The ideational foundations of coercion. Political culture and policies towards North Korea

M. Onderco, W.M. Wagner

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The notion that states’ foreign and security policies are not exclusively driven by material interests is now firmly established. Whose ideas matter and in what way, however, has remained subject to debate. We advance this debate by studying the crisis diplomacy of liberal democracies towards North Korea during four crises around the country’s violation of international norms between 1993 and 2009. Although liberal democracies share a common perception of North Korea’s nuclear programme as a threat to international peace and security, they differ widely in either confronting or accommodating North Korea. We examine the explanatory power of two ideational driving forces behind the foreign policy of liberal democracies: the ideological orientation of the government, on the one hand, and a country’s political culture, on the other. Our analysis of 22 liberal democracies demonstrates that different domestic cultures of dealing with norm violations have a significant impact on crisis diplomacy: countries with punitive domestic cultures tend to adopt confrontational policies towards international norm violators; while left governments are not more accommodationist than right governments. Ideational differences across states are thus more pronounced than those within states.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)279-302
Number of pages24
JournalEuropean Political Science Review
Volume9
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2017

Fingerprint

North Korea
political culture
democracy
diplomacy
foreign policy
norm violation
security policy
peace
threat

Cite this

@article{3eb9a256472945949bbc10be87701edf,
title = "The ideational foundations of coercion. Political culture and policies towards North Korea",
abstract = "The notion that states’ foreign and security policies are not exclusively driven by material interests is now firmly established. Whose ideas matter and in what way, however, has remained subject to debate. We advance this debate by studying the crisis diplomacy of liberal democracies towards North Korea during four crises around the country’s violation of international norms between 1993 and 2009. Although liberal democracies share a common perception of North Korea’s nuclear programme as a threat to international peace and security, they differ widely in either confronting or accommodating North Korea. We examine the explanatory power of two ideational driving forces behind the foreign policy of liberal democracies: the ideological orientation of the government, on the one hand, and a country’s political culture, on the other. Our analysis of 22 liberal democracies demonstrates that different domestic cultures of dealing with norm violations have a significant impact on crisis diplomacy: countries with punitive domestic cultures tend to adopt confrontational policies towards international norm violators; while left governments are not more accommodationist than right governments. Ideational differences across states are thus more pronounced than those within states.",
author = "M. Onderco and W.M. Wagner",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S1755773915000387",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
pages = "279--302",
journal = "European Political Science Review",
issn = "1755-7739",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

The ideational foundations of coercion. Political culture and policies towards North Korea. / Onderco, M.; Wagner, W.M.

In: European Political Science Review, Vol. 9, No. 2, 01.05.2017, p. 279-302.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The ideational foundations of coercion. Political culture and policies towards North Korea

AU - Onderco, M.

AU - Wagner, W.M.

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - The notion that states’ foreign and security policies are not exclusively driven by material interests is now firmly established. Whose ideas matter and in what way, however, has remained subject to debate. We advance this debate by studying the crisis diplomacy of liberal democracies towards North Korea during four crises around the country’s violation of international norms between 1993 and 2009. Although liberal democracies share a common perception of North Korea’s nuclear programme as a threat to international peace and security, they differ widely in either confronting or accommodating North Korea. We examine the explanatory power of two ideational driving forces behind the foreign policy of liberal democracies: the ideological orientation of the government, on the one hand, and a country’s political culture, on the other. Our analysis of 22 liberal democracies demonstrates that different domestic cultures of dealing with norm violations have a significant impact on crisis diplomacy: countries with punitive domestic cultures tend to adopt confrontational policies towards international norm violators; while left governments are not more accommodationist than right governments. Ideational differences across states are thus more pronounced than those within states.

AB - The notion that states’ foreign and security policies are not exclusively driven by material interests is now firmly established. Whose ideas matter and in what way, however, has remained subject to debate. We advance this debate by studying the crisis diplomacy of liberal democracies towards North Korea during four crises around the country’s violation of international norms between 1993 and 2009. Although liberal democracies share a common perception of North Korea’s nuclear programme as a threat to international peace and security, they differ widely in either confronting or accommodating North Korea. We examine the explanatory power of two ideational driving forces behind the foreign policy of liberal democracies: the ideological orientation of the government, on the one hand, and a country’s political culture, on the other. Our analysis of 22 liberal democracies demonstrates that different domestic cultures of dealing with norm violations have a significant impact on crisis diplomacy: countries with punitive domestic cultures tend to adopt confrontational policies towards international norm violators; while left governments are not more accommodationist than right governments. Ideational differences across states are thus more pronounced than those within states.

U2 - 10.1017/S1755773915000387

DO - 10.1017/S1755773915000387

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 279

EP - 302

JO - European Political Science Review

JF - European Political Science Review

SN - 1755-7739

IS - 2

ER -