Secrecy in International Relations and Foreign Policy

Abstract

Scholarship on the politics of secrecy in international relations and foreign policy has experienced tremendous growth in recent years. This article begins by providing an overview of this literature, analyzing the conditions under which leaders opt for secrecy in both economic and security domains. These motivations differ greatly depending on whether the presumed audience from which a leader keeps a secret is domestic, international, or corporate in nature. Next, it considers methodological innovations and challenges, particularly in the measurement of secrecy. Finally, it reflects on the lessons learned and discusses some exciting questions that scholars could explore in future research. As a burgeoning field within international relations, the study of secrecy offers a variety of promising and potentially fruitful directions.

Do Proxies Provide Plausible Deniability? Evidence From Experiments on Three Surveys

“…Secrecy is a common feature of international politics (Carnegie 2021), and a growing literature seeks to explain why states might attempt to conceal outcomes ranging from military alliances to the resolution of international legal disputes or crises (Hafner-Burton and Victor 2016; Kuo 2020; Kurizaki 2007). Covert action reflects one aspect of secrecy in the international system, whereby states attempt to obscure their involvement in hostile activities targeting another state or political entity.…”

“…To date, there has been relatively little research on public opinion toward secrecy in international politics (Carnegie 2021; Myrick 2019), including whether and how delegating hostile actions to proxies shapes public opinion. I evaluate whether this delegation can influence attributions of blame and demands for retaliation by implementing seven vignette experiments across three surveys of American adults.…”

Abducted by hackers: Using the case of Bletchley Park to construct a theory of intelligence performance that generalizes to cybersecurity

“…But this is changing. Just as espionage and subversion are becoming more prevalent in cyberspace (Gioe et al, 2020), IR scholars are becoming more interested in intelligence and covert action (Carnegie, 2021).…”

Public Reactions to Secret Negotiations in International Politics

“…These questions relate to a growing literature on secrecy in international relations. Much research in this area focuses on why governments employ secrecy in various aspects of foreign policy (e.g., Carson, 2016Carson, , 2018Carnegie andCarson, 2020, 2019;Carson and Yarhi-Milo, 2017;Cormac and Aldrich, 2018;Daugherty, 2006;Haas and Yarhi-Milo, 2020;Hafner-Burton, Steinert-Threlkeld and Victor, 2016;Johnson, 2022;Lester, 2015;McManus and Yarhi-Milo, 2017;Nutt and Pauly, 2021;O'Rourke, 2018;Otto and Spaniel, 2021;Pauly, 2022;Poznansky, 2019Poznansky, , 2020Stasavage, 2004;Schuessler, 2015;Yoder and Spaniel, 2022) and how they navigate trade-offs between the benefits of secrecy and the norms and institutions that facilitate transparency in democratic politics (e.g., Colaresi, 2014;Downes and Lilley, 2010;Forsythe, 1992;Poznansky, 2015;Smith, 2019;Spaniel and Poznansky, 2018). However, we know much less about how the public reacts to secrecy, especially in the context of international negotiations.…”

“…Such assumptions are testable. But in a review of secrecy in international relations, Carnegie (2021) emphasizes that public attitudes towards secrecy are poorly understood. Carnegie writes, “[M]any of the theories of secrecy reviewed previously rely on untested assumptions about the public’s views of certain actions, and of secrecy itself.…”