"Axis of Evil" and "Great Satan? " An Operational Code Analysis of U.S.-Iran Misperceptions
Abstract Tesim:
For the past forty years, the relationship between the United States and Iran has been defined in terms of hostility and mutual suspicion. Unfortunately, many scholars have subscribed to this view in the past, which was the product of often oversimplified and far too generalized approaches to studying foreign policy. While most traditional analysis methods focus on a macro-level examination of decision making and the strategic behavior of a nation as a whole, this study proposes an alternative viewpoint. Individual actors play a central role in the decision-making and shaping of foreign policy. Therefore, evaluating their beliefs and perceptions about the external world is crucial to understanding foreign policy consequences manifesting in the interactions between nations. This study aims to thoroughly investigate the belief systems of the U.S. and Iranian leaders between 1953 and 2020 to assess the true nature of their relationship and each one's strategic motivations. The leading research questions addressed in this thesis are: What are the belief systems of the U.S. and Iranian leaders that drive the interactions between the two countries? What are some shared patterns among these leaders' beliefs, and how does each compare to the average leader? Are these results consistent with theoretical assumptions about their relationship? To answer the research questions, this work employs the quantitative Operational Code Analysis, which uses individual leaders' verbal material to determine their belief systems. The outcomes are then analyzed by performing a series of difference of means tests. Following their statistical preferences are assessed in accordance with the principles of Brams' (1994) Theory of Moves (TOM) and Theory of Inferences about Preferences (TIP). The results show that the representation of the U.S. and Iranian leaders' nature and motivations across conventional wisdom is not entirely accurate. Hence, reinforcing the value and significance of individual-oriented approaches to studying foreign policy.
创造者:
Zuzanna Maria King
日期:
2020-10
权利声明:
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
类型:
Masters Thesis
关键词:
international relations, theory of inferences about preferences (TIP), TIP, TOM, theory of moves (TOM), strategic preferences, belief systems, operational code analysis, foreign policy , Iran, United States, and US
Broken Policies: The European Union and the Contemporary Migration Crisis
创造者:
Cravens, Tara
描述:
As the war in Syria moves into its ninth year, millions of displaced people continue to flee the region seeking protection. Europe is portrayed as facing an enormous crisis with thousands of refugees flocking to its shores. The media shows hundreds and thousands of refugees trying to enter into the European Union showing a lack of preparedness of the continent for the new arrivals. In light of this enormous humanitarian disaster, this paper proposes to determine why the European Union has been ineffective in dealing with the Syrian refugee crisis since the onset of the Syrian civil war. It involves an examination of several EU policies and shared agreements with nearby states hosting the largest populations of refugees. The goal of this thesis is to understand whether the Common European Asylum System, European Neighborhood Policy and the EU/Turkey Refugee Deal impede or assist the ability of EU member states to effectively handle thousands of refugees at their borders. I argue, evidence shows that the EU struggles to effectively deal with the crisis within its member states due to a lack of alignment in policy implementation, which hinders efforts to establish durable solutions, ultimately leading to evolving negative social opinions of refugees within Europe and influencing new leaders coming to power across the Union.
