations and cultural diplomacy in the early Cold War. Particular attention is devoted to the Congress for Cultural Freedom, an organization of left-wing anti-Communist intellectuals established in 1950 and financed by the CIA. Instead of looking at this organization from a transnational perspective, this work has as the starting point the local dimension of it. In particular, the Italian branch of the CCF: Associazione Italiana per la Libertà della Cultura and the journal Tempo Presente. Differently from other European contexts, the Italian cultural experiment failed in promoting a transnational anti-Communist culture due to domestic factors such as: the political establishment, non-governmental groups with a socialising function and the political culture of the country. This is a contribution taking further the investigation of the Cold War by emphasizing the importance of going “local” for a thorough understanding of transnational relations.

This thesis generates a greater understanding of the George W. Bush administration’s Freedom Agenda for the Middle East and North Africa. It is motivated by two central research questions: How and why was the Freedom Agenda developed? And, how was the Freedom Agenda constituted? To address these questions, a constructivist institutionalist methodology is developed. The value of this undertaking, is that it theorises the relationship between the events of September 11, 2001, and the rise of the Freedom Agenda. Consequently, this research focuses on the narrative constructed in the aftermath of the “crisis”, and how this laid discursive tracks for the evolution of the Freedom Agenda. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that the Bush administration appropriated and articulated multiple discourses into a distinctive ideological-discursive formation, which in turn, sedimented particular definitions of concepts such as ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’. This created a new policy paradigm, which failed to address the ‘conflict of interests’ problem central to US-Middle East relations. As a result, the Freedom Agenda demonstrated a commitment to regional stability and the gradual reform of ally regimes, whilst seeking to challenge regimes hostile to the US. It was a policy caught between promoting democracy and domination.

Despite the waning prominence of the vast and diverse literature on globalization, the debate remains unresolved, as globalization’s logics continue to buttress neoliberal economics (Hay & Smith, 2013; Smith, 2005). As Cameron and Palan posited thirteen years ago, “the spread of globalization in practice continues unabated” (2004). Of importance herein is how neoliberal globalization is understood, as a concept and in material terms (Marsh, 2009), as well as how it has spread spatiotemporally (Peck & Tickell, 2012). Contributing to constructivist globalization scholarship, this thesis argues that ideas are central to how “material reality” or “globalization in practice” is shaped and understood (Schmidt, 2013). Henceforth, it interrogates the space for alternatives to globalization’s logics by focusing on the ways ideas shape policy and normative understandings by (respectively) examining the IMF-Argentine consultations (1976-2006), and the discourses of the financial press (1997-2006). The methodology builds on Broome and Seabrooke’s (2007) historical content analysis. The findings show that in both cases ideas entertained came from within globalization’s logics, resulting in policies and a discourse that reflected and reinforced these ideas. Ultimately, this thesis shows the centrality of ideas to “real outcomes,” as well as how they are used to construct understandings thereof.

This thesis examines the religious/political relationship between George W. Bush (the 43rd President of the United States) and conservative Catholics. Served by the over-lapping ideology of conservatism it presents a unique insight into the pragmatic, strategic and functionary role each played in the political service of the other. Unlike other studies this work argues that conservative Catholics, not Evangelicals, were at the vanguard of Bush’s political drive. Although a transitory arrangement – centred around a select set of characters - the religious, ideological and political dynamic surrounding Bush was purposefully informed by careful, empirical analysis. Apprised by decades of examples: of challenges and changes, mistakes and opportunities, we see certain individuals move beyond ideas and analysis into coordinated organisation. The narrative of this transition, its players and outcomes argues that faith and politics deliberately negotiated with one another to strategically gain a moment for political traction. This negotiation was not, as has been frequently argued, a negotiation with religion or theology singularly in mind; but politics and policy. Mutual ideology, political affiliation and core aspects of their particular religious creeds facilitated this.

The overall contribution of this thesis is to develop a conceptualisation of empathy for the security dilemma, and to empirically explore this conceptualisation through a counterfactual case study of US foreign policy towards Iran, 2001-2010. It achieves this in three stages. First, it shows how the concept of empathy has long been implicitly central to security dilemma theorising. In particular, it demonstrates that security dilemma theorists have drawn upon implicit and unspecified notions of empathy in order to answer the crucial question of how security dilemma dynamics between adversaries can be overcome. Second, it addresses this omission by developing a conceptualisation of empathy that speaks to the unique context of the security dilemma. In mediating between different understandings of empathy across a number of literatures, the thesis proposes a conceptualisation that emphasises the importance of reflexivity and notions of difference. And third, it uses an innovative counterfactual methodology to empirically map the dynamics of empathy onto US foreign policy towards Iran. In doing so the thesis shows how empathy can promote cooperation between adversaries in some instances, but can be inhibited by broader contextual factors in others.