Foreign Policy

This article asks how the United States applies economic statecraft—positive "carrots" versus negative "sticks"—in response to Latin American countries’ engagement with China and offers a conditional mechanism for when each mode is more likely. The authors argue that U.S. policy in the region tends to emphasize economic engagement instead of coercion, especially with countries that are politically and economically aligned with Washington. They test this claim using a mixed-methods design that combines a focused case study of U.S.–Panama ties with a statistical analysis of how engagement with China relates to U.S. foreign assistance allocations in Latin America.

This article asks how foreign state communications affect public attitudes about a concrete policy: whether China should be permitted to invest in nuclear power infrastructure in the United Kingdom. Using messaging derived from official Chinese news articles, the authors deploy a survey experiment to test whether publics respond differently to coercive versus persuasive signals, how perceptions of threat or economic dependence matter, and whether counter-coercion by close allies moderates effects. The contribution is an experimental test of strategic communication from a foreign state on a specific energy-investment policy question, with attention to conditional factors that might reduce or reverse messaging effects.

A common explanation for growing polarization in American foreign policy points to an absence of external threat. Two mechanisms could reverse that trend: an information mechanism, where clear evidence about an adversary prompts bipartisan agreement among policymakers; and an identity mechanism, where an external danger raises national identity above partisan identity and reduces affective polarization among the public.

This paper explores how US military deployments to Peru engage civilians and shape local perceptions.

This study asks which individual parliamentarians take an interest in foreign and defense policy and what predicts that attention, using parliamentary questions as a window into elected officials’ priorities. It introduces an original dataset of 10,180 questions on foreign and defense matters in India’s Lok Sabha and uses analysis of those questions to show which aspects of foreign security politicians emphasise and which politician-level characteristics are associated with greater attention.

The clinical framing of psychic trauma as PTSD has reshaped American foreign policy discourse over the past fifty years, with important temporal and ethical consequences.

This research asks whether two kinds of political rhetoric—sanitized language that obscures war casualties and dehumanizing language that devalues groups—shape public support for U.S. foreign interventions. Using two experiments, the author investigates whether these rhetorical strategies change emotional reactions and thereby shift people toward more hawkish foreign policy attitudes. The brief summarizes the research question, the experimental approach reported in the abstract, and the qualified findings the author presents about emotional mechanisms and attitude change.

This paper assesses changes in the foreign policy of Bolivia and Ecuador during the administrations of Evo Morales (2006–2019) and Rafael Correa (2007–2017), focusing on how domestic and international conditions interacted to enable reorientation.

New research provides clarity on how external forces shape Japanese foreign aid. While prior studies suggest responsiveness to U.S. influence, this paper unpacks the nuances: direction and extent.

Current measures of foreign policy positions in US Congress often rely on all votes, including domestic ones, thereby conflating a member's stance across different domains. This paper introduces an alternative approach using Bayesian item response theory applied exclusively to foreign policy votes.

Foreign policy belief systems have been studied extensively, but nearly all work focuses on Western democracies—chiefly the United States. The current security environment raises the question of whether elites in other regional powers hold foreign policy views with a similar internal structure. This article investigates that question for India, examining variance, structure, and shared elements in elite opinion.

This research explores audience costs theory through a novel survey experiment examining domestic reactions to presidential policy shifts. We test whether U.S. publics respond differently when leaders abandon threats versus honor promises by entering conflicts.