Muda talk.com_ Graham Allison is an American political scientist who was able to influence foreign policies during the Jimmy Carter era. In his famous book entitled Essence of Decision: Explaining The Cuban Missile Crisis Graham Allison introduces three theoretical approaches in the foreign policy-making process.
Now! To better understand how the three approaches to Graham Allison ‘s theory, consider the following mudabicara reviews :
READ ALSO: KNOWING THE LAW OF THE THREE STAGES OF AUGUSTE COMTE
Graham Allison’s Three Theories About the Foreign Policy Process
1.Rational Actor Model
In international politics, foreign policy is the implication of the rational actions of the actors. In this case, foreign policy decision-making is described as an intellectual process carried out by actors such as the state. The state government is an actor with reasoned and coordinated behavior.
The emphasis of Graham Allison’s theory of this model rests on the stages of determining goals, alternative choices, consequences, and final choices in the decision-making process.
The basic argument of this model is that a rational choice is the result of rational or intellectual considerations and cost-benefit calculations to produce mature, precise, and wise decisions. Thus, foreign policy analysts must rely on the national interests and goals of a nation.
However, this approach also has drawbacks such as the fact that it is human nature of decision makers who have the potential to make mistakes. In addition, the external and internal challenges of the bureaucracy are still one of the obstacles for a leader to think rationally.
Read Also : Get to know Ibn Khaldun’s Theory of Social Change
Example of Rational Actor Model Approach
The issue of Climate Change became a foreign policy priority of the United States (US) after Joe Biden became president of Uncle Sam’s country replacing Donald Trump.
Climate change is indeed a global threat. The ILO report says that rising temperatures and increasing stress in the workplace will cause the loss of full-time jobs worth $80 million and global economic losses of $2.4 trillion by 2030.
For this reason, President Biden is committed to achieving the target of reducing emissions in the US by 50% by 2030. He also affirmed the target of achieving a 100% clean energy economy and achieving zero emissions by 2050.
Biden prioritized this policy out of rational calculation. This will bring a number of advantages for the US in the international eyes.
To support this policy, a number of Biden steps include reinstating the US position in the 2015 Paris Agreement. Biden also held a virtual summit on climate change and invited 40 world leaders to coincide with Earth Day, on Thursday 22 April.
Read Also : What is Positivism? Auguste Comte’s School of Philosophy
2. Organizational Process Model
In the organizational process model, foreign policy making is an organizational technical process which will go through a series of stages, procedures, and organizational mechanisms that must refer to standard operating procedures . The resulting decisions will reflect the goals, objectives, and priorities of the organization.
However, this model has a weakness in that the current policy-making process is only formalistic. Meanwhile, the dynamics that occur in the process cannot be explained clearly and rationally.
In this context, the organization in question is more conservative and only adopts small changes. In dealing with the complexity and uncertainty of the problem, this policy-making model will stick to the organization’s official guidelines.
Example of an Organizational Model Approach
On Saturday, April 24, 2021, ASEAN member countries held the ASEAN Leaders’ Meeting in Jakarta. This meeting is referred to as an Indonesian initiative and is a follow-up to President Joko Widodo’s talks with the Sultan of Brunei Darussalam as the Chair of ASEAN regarding the resolution of the situation in Myanmar which is currently in a political crisis.
The main objective of the ASEAN Leaders’ Meeting is to reach a major agreement to resolve the political crisis in Myanmar and help the country get out of the current situation. The meeting was also attended by Myanmar’s military leader, Min Aung Hlaing.
The ASEAN Leaders’ Meeting then gave birth to five points of consensus. Regarding the situation in Myanmar, ASEAN leaders called for the release of all political prisoners including foreigners.
In addition, the pact also calls for Myanmar’s continued efforts in dealing with the situation in Rakhine State, including starting the repatriation process, voluntarily, safely and with dignity in accordance with the bilateral agreement with Bangladesh.
In the context of Indonesia, the ASEAN Leaders’ Meeting is an effort by the Jokowi government to restore Indonesia’s role in the region. This will certainly bring a positive image in the eyes of the international community.
Read Also : Getting to Know the Works of Auguste Comte: Course of Positive Philosophy
However, it can be seen that the process of resolving Myanmar’s political conflicts is still very organizational in which ASEAN continues to apply the SOPs that have been the hallmark of the regional organization.
Whether the ASEAN Leaders’ Meeting is truly capable of resolving the conflict in Myanmar or not, how much of its impetus, cannot be a definitive benchmark.
Political-Bureaucratic Model
In the bureaucratic political model, the foreign decision-making process will involve more complex actors, can be groups, and emphasize interests through a process of tug of war, bargaining, mutual influence and compromise between relevant stakeholders. The decision made is a political result that goes through a long and complex process.
In the model, the process that is followed will include interaction, adjustment and tends to be political, in other words, more emphasis on socio-political processes and not intellectuals.
The actors will try to act rationally, with reference to their respective national goals.
However, in this model, there is a weakness where the actors cannot fully get what is being targeted. In addition, the process of consensus among parties within the government is difficult to explain.
Read Also : Authoritarian Political System, Definition, Kinds and Characteristics
This model in the end is also not in favor of a larger common goal, so it shows more egoism between actors.
Example of a Political-Bureaucratic Model Approach
The South China Sea (SCS) conflict can be an example of a bureaucratic political model. Some of the countries involved in this conflict are mainly China, several countries in Southeast Asia such as Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, the Philippines.
In this context, China claimed the South China Sea as its territory until issuing the Coast Guard Act. One of them contains a clause that Chinese coast guard ships are allowed to shoot foreign ships that enter the waters of the Bamboo Curtain country.
The international political consequences of the issuance of the Act are certainly quite large. In addition to worsening conflict escalation, China has further strengthened its bargaining position in its foreign policy in the Asia Pacific region.
Read Also : 15 Benefits of Studying Communication Studies for Young People
In response to China’s stance, the Philippines has also repeatedly lodged diplomatic protests against the Panda country’s actions in the South China Sea. Even Philippine President Duterte said he was ready to deploy warships if this continued.
He even stated there was no other way for the Philippines to enforce the 2016 arbitration award without bloodshed. He saw that the Philippines was powerless to stop China in its activities in the South China Sea and this could pose a risk of war.
Previously, Chinese President Xi Jinping rejected the decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in favor of the Philippines and concluded that China had no legal basis for claiming rights to most of the South China Sea.
What Duterte and Xi Jinping have done illustrates that the bureaucratic political model has become very complicated to apply in international politics.
Both China and the Philippines are trying to emphasize their respective discourses to show each other’s bargaining positions and influence each other.