1

Problem-solving vs. Critical Approaches to Foreign Policy

Analysis
Problem-solving vs. Critical Theory
Robert Cox:
Theory is always for someone and for some purpose
Main starting point for critical theories of IR
Based on the assumption that knowledge cannot be objective
and timeless in the sense that positivists would like to claim
A key implication:
All theorists inevitably bring their value to bear on the
analysis
Cox: We need to look closely at those theories, those ideas,
those analyses that claim to be objective or value free, and
ask who or what is it for or serve the interests of
Problem-solving theory:
Theory which accepts the parameters of the present order
and thus helps to legitimate an unjust and deeply unequal
system
Critical theory:
Theory that challenges the prevailing order by seeking out,
analysing, and assisting social processes that can potentially
lead to emancipatory change
Problem-solving vs. critical theories of foreign policy
Allisons three models
Account for foreign policy behaviour of states
Three models that complement each other
Allison as a problem-solving theorist
Allisons purpose
Present a better account of states foreign policy behaviour
Show how difficult and uncertain crisis management is
so that in the future crises would be better managed or
averted
Critical theories of foreign policy
Whereas Allison takes a foreign policy problem as given and tries
to account for the policy behaviour of those who try and solve it
Critical theories are interested in the construction of foreign policy
issues as problems that need to be solved
Jutta Weldes argument
crises are social constructions that are forged by state
officials in the course of producing and reproducing state
identity

If crises are constructed in relation to state identities, events that

are the same may be constructed as different crises, or not as a
crisis at all
Problem-solving theoriesof foreign policy
Take foreign policy problems as framed by policy-makers
Do not question whether this was a problem or not
Do not question the purpose behind policy-makers framing
the issue as a crisis
Try and account for foreign policy behaviour once a problem
has been represented as a problem/crisis
Crises are times of
Threat
Opportunity
policy-makers may represent issues as problems or even crises
If it serves their purposes
If their state identity is constructed in a way that enables
the framing of issues as crisis
Critical theories of foreign policy
Question whether the crisis was a crisis after all
Try and uncover the processes through which a foreign policy issue
is represented as a problem or a crisis
Try and show that there is nothing obvious about crisesthey can
be averted if framed as problems to be dealt with
Weldes argument: The missile deployment in Cuba was a crisis
rather than, say, a mere nuisance, because the deployment of the
missiles in Cuba by the Soviet other challenged the very identity of
the United States, not only as the leader of the Free World but
also as the guarantor of freedom in the Western hemisphere
Relationship between state identity and foreign policy
Two-way relationship
State identity enables crises
Crises enable state identity
Identity and foreign policy
David Campbells study of US foreign policy
The making of foreign through foreign policy making
Self/Other
societies exist by defining themselves against an
external standard
Without an Other the Self could not see itself as
distinctive
Campbells argument: US foreign policy in the post-war was
not simply a reaction to Soviet policies and the Containment
Policy not simply a reaction to Soviet expansionism

US foreign policy behaviour in the post-war era could be viewed as

expansionist when viewed from the Soviet perspective
The nature of the struggle between the USA and the USSR was
represented by US policy-makers as geopolitical and military
But, it was ideological and cultural as well
US policy of containment was not simply a reaction to Soviet
policies, but constitutive of US identity as a democracy and
the leader of the Free World
Once constructed in opposition to a Soviet other, US identity
enabled policies such as
The formation of NATO
Leadership of the Free World
Duty to defend and extend the Free World
Cold War as a struggle between US self and Soviet other
Campbells contribution: US foreign policy could be understood as
a political practice central to the constitution, production and
maintenance of American political identity
Implications of Campbells contribution:
US foreign policy could be studied in a similar fashion in the postCold War era
A new other (or others) could be found to replace the Soviet
other
Thus, foreign policy needs to be understood as giving rise to a
boundary rather than acting as a bridge
problem-solving/critical theories of foreign policy
Problem-solving theories view foreign policy as a practice used to
solve problems between countries
Try and understand how specific problems are solved
Critical theories view foreign policy as constitutive of those
problems the others take for granted
Try and understand how specific problems are constructed
Conducting critical analyses of foreign policy
RAM
Weigh costs and benefits
Decide which is the most rational course of action
Does not question national interest but takes it as given
Critical approaches to foreign policy analysis
Studies the process through which national interest is
constructed
Deciding whether the situation faced by the state is a threat to
national interest or not, required interpretation by policy-makers
Contra-realism, threats are not self-evident

Threats and states national interests in the face of threats are

matters of interpretation by policy-makers
This is not meant to suggest that no threats exist
What is socially constructed are the meaning of things and their
social effects, not physical existence