Covert actions and the US foreign policy
This paper, by referring to the research on the issue of global politics, argues that covert actions should not be part of the US foreign policy. While the U.S. foreign policy process implies a careful approach because of United States as a world power and of American pol¬itics in political theory, a wider perspective is needed. Ole Holsti suggests that three factors are “central for fuller understanding of the American policy abroad: the examination of multiple cases, a cross-national context, and repeated question wordings” (1996, pp. 191-92). There is a “need for public opinion research in which evidence about the United States is placed in a broader comparative context”: the nature of public opinion, the channels by which it “enters the policy process,” and its impact vary “across coun¬tries and political system” (Holsti 1996, p. 204). “By far the least well developed of the areas of public opinion research has been the opinion-policy linkage” Holsti notes (p. 196). In other words, while America’s central role in the international system requires close examination of its foreign pol¬icy process, comparative analysis is necessary to avoid separation from a single, largely American, perspective.
As Thomas Risse-Kappen notes for France, West Germany, the United States, and Japan, the impact of public opinion is “significantly affected by the domestic institu¬tions and coalition building processes among elites” (Holsti 1996, p. 205). Since the wordings of questions and context affect results in public opinion surveys, it is essential to repeat the same questions at regular intervals. By focusing on making decisions on intervention, the US policymakers have understated the public disapproval to fund the opposition in Vietnam covertly or to arm the Bosnian Muslims, despite an arms embargo. The important implications of hiding policy from public opinion and Congress require the analysis of the theory and practice of covert action in a democratic society (Maxwell 1994).
Public opinion has constrained the U.S. foreign policy decision-making process over the last generation. By analyzing theory and events of the Vietnam, Nicaragua, Gulf, and Bosnia interventions and obtaining the views of active decision-makers, one can see that public opin¬ion’s influences in U.S. foreign relations (Maxwell 1994).
The issues of public support and opposition to U.S. interventions remain crucial ones for the US foreign policy. Public opinion is increas¬ingly recognized as a central factor in the decisions about U.S. foreign relations. The voice of the people speaks during intervention debates, and, in this fight of pub¬lic attitudes with national security, policy continues to be of fundamental concern for citizens and policymakers (Holsti 1996).
Processing your request, Please wait....
