On November 6-8, 2019 I teach a Guest Course on “The Politics of Multinational Military Operations” at the Department of International Relations at Charles University Prague (Syllabus here). Thanks to Head of Department Jan Karlas and Deputy Michal Parízek for the kind invitation! The three-day course introduces participants to current topics surrounding the politics of international security, and specifically political debates about countries’ participation in multinational military operations, taking a comparative perspective. It draws on work from a Special Forum in Contemporary Security Policy, which I co-edited together with Steve Saideman, as well as articles that appeared in in the European Journal of International Security, and West European Politics, the British Journal of Politics and International Relations (a Special Issue co-edited with Dirk Peters and an article co-authored with Philippe Lagassé), among others. The content is split into six sessions, starting with (1) a general introduction to gain an overview over recent political and academic debates surrounding these topics. Individual sessions will focus on (2) party politics and security policy, (3) parliamentary involvement in decision-making on the use of military force, (4) the British parliament and war involvement, (5) coalition and alliance dynamics, including coalition formation, burden-sharing, and coalition withdrawal, and (6) national restrictions in multinational military operations.
Tag: foreign policy analysis
-
DVPW-Tagung zu Methoden der Außenpolitikanalyse
Am 26. und 27. September 2019 findet im Internationalen Begegnungszentrum der Universität Erfurt die Tagung „Methoden der Außenpolitikanalyse: Ansätze, Daten und Perspektiven“ statt. Die Tagung wird von Dr. Patrick A. Mello, Gastwissenschaftler an der Willy Brandt School of Public Policy der Universität Erfurt und Dr. Falk Ostermann von der Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen gemeinsam organisiert und ausgerichtet im Rahmen der Themengruppe Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik der Deutschen Vereinigung für Politikwissenschaft (DVPW). Die theoriegeleitete Außenpolitikforschung (Foreign Policy Analysis) hat sich als eigenständiges Feld innerhalb der politikwissenschaftlichen Disziplin Internationale Beziehungen etabliert. Aus methodologischer Sicht fehlt bislang jedoch eine eingehendere Auseinandersetzung mit vorhandenen Ansätzen, zugrundeliegenden Daten und Entwicklungsperspektiven zur Erforschung von Außenpolitik. Für welche Forschungszwecke sind welche methodischen Ansätze geeignet und was sind die Voraussetzungen für deren Anwendung? Mit welchen qualitativen und quantitativen Daten arbeitet die Außenpolitikanalyse und wie wirkt sich die technologische Entwicklung auf die Datengewinnung aus? Und welche Perspektiven bestehen für die weitere Entwicklung des vorhandenen Methodenspektrums? Im Rahmen der Tagung (Programm) soll diesen Fragen über fünf Panels und 16 Beiträge nachgegangen werden. Abgedeckt werden dabei so unterschiedliche Themen wie Narrativanalyse, Big Data und Social Media, Normen und Diskurs, quantitative und vergleichende Ansätze als auch historische und pragmatische Ansätze. Die Tagung wird durch die Willy Brandt School of Public Policy und die Forschungsförderung der Universität Erfurt unterstützt. Die Veranstaltung steht allen Interessierten offen. Aufgrund der begrenzten Plätze wird um vorherige Anmeldung unter aussenpolitik2019@mailbox.org gebeten.
-
Paths towards Coalition Defection
Article Published in the European Journal of International Security
The European Journal of International Security (Cambridge University Press) has published a first view version of “Paths towards Coalition Defection: Democracies and Withdrawal from the Iraq War“. The open access article PDF is available here. Replication data is hosted a Harvard Dataverse (R script, data, supplement). The article examines democratic war involvement in Iraq across 51 leaders from 29 democracies. It is the first set-theoretic study that covers the entire time frame of coalition operations, from 2003 until 2010. Its counter-intuitive findings document the existence of multiple paths towards coalition defection, emphasizing the importance of casualties and prior commitment. The European Journal of International Security (EJIS), founded in 2016, aims to publish “the cutting-edge of security research”, taking a cross-disciplinary approach that seeks to cover all areas of international and global security. EJIS is a journal of the British International Studies Association (BISA).
Abstract: Despite widespread public opposition to the Iraq War, numerous democracies joined the US-led multinational force. However, while some stayed until the end of coalition operations, and several increased their deployments over time, others left unilaterally. How to explain this variation? While some studies suggest that democratic defection from security commitments is primarily motivated by electoral incentives or leadership change, scholars have not reached a consensus on this issue. To account for the complex interplay between causal factors, this article develops an integrative theoretical framework, using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) on original data on the Iraq War involvement of 51 leaders from 29 democracies. The findings document the existence of multiple paths towards coalition defection. Among others, the results show that: (1) leadership change led to early withdrawal only when combined with leftist partisanship and the absence of upcoming elections; (2) casualties and coalition commitment played a larger role than previously assumed; and (3) coalition defection often occurred under the same leaders who had made the initial decision to deploy to Iraq, and who did not face elections when they made their withdrawal announcements.
-
ISA Toronto 2019
60th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, 27-30th March 2019, Toronto
At the Annual Convention of the ISA in Toronto, I have three program appearances. I contribute a paper to a panel on “Democratic Alliance Reliability and the Global Coalition Against the Islamic State“, chaired and organized by Justin Massie, with Olivier Schmitt as discussant. The panel includes papers from Marina E. Henke, Rasmus Brun Pedersen, Yf Reykers, Jonathan Paquin, Stéfanie von Hlatky, and Justin Massie – a great lineup of scholars, many of which also contributed to our CSP Special Forum 2019 on “The Politics of Multinational Military Operations“, which I co-edited with Steve Saideman. I also take part in the second installment of the “Methods Café: Foreign Policy Analysis – Methods and Approaches“. At ISA 2018 in San Francisco the methods café was nominated as ISA Innovative Panel and due to the popularity of the format Marijke Breuning, Falk Ostermann, and I decided to submit a similar panel for ISA Toronto. We are honored to have an excellent lineup of scholars for the Methods Café, including Klaus Brummer, Rose McDermott, Stephen Benedict Dyson, Stefano Guzzini, Ted Hopf, Mark Schafer, Burcu Bayram, and Soumita Basu join us for the Methods Café! The café brings together scholars that represent diverse methods and approaches in foreign policy analysis. The format provides an informal setting where participants can meet panelists at separate tables to discuss methods-related questions. Please join us for the methods café! Finally, I am part of a roundtable on “Teaching Foreign Policy Analysis at the Undergraduate Level“, chaired and organized by Baris Kesgin. We will be joined by Marijke Breuning, Ozgur Ozdamar, Cristian Cantir, Raul Salgado Espinoza, Jeffrey Lantis, Kai Oppermann, Nicolas Blarel, Bertjan Verbeek, and Akan Malici to discuss our approaches to teaching FPA and the practicalities of classroom settings. The roundtable is sponsored by the Foreign Policy Analysis section of the International Studies Association. The conference website for ISA Toronto 2019 can be found here. There is even an official welcome letter from PM Justin P.J. Trudeau!
-
EISA Workshops Groningen 2018
From 6-9 June 2018, I attended the 5th EISA European Workshops in International Studies (EWIS) at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands. The EWIS format of the European International Studies Association allows scholars to engage in sustained, in-depth discussion over the course of several days, which makes them ideal to explore new topics and ideas. I participated in the workshop “The Politics of Foreign Policy Change – The Role of Policy Entrepreneurs”, co-organized by Tim Haesebrouck and Jeroen Joly (both Ghent University, Belgium). I presented a paper on “Leaders and the Politics of Foreign Policy Change”. The workshop comprised contributions from a group of 14 researchers from Belgium, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, and the United States. The workshop program can be accessed here.
-
Interdisciplinary Conference on Role Theory and German Foreign Policy
Tagung: Von der Zivilmacht zum Europäischen Hegemon? Bundesdeutsche außenpolitische Rollen aus geschichts- und politikwissenschaftlichen Perspektiven
At the Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, I participated in an interdisciplinary conference on role theory and German foreign policy. The two-day conference, co-organized by Klaus Brummer (International Relations) and Friedrich Kießling (Modern and Contemporary History), equally comprised contributions from historians and political scientists. The group of 20 participants included researchers from Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. My own contribution focused on “Roles, Role Performance, and Public Opinion in German Security Policy”. The participants are currently working on a joint publication. The conference program can be accessed here.
-
ISA San Francisco 2018
59th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, 4-7 April 2018, San Francisco
At the Annual Convention of the ISA in San Francisco, I was involved with papers in two panels. The first panel on parliaments and security policy featured articles from our a special issue of the British Journal of Politics and International Relations (co-edited with Dirk Peters). The other panel focused on the politics of multinational military operations: I also took part in a methods café and a roundtable, and served as discussant for one session of the Junior Scholar Symposium. The methods café was an ISA Innovative Panel that brought together scholars that represent diverse methods and approaches in foreign policy analysis (co-organized with Falk Ostermann). The methods café format provides an informal setting where participants can meet panelists at separate tables to discuss methods-related questions. The roundtable sponsored by the Association for Canadian Studies in the United States looked into US-Canadian relations after the first year of the Trump Administration (organized by Carolyn C. James). See the full ISA 2018 program here.
-
Parliaments in Security Policy
BJPIR Special Issue – Parliaments in Security Policy: Involvement, Politicisation, and Influence
The British Journal of Politics and International Relations (BJPIR) has published a Special Issue, guest edited by Patrick A. Mello and Dirk Peters: “Parliaments in Security Policy: Involvement, Politicisation, and Influence”. The special issue focuses on the pivotal democratic institution – parliament – to study legislative involvement in security matters and its effects on policy outcomes. The contributing articles employ a diverse set of theoretical perspectives and methods to explore the role of 11 different parliamentary bodies from a broad range of contemporary Western democracies. BJPIR is a peer reviewed journal of the Political Studies Association of the UK with an Impact Factor of 1.423 (2016) and Rankings of 62/165 in Political Science and 24/86 in International Relations [More Information].
Abstract: “While parliaments have long been neglected actors in the analysis of security policy, a research literature on the subject is growing. Current research is focused primarily on how parliaments, relying on formal legal competences, can constrain governmental policies. However, this research needs expansion in three areas. First, informal sources of parliamentary influence on security policy deserve more systematic attention as the significance of parliaments often hinges on contextual factors and individual decision-makers. Second, we still lack a systematic understanding of the effects of parliamentary involvement on security policy. Finally, the role of parliaments for the politics of security is almost completely uncharted territory. When parliaments become involved in security policy, does it foster transparency and contribute to the politicisation of security policy so that security policy becomes a ‘normal’ political issue? The article reviews current research, derives findings from the contributions to this Special Issue, and spells out their wider implications.” [Read Further]
Introduction to the Special Issue:
Mello, Patrick A., and Dirk Peters (2018) ‘Parliaments in Security Policy: Involvement, Politicisation, and Influence’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745684.
Contributing Articles (in alphabetical order):
Hegemann, Hendrik (2018) ‘Towards ‘Normal’ Politics? Security, Parliaments and the Politicisation of Intelligence Oversight in the German Bundestag’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745683.
Kaarbo, Juliet (2018) ‘Prime Minister Leadership Style and the Role of Parliament in Security Policy’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745679.
Kriner, Douglas L. (2018) ‘Congress, Public Opinion, and an Informal Constraint on the Commander-in-Chief’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745860.
Lagassé, Philippe, and Patrick A. Mello (2018) ‘The Unintended Consequences of Parliamentary Involvement: Elite Collusion and Afghanistan Deployments in Canada and Germany’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745681.
Oktay, Sibel (2018) ‘Chamber of Opportunities: Legislative Politics and Coalition Security Policy’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745680.
Raunio, Tapio (2018) ‘Parliament as an Arena for Politicization: The Finnish Eduskunta and Crisis Management Operations’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745682.
Rosén, Guri, and Kolja Raube (2018) ‘Influence Beyond Formal Powers: The Parliamentarisation of European Union Security Policy’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117747105.
Schade, Daniel (2018) ‘Limiting or Liberating? The Influence of Parliaments on Military Deployments in Multinational Settings’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117746918.
Strong, James (2018) ‘The War Powers of the British Parliament: What Has Been Established and What Remains Unclear?’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745767.
Wagner, Wolfgang (2018) ‘Is There a Parliamentary Peace? Parliamentary Veto Power and Military Interventions from Kosovo to Daesh’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745859.
-
Foreign Policy Analysis
Joining the Editorial Board of Foreign Policy Analysis
I am honored to be joining the Editorial Board of Foreign Policy Analysis, led by Editor-in-Chief Cameron G. Thies and Associate Editors Klaus Brummer, Juliet Kaarbo, Brian Lai, Deborah Welch Larson, and Arlene B. Tickner. I look forward to meeting everyone at ISA San Francisco (Editorial Board Meeting: April 4, 4:30 PM, Parlor 1-4278, Hilton San Francisco Union Square).
“Reflecting the diverse, comparative and multidisciplinary nature of the field, Foreign Policy Analysis provides an open forum for research publication that enhances the communication of concepts and ideas across theoretical, methodological, geographical and disciplinary boundaries. By emphasizing accessibility of content for scholars of all perspectives and approaches in the editorial and review process, Foreign Policy Analysis serves as a source for efforts at theoretical and methodological integration and deepening the conceptual debates throughout this rich and complex academic research tradition. Foreign policy analysis, as a field of study, is characterized by its actor-specific focus. The underlying, often implicit argument is that the source of international politics and change in international politics is human beings, acting individually or in groups. In the simplest terms, foreign policy analysis is the study of the process, effects, causes or outputs of foreign policy decision-making in either a comparative or case-specific manner.” [Read More]
For the current issue of Foreign Policy Analysis, see here.
Reproduced with permission from cover image. Foreign Policy Analysis is published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Studies Association. All rights reserved. Available online at: https://academic.oup.com/fpa. For permissions contact Journals.permissions@OUP.com.
-
Two-Level Games in Foreign Policy Analysis
Chapter Published in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
da Conceição-Heldt, Eugénia and Patrick A. Mello (2017) Two-Level Games in Foreign Policy Analysis, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press (DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.496).
Article Summary: “Whether in multilateral negotiations or bilateral meetings, government leaders regularly engage in “two-level games” played simultaneously at the domestic and the international level. From the two-level-games perspective, executives are seen as “chief negotiators” that are involved in some form of international negotiations for which they ultimately need to gain domestic approval at the ratification stage. This ratification requirement provides the critical link between the international and domestic level but it can be based on formal voting requirements (for instance, mandatory legislative approval in a certain policy area) or more informal ways of ratification such as measures of public opinion and public approval ratings.
With its focus on government leaders as “gatekeepers” and central actors in international negotiations, the two-level games perspective constitutes a distinct approach in foreign policy analysis and serves to reintegrate the subfields of comparative politics and international relations. While there are similarities to a liberal perspective, two-level games emphasize that executives hold a certain degree of autonomy in their decision-making, which cannot be purely derived from their constituencies. Unlike realism, however, the approach recognizes the importance of domestic veto players and institutional constraints. Since its inception in the late 1980s, a vast literature on two-level games has evolved including refinements of its theoretical foundation and applications in various policy areas. Against this background, this essay engages with key controversies in two-level games and foreign policy analysis throughout the last three decades. The discussion is organized along six debates concerning the levels of analysis, domestic political institutions, the interaction between the domestic and international level, relevant actors, their interests and preferences, and the relationship between comparative politics and international relations. The essay concludes with some thoughts on possible future research agendas“ [Read Further]
Keywords: bargaining, domestic politics, two-level games, interests, levels of analysis, negotiation analysis, ratification, veto players, win sets
da Conceição-Heldt, Eugénia and Patrick A. Mello (2017) Two-Level Games in Foreign Policy Analysis, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press (DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.496).