Introduction
‘’I have come across men of letters who have written history without taking part in the public affairs, and politicians who have concerned themselves with producing events without thinking about them. I have observed that the first are always inclined to find general causes, whereas the second, living in the midst of disconnected daily facts, are prone to imagine that everything is attributable to particular incidents and that the wires they pull are the same as those that move the world. It is to be presumed that both are equally deceived.’’ (Alexis de Tocqueville, 1849).
States have goals (political, economic, social, etc.) which they try to pursue in the international system. Many of such goals transcend their territorial environments and so they will require the cooperation of other states in the system to achieve these national objectives. To this end, a state necessarily has to be in continuous communication with its external environment. It is the totality of this communication that is commonly referred to as foreign policy.
Nature of Foreign Policy
A foreign policy consists of executing the state’s goals in line with its national interests within the international system. It is the aggregate of a country’s national interest which results from the interaction of internal and external forces as perceived by the foreign policy decision makers. The approaches used are strategically employed to interact with other countries. In recent times however, due to the deepening level of globalization and transnational activities, relations and interactions have been known to exist between state and non-state actors in the international system. These relations in their own way have influenced several foreign policies between nation states.
Thus, ‘’Foreign Policy is the way a state relates to the world and the way the world relates to the state.’’ (Soremekun, 2012). Gibson (1994) defines it as a well-rounded comprehensive plan, based on knowledge and experience, for conducting the business of the government with the rest of the world. It can be seen that Foreign Policy bridges the gap between two environments: domestic and external environments. These determinants therefore, inform the settings in which Foreign Policy is made.
Determinants of Foreign Policy
Foreign policy environment is composed of the domestic, psychological and external variables (factors, dynamics, structures and processes) that determine and fuel foreign policy actions. It is also the sum total of the environment within which foreign policy actors operate.
The domestic environment is the aggregation of setting vital components which have some bearing on the operational behaviour and capability profile of any state. These vital components must be in aggregation not in isolation. It is composed of the location of the country (size and geography), Endowment natural resources and human resources, the nature of the political system, the population (nature and quality), the structure of society, quality of leadership and many more.
The external environment refers to the configuration of power, the political and economic dynamics and institutional frameworks and structures which define the options and policy choices of actors outside a state’s territory. It is the ultimate recipient of every Foreign Policy. The external environment provides the stimuli of every Foreign Policy. It is asymmetrical. Asymmetrical interdependence is the current feature of international relations, because certain countries have something that powerful states are looking for. And there are certain tool to mitigate this inequality in the international system such as regional groupings (EU, BRICS) and some years ago, the Non-Alignment Movement.
The psychological environment features policy makers basic experiences, it is subjective not objective. It is influenced by people’s idiosyncrasy. It is the most important environment. What perceive to be the reality determines the Foreign Policy.
Recipient(final destination
Elite
External Environment Psychological Environment Domestic Environment
Interprets
Graph by Timothew Lawal
- Historical and Cultural Influence
The social and cultural conventions of a nation additionally profoundly impact the Foreign Policy. By and large, individuals having a brought together normal culture and chronicled experience can seek after a successful Foreign Policy as a result of the help of all areas of society who share similar qualities and recollections. Similarly significant are the procedures through which the substance of shared standards and practices of society, as recognized from the level of solidarity that underpins them shape the plans that are made and the exercises that are embraced concerning the outside world.
India’s anxieties of China and Pakistan are the result of their verifiable conventions. India and China have somewhat retired their chronicled doubt so as to clear ground for their common exchange. It is accepted by the Complex Interdependence scholars that in the current time of relationship, it is profoundly unrealistic that the two nations would do battle.
- Size and Geography
The size of a state’s region just as its populace incredibly impacts its Foreign Policy. By and large, the pioneers and individuals of nations with little domain and populace don’t anticipate that their nation should convey incredible load in global undertakings. Then again, the pioneers and individuals of huge nations are prepared to accept exceptional obligations. Size has been a factor in the Foreign Policies of the U.S.A., Russia, China, India, Brazil, France and others.
Be that as it may, at times even little states which have rich assets additionally leave a profound effect on world legislative issues. For instance, Britain, a little nation, assumed driving job in world legislative issues in the nineteenth and mid twentieth century. In our own occasions the oil-rich nations of the Middle East, however little in size are assuming a noteworthy job in universal legislative issues.
Then again, huge states like Canada and Australia have not had the option to seek after elective Foreign Policy. Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) which appeared after the breaking down of the Soviet Union, however very enormous in size, can’t assume an elective job in contemporary universal relations.
The topography of a nation, including its fertility, climate, location in relation to their land masses, and water-ways etc. also influence the country’s foreign policy. It is a major factor in determining self-sufficiency of a country.
The role played by the English Channel in the development of Britain as a major naval power and consequently as an imperial power is well known. The impact of the Atlantic Ocean on the US Foreign Policy has been consistently there. Indian Foreign Policy currently certainly bears the impact of the geological area of India as the biggest littoral condition of the Indian Ocean.
For the most part, land-bolted nations, countries in the tropics and those circumscribing a superpower are less independent in contrast with the nations which approach warm-water ports or are situated in the mild zones and far expelled from superpowers. For instance in the nineteenth century, USA embraced independent approach mainly because of its geological area. In spite of the fact that the significance of geographic elements is recognized nearly at all hands, its significance has impressively declined because of innovative and logical turns of events.
- Population
The human power establishes another determinant of Foreign Policy. The quality of a country relies on the quality and amount of its human factor. The gigantic populace of China empowered it to seek after a mighty international strategy. Then again, the falling birth rate in France constrained her to toe a frail Foreign Policy during the between war period. Subjectively, the populace ought to be sound, taught and prosperous. It ought to likewise have specialized expertise. It is be that as it may, to be noticed that the number of inhabitants in a nation must be assessed according to its different properties. In the event that the assets of a nation are not adequate to meet the prerequisites of the enormous populace, the last may represent a genuine test to the very presence of the state. Be that as it may, if there are adequate assets to meet the prerequisites of an enormous populace, at that point it positively adds to the intensity of the state, as this may empower it to form its international strategy likewise. Examples from USA and the ancient Soviet Union’s history can be cited to prove this point. On the opposite side on the off chance that the state has adequate normal assets however less populace, at that point it will most
likely be unable to attest it. The case of Canada can be cited in this regard. Canada has been seeking after a liberal Immigration Policy to beat this insufficiency.
- Natural Resources
The characteristic assets of a nation likewise significantly impact the assurance of an international strategy. The regular assets separated from minerals, gas and water assets likewise incorporate the nourishment grain. During the current century food has tended to be an important factor in the determination of a country’s foreign policy. It is said that during the Second World War the outside and military strategy of Germany was to an enormous degree, controlled by her constrained nourishment saves. She turned to huge activity since she was to win a fast triumph taking into account the peril of starvation looked by the German armed force. In the post-World War II, Oil strategy in the Middle East has incredibly decided international strategy of the conditions of the area, yet in addition of the whole world. The disposition of the super powers during the virus war, towards the area of the Middle East specifically, was to an enormous degree, directed by their craving to control the oil.
We can say that the characteristic assets and crude material exercise significant impact upon the Foreign Policy of a nation. Without a sound mechanical complex, they can make a state defenceless against remote intercession, however with their local utilization and indigenous information; they can be a genuine shelter for any nation. In such a case, the state would pursue its foreign policy more confidently and assertively.
- Leadership
Most likely, the characteristics of the leader deeply affect the nation’s Foreign Policy however their job is incredibly compelled by the administrative and social structure. Further the job of authority isn’t indistinguishable in all nations. In less created nations their job is more noteworthy when contrasted with industrialized social orders. In industrialized social orders the people appreciate restricted prudence in high administrative and non-legislative positions.
External environmental variables include:
- Power Structure
The relations that countries set up among themselves are upheld by their individual national interests and powers. Indeed, such relations include battle for power among them. The net impact is that global relations comprise a force structure in which the more remarkable countries the super powers and the significant forces play a more overwhelming and driving job than the moderately less amazing countries.
The force vacuum brought about by the debilitated intensity of the once in the past ground-breaking European states, on account of their contribution in two World Wars constrained the U.S.A. to come out of its non-intervention and accept another worldwide job in global relations.
The rise of the U.S.A. furthermore, the U.S.S.R. as the two super powers with cold war in the middle of them, made it basic for the recently autonomous states like India, to receive a strategy of avoiding the virus war but endeavour to have amicable co-activity with both the super powers.
- International Organizations
The job and significance of universal establishments as instruments of states’ international strategies, and the political, military, utilitarian, financial and helpful jobs played basically by the United Nations in worldwide relations can’t be overestimated. These global associations to changing degrees fill in as modifiers of state conduct and as free entertainers in their own right. They have significant effect on the assurance of the Foreign Policy of a state. No state can choose and lead its arrangement subjectively to the drawback of different states. UN and other multilateral gatherings act the hero of the aggressed state. Usually sanctions are imposed which in some cases become very effective provided the international community imposes them sincerely.
- Reaction of other states
Similarly, the arrangement of states is quick changing into a general public of states where every single individual state has respect for the privileges of different states. Being reasonable to the sensibilities of different states, no state can embrace a one-sided arrangement. It needs to consider, and suit, if conceivable, the interests of the other partners too. India and the US need to
consider Pakistani interests in Afghanistan. They are additionally aware of the way that no arrangement for Afghanistan can work until and except if Pakistan is taken on board in such manner.
- World Public Opinion
The state, while planning its Foreign Policy, needs to consider the world popular conclusion. World popular feeling is increasingly successful when it is upheld by the household general assessment of the given state. Force isn’t about military equipment or nukes and ammo; it’s similarly significant segment is a state’s glory known as ‘delicate force’. It is notable that the US organization was made to impact changes in its Vietnam approach to a great extent because of antagonistic world popular sentiment.
The genuine quality behind the goals of Disarmament, Arms Control and Nuclear Disarmament, Anti-expansionism, Anti-politically-sanctioned racial segregation arrangements of different countries, has been the World Public Opinion.
- Alliances and Treaties (Bilateral and Multilateral):
The broad and serious arrangement of coalitions that developed in the Post-1945 period bigly affected the Foreign Policies of the considerable number of countries. During 1945-90 both the United States and the USSR, perceived and utilized unions as the methods for merging their particular positions.
Their Foreign Policies, just as the Foreign Policies of their partners were constantly represented by the objective to make sure about new accomplices in their particular unions and to keep up and combine the union associations. Indeed, even now, after the downfall of Warsaw Pact, the U.S.A. keeps on thinking about NATO as the backbone of its Foreign Policy in Europe.
NATO’s help to the US choice to pronounce a war against Taliban’s Afghanistan strongly invigorated the US international strategy. Be that as it may, numerous different countries, the Non-Aligned countries, despite everything keep on seeing unions as a wellspring of pressure and doubt and their Foreign Policies are still administered by the counter union guideline. As of late, another factor has become a powerful factor in Foreign Policy-production. The realization for mutual interdependence has given birth to a large number of regional organizations, arrangements, agreements, and trading blocs. European Union, ASEAN, SAARC, NAFTA, APEC, SCO and several others have been major players in international economic relations.
Conclusion
It is clear from the above discussion that foreign policy of a country is determined by a number of factors. As most of these factors are of changing nature, so with their evolution or transformation, foreign policies of countries also keep on changing. In addition to these factors, certain developments at the international level such as development of thermo-nuclear technology, onset of cold war and military alliances, elimination of colonialism have exercised profound influence on the foreign policies of different countries. The creation of United Nations has also left a mark on the foreign policies of different countries. The end of cold war influenced the states in every region of the world to modify their foreign policies in according with the changing dynamics of the world. Post 9/11 has a similar effect on the states.
References
Bendor, J & Hammond T(1992), ‘Rethink Allison’s Model’, American Political Science Review, 86, pp.301-302.
Bernstein, Boston, (2000), ‘Understanding Decision Making, U.S. Foreign Policy and the Cuban Missile Crisis, International Security, 25, pp. 134-164.
9
Brian White (1978) ‘Decision Making Analysis’ in T. Taylor ed.,Approaches and Theory in International Relations, London: Longman.
Chidozie, F.C, Ibietan, J and Ujara, E (2014) “Foreign Policy, International Image and National Transformation: A Historical Perspective” International Journal of Innovative Social Sciences and Humanities Research (IJISSHR), Ambrose Ali University, Ekpoma, Vol.2(4). Pp. 49-58.
Falkowski, L.S ed., (1979), Psychological Models in International Politics, Boulder: Westview.
Fayomi, O.O., Chidozie, F.C and Ajayi, L (2015) “Nigeria’s National Image and Her Foreign Policy: An Exploratory Approach” Open Journal of Political Science (OJPS) USA, Vol.
5, No. 3. Pp. 180-196
http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=55327#.Vbd1s9g5Bdg
Folarin, S., Ibietan, J., and Chidozie, F.C (2015) “Nigeria and the BRICS: Regional Dynamics in Emerging Economies’ Studies”, Accepted in the Journal of South African Business Research, South Africa.
Joseph F. (1967), The Making of Foreign Policy: An Analysis of Decision Making, London:
Oxford University Press.
