Content area
Full Text
Scholars are currently focusing substantial attention on the influence of domestic political variables on foreign policy behavior. The scope of ongoing research is broad, and cannot be adequately addressed in a brief literature review. Indeed, the field is sufficiently vast that even the study of specific variables can involve a wide range of important questions. For example, Holsti surveys a large number of studies on "the nature, structure and impact of public opinion" and notes that longstanding consensus views have "come under vigorous challenge." (1) The spotlight here is on the relationship between public opinion and foreign policy outcomes, which Holsti finds to be "by far the least developed of the areas."
Nonetheless, an impressive amd methodologically diverse body of work by Page and Shapiro, Russett and colleagues, Hinckley, Graham, and others considers the alleged link between public opinion and foreign policy outcomes. (2) According to these recent studies, public opinion can have a substantial influence on the international behavior of states, especially democracies like the United States. Page and Shapiro and Hartley and Russett use quite different quantitative correlational data, but agree that policy changes follow shifts in public opinion. (3) Moreover, after studying decades of U.S. nuclear arms negotiating positions towards the Soviet Union, Graham found that "public opinion played an important role both in framing the debate and in determining the outcomes." (4)
This new research, which suggests policymaker responsiveness to public opinion, could eventually alter scholarly understanding of state behavior and world politics. As will be elaborated below, these findings challenge central assumptions of realism, often considered the dominant paradigm in the field. Social theorists, as those exploring domestic variables might be called, claim that realism "seriously undervalues" the role public opinion plays in the "formation and conduct of a democratic nation's foreign policy." (5)
Yet realists might respond that they are justified in their skepticism because of important shortcomings in current research. For instance, the correlational results cited by the social theorists are open to speculation that foreign policy leaders simply manipulate opinion in a desired direction. If this occurs, then policymakers are not responsive to public opinion. Page and Shapiro argue that public opinion swings are "important causes" of shifts in both domestic and foreign policies. However, throughout their...