Precedents, parliaments, and foreign policy: historical analogy in the House of Commons vote on Syria

Kaarbo, Juliet; Kenealy, Daniel

doi:10.1080/01402382.2016.1240408

Cited by 41 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the empirical basis for this finding is very small: in the four countries under study, only two MPs of the Front national in the 2012-2017 legislature of the Assemblée nationale and a single MP of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) in the 2015-2017 House of Commons represent radical-right parties; additionally, these MPs took only part in a small number of votes. 16 The 2013 vote on Syria was unusual in a number of other ways as well (Kaarbo and Kenealy, 2016). MPs actually voted on two motionsone supported by the Government (reflected in our data) and one introduced by Labour.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 72%

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Wagner

Herranz-Surrallés

Kaarbo

et al. 2018

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes to current debates on the politicization of international politics by examining party-political contestation of peace and security missions. It is guided by two inter-related questions, (a) to what extent deployment decisions are contested amongst political parties and (b) what drives such contestation. We examine data from a new data set on parliamentary votes on deployment decisions in France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom and from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey. Against conventional wisdom and in an effort to address the often-overlooked role of political parties, we find that military deployments have been systematically contested amongst political parties across Europe. Further, we find that contestation is driven by the left/right axis, as opposed to newer cleavages captured here by the so-called gal/tan axis. We also find evidence that patterns of contestation depend on parties' positions in government or opposition, a factor we relate to bureaucratic and international pressures on the parties in office, and to political opportunities for opposition parties.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 72%

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Wagner

Herranz-Surrallés

Kaarbo

et al. 2018

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Curiously, little conceptual link has been done between the scholarship studying extreme parties' connections with (and interest in) Russia on one hand, and the increasing academic interest in the study of the role of political parties in foreign policy on the other hand. The scholarship on the role of parties in foreign policy has focused on the role of ideology, and has seen a true explosion of the scholarship in recent years (Blarel & van Willigen, 2017;Fonck, Haesebrouck, & Reykers, 2019;Herbel, 2017;Kaarbo & Kenealy, 2017;Mello, 2012Mello, , 2014Raunio & Wagner, 2017;Wagner, Herranz-Surrallés, Kaarbo, & Ostermann, 2018). However, understanding European parties' past and present view on Russia is crucial for sketching prospects for future cooperation (or confrontation) with Russia.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Partisan views of Russia: Analyzing European party electoral manifestos since 1991

Onderčo

2019

Contemporary Security Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The connection between Russia and European political parties has been in the scholarly and popular spotlight recently. While scholars focus on the connection between the far right (and populist) parties and Russia, they have all but ignored the rapidly increasing literature on the role of political parties in foreign policy. This article provides an attempt to bridge these literatures. After analyzing a corpus of party manifestos, the results suggest that there is temporal variation in how European parties have seen Russia since the end of the Cold War. European parties tended to be mostly positive in their views of Russia prior to 2015. Geography and ideology were much less important as a factor in explaining party positions. While some ideological groups share attitudes across different borders, the overall influence of ideology on attitudes toward Russia is minimal.

show abstract

“…As Kratochwil (1989: 223) noted, "the task of analogies is to establish similarities among different cases or objects in the face of (striking) dissimilarities." Analogical reasoning is important for foreign policy-making by governments and parliaments in international crises (Hemmer, 2000;Kaarbo and Kenealy, 2017;Khong, 1992), in other foreign policy situations (Breuning, 2003;Vertzberger, 2002), and for precedent-based legal decisionmaking (Lamond, 2016;Schauer, 1987;Stone Sweet, 2004), which may be considered a "formalized application of analogical reasoning" (Holyoak, 2005: 117). As "a fundamental aspect of human cognition" (Gentner and Smith, 2012: 130), analogical reasoning is also highly relevant for day-to-day decision-making in IOs.…”

Section: Analogy-based Collective Decision-making In Iosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analogy-based collective decision-making and incremental change in international organizations

Dörfler

Gehring

2021

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine how analogy-based collective decision-making of member states contributes to the endogenous emergence of informal rules and the incremental change of international organizations (IOs). Decision-making by analogy is an important characteristic of day-to-day decision-making in IOs. Relating current decisions to previous ones through analogies drives incremental change and simultaneously reinforces organizational resilience. Whereas the foreign policy analysis literature shows that analogies can be used as cognitive shortcuts in fuzzy and complex foreign policy situations, we focus on their use to overcome social ambiguity (indeterminacy) of coordination situations in IOs. Drawing on psychological conceptions, we develop two micro-level mechanisms that elucidate the effects of analogy-based collective decision-making in member-driven IOs. Analogy-based collective decisions emphasizing similarity between a current situation and previous ones follow an established problem schema and produce expansive and increasingly well-established informal rules. Collective decisions that are analogy-based but emphasize a crucial difference follow different problem schemas and trigger the emergence of additional informal rules that apply to new classes of cases. The result is an increasingly fine-grained web of distinct organizational solutions for a growing number of problems. Accordingly, an IO can increasingly facilitate collective decision-making and gains resilience. Empirically, we probe these propositions with a documentary analysis of decision-making in the Yugoslavia sanctions committee, established by the United Nations Security Council to deal with a stream of requests for exempting certain goods or services from the comprehensive economic embargo imposed on Yugoslavia in response to the War in the Balkans.

show abstract

Precedents, parliaments, and foreign policy: historical analogy in the House of Commons vote on Syria

Cited by 41 publications

References 32 publications

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Party politics at the water’s edge: contestation of military operations in Europe

Partisan views of Russia: Analyzing European party electoral manifestos since 1991

Analogy-based collective decision-making and incremental change in international organizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About