<p>The aim of this paper is to try to explain how specific, foreign policy decisions are made, and why one state decides to use violence against another state. A qualitative method is used, and text and documents are analysed. The two theoretical points of departure are central within foreign policy analysis: realism´s theories on external threats and constructivism´s theories on ideas´ policy influence. The empirical case chosen is the US decision to use military violence against Iraq. The paper investigates whether the real threat from Saddam Hussein´s Iraq was the cause of the American military attacks, or whether the ideas of leading politicians in the USA were decisive for the decision to invade the country. The main theoretical assumption is that politicians´ ideas – rather than real, external threats – influence their actions. </p><p>The differences between President Clinton´s benevolent Iraq policy and President Bush´s aggressive Iraq policy can be summarized as a result of a combination of a changed external environment and differences in ideas on the use of military violence. The general conclusion is that politicians´ ideas – rather than real, external threats – influence their decision-making on specific foreign policy decisions.</p>
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA/oai:DiVA.org:sh-3892 |
| Date | January 2010 |
| Creators | Delang, Elisabet |
| Publisher | Södertörn University College, School of Social Sciences |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, text |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds