No abstract

What determines the consequences of economic sanctions? Is there a common explanation for these consequences? This article provides a comprehensive review of the fragmented literature focusing on the consequences of sanctions. We critically discuss the complex relationships between types of sanctions and sanction senders and their targets, as well as the structural factors that account for the specific consequences of different sanction cases. A discussion on the thematic, methodological, and theoretical shortcomings of the existing literature on sanction consequences follows. We argue that a “common approach” to sanction consequences research should be framed within the framework of international interdependence. We also present several nascent trends and propose new directions for sanction researchers and other disciplines.

Over the last twenty years since the introduction of automated coding schemes, research in foreign policy analysis (FPA) has made great advances. However, this automatization process is based on the analysis of verbal statements of leaders to create leadership profiles and has remained largely confined in terms of language. That is, the coding schemes can only parse English-language texts. This reduces both the quality and quantity of available data and limits the application of these leadership profiling techniques beyond the Anglosphere. Against this background, this forum offers five reports on the development of freely available coding schemes for either operational code analysis or leadership trait analysis for languages other than English (i.e., Turkish, Arabic, Spanish, German, and Persian).

This essay evaluates the English School—a prominent approach to the study of international relations—as a “research enterprise” (James 2002). Our exploration begins with an introduction of a “continuum of aggregation” that conveys a given research enterprise, such as the English School, at different conceptual levels. The English School's axioms along with its negative and positive heuristics are identified and evaluated based on the classics and more recent works from Wight, Bull, and others. Conclusions and prospects for further development of the English School complete the review.

Studies of foreign policy are as eclectic as the states in the global system. This paper attempts to provide a framework to facilitate the comparative study of foreign policy. Based on the original model by McGowan and Shapiro (1973), the expanded model here reflects advances in the understanding of the global system as well as the increased internationalization of domestic actors and events. The model will be illustrated by an analysis of Turkish foreign policy with Syria influenced by Turkey's own Kurdish citizenry.The first section of the study begins by presenting a particular ontological approach-a system-oriented model that facilitates understanding of the connection between domestic, or micro, variables and external, or macro, variables. Based on Bunge's (1996) concept of comprehensive ''systemism'', the model facilitates incorporation of both international and domestic variables. The second part of the section presents a foreign policy model that meets the standards set by a system-oriented approach. This approach is increasingly relevant, as traditionally internal disturbances, such as ethnic conflicts, become internationalized. The second section of the paper presents Turkish-Syrian relations concerning the Kurds to illustrate the potential of the model and its variables. In the third section, this case is used to evaluate the explanatory power of the model. The conclusion provides overall generalizations and implications for further research and policy.We have chosen to illustrate the model by exploring the relationship between Turkey's Kurdish citizenry with Turkish-Syrian foreign policy. As will be shown, internal relations between Turkish-Kurds and the national government in Ankara have had a direct influence on the relationship between Turkey and Syria. Both states have, at times, centered their foreign policy decisions on this sometimes violent issue. Theory and ApproachSystemism