Foreign policy determinants: Comparing realist and domestic-political models of foreign policy

Conflict Management and Peace Science

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 149-163

  Souva, Mark ^a  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Congress; Liberalism; Model testing; Realism

Indexed keywords

EID: 29744466076     PISSN: 07388942     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07388940590948574     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Aldrich, J. R., and D. W. Rohde. 2000. The consequences of party organization in the House: The role of the majority and minority parties in conditional party government. In Polarized politics, eds. J. Bond and R. Fleisher. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
2. Bond, J. R., and R. Fleisher. 1990. The President in the legislative arena. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Clarke, K. A. 2001. Testing nonnested models of international relations: Reevaluating realism. American Journal of Political Science 45(3): 724-744.
4. Clarke, K. A. 2003. Nonparametric model discrimination in international relations. Journal of Conflict Resolution 47(1): 72-93.
5. Destler, I. M., L. Gelb, and A. Lake. 1984. Our own worst enemy: The unmaking of American foreign policy. New York: Simon and Schuster.
6. Doyle, M. 1986. Empires. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
7. Elman, C. 1996. Horses for courses: Why not neoreal ist theories of foreign policy? Security Studies 6(1): 7-53.
8. Fearon, J. D. 1998. Domestic politics, foreign policy, and theories of international relations. Annual Review of Political Science 1: 289-313.
9. Gilpin, R. 2000. The challenge of global capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10. Gowa, J. 1998. Politics at the water's edge: Parties, voters, and the use of force abroad. International Organization 52(2): 307-324.
11. Gowa, J. 1999. Ballots and bullets: The elusive democratic peace. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12. Jacobson, G. C. 2000. Party polarization in national politics: The electoral connection. In Polarized politics, eds. J. Bond and R. Fleisher. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
13. Jentleson, B. W., and R. L. Britton. 1998. Still pretty prudent: Post-Cold War American public opinion on the use of military force. Journal of Conflict Resolution 42(4): 395-417.
14. Kaempfer, W. H., and A. D. Lowenberg. 1992. International economic sanctions: A public choice perspective. Boulder, CO: Westview.
15. Krauthammer, C. 1990-1991. The unipolar moment. Foreign Affairs 70(1): 23-33.
16. Lakatos, I. 1970. Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In Criticism and the growth of knowledge, eds. I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave. New York: Cambridge University Press.
17. Layne, C. 1993. The unipolar illusion: Why new great powers will rise. International Security 17(4): 5-51.
18. Lindsay, J. 1986. Trade sanctions as policy instruments: A re-examination. International Studies Quarterly 30: 153-73.
19. McCormick, J. M., and E. R. Wittkopf. 1990. Bipartisanship, partisanship, and ideology in congressional-executive foreign policy relations, 1947-1988. Journal of Politics 52(4): 1077-1100.
20. McCormick, J. M., and E. R. Wittkopf. 1992. At the water's edge: The effects of party, ideology, and issues on congressional foreign policy voting, 1947-1988. American Politics Quarterly 20: 26-53.
21. Mearsheimer, J. 1990. Back to the future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War. International Security 15(1): 5-56.
22. Mearsheimer, J. 2001. The tragedy of great power politics. New York: Norton.
23. Meernik, J. 1993. Presidential support in Congress: Conflict and consensus on foreign and defense policy. The Journal of Politics 55(3): 569-587.
24. Miller, W. E., and D. E. Stokes. 1963. Constituency influence in Congress. American Political Science Review 57(1): 45-56.
25. Ostrom, C. W., and B. L. Job. 1986. The president and the political use of force. American Political Science Review 79: 334-358.
26. Ostrom, C. W., and D. Simon. 1985. Promise and performance: A dynamic model of presidential popularity. American Political Science Review 79(2): 334-358.
27. Prins, B. C. 2001. Domestic politics and interstate disputes: Examining U.S. MID involvement and reciprocation, 1870-1992. International Interactions 26(4): 411-438.
28. Prins, B. C., and B. W. Marshall. 2001. Congressional support of the president: A comparison of foreign, defense, and domestic policy decision-making during and after the Cold War. Presidential Studies Quarterly 31(4): 660-679.
29. Rohde, D. W. 1991. Parties and leaders in the postreform house. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. True, J. 2004. Tracking the purposes of government: National government spending, 1947-2003, http://dept.lamar.edu/polisci/TRUE/BudgetProjectIndex.htm
31. Walt, S. M. 1998. International relations: One world, many theories. Foreign Policy Spring 29-46.
32. Waltz, K. 1979. Theory of international politics. New York: Random House.
33. Waltz, K. 1993. The emerging structure of international politics. International Security 18(2): 44-79.
34. Waltz, K. 1996. International politics is not foreign policy. Security Studies 6(1): 54-57.
35. Waltz, K. 1997. Evaluating theories. American Political Science Review 91(4): 913-917.
36. Wildavsky, A. 1966. The two presidencies. Trans-Action 4: 7-14.
37. Wohlforth, W. 1999. The stability of a unipolar world. International Security 24(1): 5-41.