As per Alexander Djerassi, Foreign policy analysis helps us to gain a better understanding of how politicians make decisions about policy and how they interact with the other foreign government and non-government organizations. The field of foreign policy can be described as a nebulous discipline in which a multitude of actors operate within institutions both inside and outside of the state to exert an influence on the process of making decisions. It is beneficial to have analytical models to understand the dynamics of this area and aid in understanding the way that states manage their foreign policies, international relations, and diplomatic activities.
Models of Analysis of Foreign Policy Explained by Alexander Djerassi
There are five major models of analysis of foreign policy which we will explore in this article The rational actor model and the bureaucratic politics model, and the organizational process model.
Rational Actor Model
The most commonly used foreign policy analysis method is the model of the rational actor. It is based on the assumption that the principal person in the foreign policy process is an intelligent individual who is able to be counted upon to make well-informed rational, well-thought-out decisions that maximize the value and benefits perceived to the state.
This model is based on the individual state-level interactions of governments and nations as a basis for analysis. it presumes that there is all the information needed by policymakers to make efficient decision-making and that the actions taken over time are coherent and consistent. There are four key actions in the rational actor’s decision-making process. determine the issue, establish desired outcomes, assess the potential consequences of policies, and then take the best decision to achieve the best possible outcomes.
The rational actor theory can help to understand the motivations and goals behind foreign policy actions. However, those who criticize this theory believe that it is not able to address situations where complete information might not be available or the somewhat subjective concept of rationality or the factors that could hinder rational decision-making.
Bureaucratic Politics Model
Contrary to that model of the rational actor that considers the state as a unidirectional actor, the bureaucratic model analyzes decisions based on the assumption that decisions are made by a variety of competing, independent entities within a state. Alexander Djerassi says Each of these entities has its own perspective on the decision-making process and also its own perspective on what is most beneficial for its own personal, organizational as well as national interest. Each of them tries to achieve their goals, which means that any collective decision is contingent on successful negotiation and the conclusion of a consensus among all the entities.
There are a variety of factors that can influence the decision-making of each participant and the way it accomplishes its objectives, including the relative strength and level of influence of each participant in the group.
Organizational Process Model
Contrary to the two approaches previously mentioned The organizational process model sees the government as a mixture of powerful organizations that work together instead of an individual or groups of partisan organizations. The model analyzes foreign policy choices implemented within the rules of bureaucracy, in which the actions can only be taken in accordance with the proper authorization and adhering to the hierarchy of command in accordance with established procedures along with standard operating protocols or SOP.
But, using this model can help to simplify decision-making through the development of standard protocols for specific situations with certain, quantifiable results. Also, the model of organizational process anticipates the slow pace of bureaucratic procedures and aims to establish a protocol that is easily applied in the case of an emergency.
Inter-Branch Politics Model
Alexander Djerassi explains The model of inter-branch politics is similar to bureaucratic and organizational process models in that it is comprised of separately defined entities or groups. Instead of being focused on one-dimensional goals and outcomes, the inter-branch model assesses the effectiveness of actions and their results on the basis of the efforts and cohesion of the various groups as well as their progress toward reaching their goals together. first presented the model, administrative and organizational structures within as well as outside of states do not work in total independence but instead collaborate and influence one another.
Political Process Model
The model of the political process in the analysis of foreign policies was created through Roger Hilsman in his book, The Politics of Policymaking in Defense and Foreign Affairs. According to Hilsman, the model has many people involved in the foreign policy-making process, which is primarily concentrated in the offices of Presidents and Congress however, there are many other levels of government too. Similar to the bureaucratic model The model of the political process stresses bargaining and the presence of different power centers that seek to accomplish their own goals.
These targets could be in conflict or agree with the goals of other groups. This model is different from the bureaucratic models in that it is more focused on the individual actors and their individual objectives and attitudes towards international politics, rather than on groups or organizations in general. According to Hilsman his theory, the personal philosophy of every political participant is among the primary factors making decisions and explaining them. Some critics of the model claim that it is not sufficiently similar to bureaucratic politics to be able to contribute significantly to the study of foreign policy.
The analysis of foreign policy is crucial to increase our knowledge of the government as well as the processes of political decision-making that take place on the international stage. Every diplomatic approach has a distinct set of negatives and advantages and focuses on the significance of the actors and structures involved as well as the ways they are used to achieve their foreign policy objectives.