Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:57:23.513Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in International Relations

Domestic Interests, Democracy, and Foreign Policy Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2022

Brett Ashley Leeds  and
Michaela Mattes
Brett Ashley Leeds
Affiliation:
Rice University, Houston
Michaela Mattes
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley

Summary

When new leaders come to office, there is often speculation about whether they will take their countries' foreign policies in different directions or stick to their predecessors' policies. We argue that when new leaders come to power who represent different societal interests and preferences than their predecessors, leaders may pursue new foreign policies. At the same time, in democracies, leadership selection processes and policymaking rules blunt leaders' incentives and opportunities for change. Democracies thus tend to pursue more consistent foreign policies than nondemocracies even when new leaders with different supporting coalitions assume office. Statistical analyses of three distinct foreign policy areas – military alliances, UNGA voting, and economic sanctions – provide support for our argument. In a fourth area – trade – we find that both democracies and nondemocracies are more likely to experience foreign policy change when a new leader with a different supporting coalition comes to power. We thus conclude that foreign policy responds to domestic political interests, and that, even as the interests supporting leaders change, democracies' foreign policies are no less stable than those of nondemocracies and often exhibit greater consistency.
Get access

Keywords

foreign policydemocracyleadership changedomestic politics and international relationsinternational relations
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in International Relations
Online ISBN: 9781009037938
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 17 March 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, K. W. and Snidal, D. 1998. Why states act through formal international organizations. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 42(1), 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, J. and Somer-Topcu, Z. 2009. Moderate now, win votes later: The electoral consequences of parties’ policy shifts in 25 postwar democracies. The Journal of Politics, 71(2), 678–692.Google Scholar
Aldrich, J. H., Gelpi, C., Feaver, P., Reifler, J., and Sharp, K. T. 2006. Foreign policy and the electoral connection. Annual Review of Political Science, 9, 477–502.Google Scholar
Almond, G. A. 1950. The American People and Foreign Policy. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company.Google Scholar
Anderson, C., Blais, A., Bowler, S., Donovan, T., and Listhaug, O. 2005. Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. 2007. Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade? Journal of International Economics, 71(1), 72–95.Google Scholar
Bailey, M. A., Strezhnev, A., and Voeten, E. 2017. Estimating dynamic state preferences from United Nations voting data. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(2), 430–456.Google Scholar
Bapat, N. A. and Morgan, T. C. 2009. Multilateral versus unilateral sanctions reconsidered: A test using new data. International Studies Quarterly, 53(4), 1075–1094.Google Scholar
Barnhart, J. N., Trager, R. F., Saunders, E. N., and Dafoe, A. 2020. The suffragist peace. International Organization, 74(4), 633–670.Google Scholar
Bearce, D. H. 2003. Societal preferences, partisan agents, and monetary policy outcomes. International Organization, 57(2), 373–410.Google Scholar
Berinsky, A. J. 2007. Assuming the costs of war: Events, elites, and American public support for military conflict. The Journal of Politics, 69(4), 975–997.Google Scholar
Bermeo, N. 2016. On democratic backsliding. Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 5–19.Google Scholar
Black, D. 1948. On the rationale of group decision-making. Journal of Political Economy, 56(1), 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brazys, S. and Panke, D. 2017. Why do states change positions in the United Nations General Assembly? International Political Science Review, 38(1), 70–84.Google Scholar
Bueno De Mesquita, B. and Siverson, R. M. 1995. War and the survival of political leaders: A comparative study of regime types and political accountability. American Political Science Review, 89(4), 841–855.Google Scholar
Bueno, De Mesquita, Smith, B., A., Siverson, R. M., and Morrow, J. D. 2003. The Logic of Political Survival. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bunce, V. 1980. Changing leaders and changing policies: The impact of elite succession on budgetary priorities in democratic countries. American Journal of Political Science, 24(3), 373–395.Google Scholar
Bunce, V. and Echols III, J. M. 1978. Power and policy in communist systems: The problem of incrementalism. The Journal of Politics, 40(4), 911–932.Google Scholar
Canes-Wrone, B. Howell, W. G., and Lewis, D. E. 2008. Toward a broader understanding of presidential power: A reevaluation of the two presidencies thesis. The Journal of Politics, 70(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, D. B. and Signorino, C. S. 2010. Back to the future: Modeling time dependence in binary data. Political Analysis, 18(3), 271–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, D. B. and Stone, R. W. 2015. Democracy and multilateralism: The case of vote buying in the UN General Assembly. International Organization, 69(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
Chiozza, G. and Goemans, H. E. 2011. Leaders and International Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Colgan, J. D. 2013. Domestic revolutionary leaders and international conflict. World Politics, 65(4), 656–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croco, S. E. 2011. The decider’s dilemma: Leader culpability, war outcomes, and domestic punishment. American Political Science Review, 105(3): 457–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, D. R. and Moore, W. H. 1997. Ethnicity matters: Transnational ethnic alliances and foreign policy behavior. International Studies Quarterly, 41(1), 171–184.Google Scholar
De Tocqueville, A. 1835. Democracy in America, trans. George Lawrence, ed. Mayer, J. P.. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co.Google Scholar
Downs, A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Dür, A., Baccini, L., and Elsig, M. 2014. The design of international trade agreements: Introducing a new dataset. The Review of International Organizations, 9(3), 353–375.Google Scholar
Edry, J., Johnson, J., and Leeds, B. A. 2021. Threats at home and abroad: Interstate war, civil war, and alliance formation. International Organization, 75(3), 837–857.Google Scholar
Erikson, R. S., MacKuen, M. B., and Stimson, J. A. 2002. The Macro Polity. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Ezrow, L. 2005. Are moderate parties rewarded in multiparty systems? A pooled analysis of Western European elections, 1984–1998. European Journal of Political Research, 44(6), 1–19.Google Scholar
Foakes, J. 2015. Foreign affairs in national courts: The role of the executive certificate. Chatham House Briefing.Google Scholar
Fordham, B. O. 1998. Economic interests, party, and ideology in early Cold War era US foreign policy. International Organization, 52(2), 359–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fordham, B. O. 2019. The domestic politics of world power: Explaining debates over the United States battleship fleet, 1890–91. International Organization, 73(2), 435–468.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, J. 2016. The death of the median voter. The Interpreter. Available at www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/death-median-voter.Google Scholar
Franklin, M. N., Mackie, T. T., and Valen, H. 1992. Electoral Change: Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Frieden, J. 1988. Sectoral conflict and foreign economic policy, 1914–1940. International Organization, 42(1), 59–90.Google Scholar
Fuhrmann, M. 2020. When do leaders free‐ride? Business experience and contributions to collective defense. American Journal of Political Science, 64(2), 416–431.Google Scholar
Gandhi, J. and Przeworski, A. 2006. Cooperation, cooptation, and rebellion under dictatorships. Economics & Politics, 18(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
Gartzke, E. and Gleditsch, K. S. 2004. Why democracies may actually be less reliable allies. American Journal of Political Science, 48(4), 775–795.Google Scholar
Gaubatz, K. T. 1996. Democratic states and commitment in international relations. International Organization, 50(1), 109–139.Google Scholar
Geddes, B. 2003. Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Geddes, B., Wright, J., and Frantz, E. 2014. Autocratic breakdown and regime transitions: A new data set. Perspectives on Politics, 12(2), 313–331.Google Scholar
Geddes, B., Wright, J., and Frantz, E. 2018. How Dictatorships Work: Power, Personalization, and Collapse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gehlbach, S., Sonin, K., and Svolik, M. W. 2016. Formal models of nondemocratic politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 19, 565–584.Google Scholar
Gidron, N., Adams, J., and Horne, W. 2020. American Affective Polarization in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gleditsch, K. S. 2002. Expanded trade and GDP data. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46(5), 712–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goemans, H. E., Gleditsch, K. S., and Chiozza, G. 2009. Introducing Archigos: A dataset of political leaders. Journal of Peace Research, 46(2), 269–283.Google Scholar
Goldgeier, J. and Saunders, E. N. 2018. The unconstrained presidency: Checks and balances eroded long before Trump. Foreign Affairs, 97(5), 144–156.Google Scholar
Guisinger, A. 2017. American Opinion on Trade: Preferences Without Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guisinger, A. and Saunders, E. N. 2017. Mapping the boundaries of elite cues: How elites shape mass opinion across international issues. International Studies Quarterly, 61(2), 425–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, M. L. 2005. The Ideological Origins of Great Power Politics, 1789–1989. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Haftendorn, H. 2006. Coming of Age: German Foreign Policy since 1945. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Hagan, J. D. 1993. Political Opposition and Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
Haggard, S. 1990. Pathways from the Periphery: The Politics of Growth in the Newly Industrializing Countries. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Haney, P. J. and Vanderbush, W. 1999. The role of ethnic interest groups in US foreign policy: The case of the Cuban American National Foundation. International Studies Quarterly, 43(2), 341–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helfer, L. R. 2019. Treaty exit and intrabranch conflict at the interface of international and domestic law in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Helmke, G. and Rosenbluth, F. 2009. Regimes and the rule of law: Judicial independence in comparative perspective. Annual Review of Political Science, 12, 345–366.Google Scholar
Hetherington, M. J. 2009. Review article: Putting polarization in perspective. British Journal of Political Science, 39(2), 413–448.Google Scholar
Holbrook, T. M. and McClurg, S. C. 2005. The mobilization of core supporters: Campaigns, turnout, and electoral composition in United States presidential elections. American Journal of Political Science, 49(4): 689–703.Google Scholar
Holsti, O. R. 2006. Making American Foreign Policy. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. C., Stam, A. C., and Ellis, C. M. 2015. Why Leaders Fight. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huber, J. D. and Shipan, C. R. 2002. Deliberate Discretion? The Institutional Foundations of Bureaucratic Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hurwitz, J. and Peffley, M. 1987. How are foreign policy attitudes structured? A hierarchical model. The American Political Science Review, 81(4), 1099–1120.Google Scholar
Hyde, S. D. 2020. Democracy’s backsliding in the international environment. Science, 369(6508), 1192–1196.Google Scholar
Hyde, S. D. and Saunders, E. N. 2020. Recapturing regime type in international relations: Leaders, institutions, and agency space. International Organization, 74(2), 363–395.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. 1997. Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., and Westwood, S. J. 2019. The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science, 22, 129–146.Google Scholar
Jensen, N. and McGillivray, F. 2005. Federal institutions and multinational investors: Federalism, government credibility, and foreign direct investment. International Interactions, 31(4), 303–325.Google Scholar
Kaarbo, J., Lantis, J. S., and Beasley, R. K. 2012. The analysis of foreign policy in comparative perspective in Lantis, J. S., Kaarbo, J., Beasley, R. K., and Snarr, M. T. (eds.), Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective: Domestic and International Influences on State Behavior. Washington DC: SAGE Publications, 1–23.Google Scholar
Kaempfer, W. H. and Lowenberg, A. D. 2007. The political economy of economic sanctions in Sandler, T. and Hartley, K. (eds.), Handbook of Defense Economics: Defense in a Globalized World, 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science & Technology, 867–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karp, J. A., Banducci, S. A., and Bowler, S. 2008. Getting out the vote: Party mobilization in a comparative perspective. British Journal of Political Science 38(1), 91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kertzer, J. D. and Zeitzoff, T. 2017. A bottom‐up theory of public opinion about foreign policy. American Journal of Political Science, 61(3), 543–558.Google Scholar
King, G., Tomz, M., and Wittenberg, J. 2000. Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 347–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, K. L. and Meernik, J. 1999. The Supreme Court and the powers of the executive: The adjudication of foreign policy. Political Research Quarterly, 52(4), 801–824.Google Scholar
Klingemann, H. D., Hofferbert, R. I., and Budge, I. 1994. Parties, Policies, and Democracy. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C. and Snidal, D. 2001. The rational design of international institutions. International Organization, 55(4), 761–799.Google Scholar
Krasner, S. D. 1972. Are bureaucracies important? (or Allison Wonderland). Foreign Policy, 7, 159–179.Google Scholar
Krcmaric, D., Nelson, S. C., and Roberts, A. 2020. Studying leaders and elites: The personal biography approach. Annual Review of Political Science, 23, 133–151.Google Scholar
Krustev, V. L. and Morgan, T. C. 2011. Ending economic coercion: Domestic politics and international bargaining. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 28(4), 351–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeds, B. A. and Anac, S. 2005. Alliance institutionalization and alliance performance. International Interactions, 31(3), 183–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeds, B. A., Mattes, M., and Vogel, J. S. 2009. Interests, institutions, and the reliability of international commitments. American Journal of Political Science, 53(2), 461–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeds, B. A., Ritter, J., Mitchell, S., and Long, A. 2002. Alliance treaty obligations and provisions, 1815–1944. International Interactions, 28(3), 237–260.Google Scholar
Leeds, B. A. and Savun, B. 2007. Terminating alliances: Why do states abrogate agreements? The Journal of Politics, 69(4), 1118–1132.Google Scholar
Levendusky, M. 2009. The Partisan Sort: How Liberals became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Q. and Vashchilko, T. 2010. Dyadic military conflict, security alliances, and bilateral FDI flows. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(5), 765–782.Google Scholar
Lippmann, W. 1955. Essays in the Public Philosophy. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.Google Scholar
Lipset, S. R. and Rokkan, S. 1967. Cleavage structures, party systems, and voter alignments: An introduction in Lipset, S. M. and Rokkan, S. R. (eds.), Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-national Perspectives. New York : Free Press, 1–61.Google Scholar
Lipson, C. 2003. Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lobell, S. E. 2004. Politics and national security: The battles for Britain. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 21(4), 269–286.Google Scholar
Lührmann, A. and Lindberg, S. I. 2019. A third wave of autocratization is here: What is new about it? Democratization, 26(7), 1095–1113.Google Scholar
Lupu, N. 2015. Party polarization and mass partisanship: A comparative perspective. Political Behavior, 37(2), 331–356.Google Scholar
Magaloni, B. 2008. Credible power-sharing and the longevity of authoritarian rule. Comparative Political Studies, 41(4–5), 715–741.Google Scholar
Mansfield, E. D. and Bronson, R. 1997. Alliances, preferential trading arrangements, and international trade. The American Political Science Review, 91(1), 94–107.Google Scholar
Mansfield, E. D. and Reinhardt, E. 2008. International institutions and the volatility of international trade. International Organization, 62(4), 621–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maoz, Z. and Russett, B. 1993. Normative and structural causes of the decentralized peace, 1946–1986. American Political Science Review, 87(3), 914–924.Google Scholar
Marshall, M. G., Jaggers, K. and Gurr, T. R. 2012. Polity IV Project: Dataset Users’ Manual. College Park: University of Maryland. Available at http://www.systemicpeace.org/polityproject.html.Google Scholar
Martin, L. L. 2000. Democratic Commitments: Legislatures and International Cooperation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Mattes, M. 2012. Democratic reliability, precommitment of successor governments, and the choice of alliance commitment. International Organization, 66(1), 153–172.Google Scholar
Mattes, M., Leeds, B. A. and Carroll, R. 2015. Leadership turnover and foreign policy change: Societal interests, domestic institutions, and voting in the United Nations. International Studies Quarterly, 59(2), 280–290.Google Scholar
Mattes, M., Leeds, B. A. and Matsumura, N. 2016. Measuring change in source of leader support: The CHISOLS dataset. Journal of Peace Research, 53(2), 259–267.Google Scholar
Mattiacci, E. Forthcoming. Volatile States in International Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McDonald, M. D. and Budge, I. 2005. Elections, Parties, Democracy: Conferring the Median Mandate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McGillivray, F. and Smith, A. 2008. Punishing the Prince: A Theory of Interstate Relations, Political Institutions, and Leader Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
McGillivray, F. and Stam, A. C. 2004. Political institutions, coercive diplomacy, and the duration of economic sanctions. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 48(2), 154–172.Google Scholar
Meyerrose, A. M. 2020. The unintended consequences of democracy promotion: International organizations and democratic backsliding. Comparative Political Studies, 53(10–11), 1547–1581.Google Scholar
Milner, H. V. 1997. Interests, Institutions, and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Milner, H. V. and Judkins, B. 2004. Partisanship, trade policy, and globalization: Is there a left–right divide on trade policy? International Studies Quarterly, 48(1), 95–119.Google Scholar
Milner, H. V. and Tingley, D. 2015. Sailing the Water’s Edge: The Domestic Politics of American Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Moon, B. E. 1985. Consensus or compliance? Foreign-policy change and external dependence. International Organization, 39(2), 297–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moosa, H. and Abi-Habib, M. 2018. Fears of Maldives crisis ease after president concedes election loss. New York Times, www.nytimes.com/2018/09/24/world/asia/maldives-presidential-election-ibrahim-mohamed-solih.html.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, A. 1997. Taking preferences seriously: A liberal theory of international politics. International Organization, 51(4), 513–553.Google Scholar
Morgan, T. C., Bapat, N. and Krustev, V. 2009. The threat and imposition of economic sanctions, 1971 – 2000. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 26(1), 92–110.Google Scholar
Myrick, R. 2018. Towards the extremes: The impact of partisan polarization on international cooperation. Working paper.Google Scholar
Narizny, K. 2003. Both guns and butter, or neither: Class interests in the political economy of rearmament. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 203–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narizny, K. 2007. The Political Economy of Grand Strategy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Page, B. I. and Shapiro, R. Y. 1982. Changes in Americans’ policy preferences, 1935–1979. Public Opinion Quarterly, 46(1), 24–42.Google Scholar
Rai, K. B. 1972. Foreign policy and voting in the UN General Assembly. International Organization, 26(3), 589–594.Google Scholar
Rathbun, B. C. 2004. Partisan Interventions: European Party Politics and Peace Enforcement in the Balkans. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Rathbun, B. C., Kertzer, J. D., Reifler, J., Goren, P. and Scotto, T. J. 2016. Taking foreign policy personally: Personal values and foreign policy attitudes. International Studies Quarterly, 60(1), 124–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiljan, A. 2020. ‘Fear and loathing across party lines’(also) in Europe: Affective polarisation in European party systems. European Journal of Political Research, 59(2), 376–396.Google Scholar
Risse-Kappen, T. 1991. Public opinion, domestic structure, and foreign policy in liberal democracies. World Politics, 43(4), 479–512.Google Scholar
Rogowski, R. 1989. Commerce and Coalitions: How Trade Affects Domestic Political Alignments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rosati, J. A. 1981. Developing a systematic decision-making framework: Bureaucratic politics in perspective. World Politics, 33(2), 234–252.Google Scholar
Saunders, E. N. 2011. Leaders at War: How Presidents Shape Military Interventions. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Saunders, E. N. 2015. War and the inner circle: Democratic elites and the politics of using force. Security Studies, 24(3), 466–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. N. 2017. No substitute for experience: Presidents, advisers, and information in group decision making. International Organization, 71(S1), S219–S247.Google Scholar
Schultz, K. A. 2005. The politics of risking peace: Do hawks or doves deliver the olive branch? International Organization, 59(1), 1–38.Google Scholar
Schultz, K. A. 2017. Perils of polarization for US foreign policy. The Washington Quarterly, 40(4), 7–28.Google Scholar
Simmons, B. A. 1994. Who Adjusts? Domestic Sources of Foreign Economic Policy During the Interwar Years. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Singer, J. D. 1987. Reconstructing the correlates of war dataset on material capabilities of states, 1816–1985. International Interactions, 14(2), 115–132.Google Scholar
Smith, T. 2000. Foreign Attachments: The Power of Ethnic Groups in the Making of American Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, J. 1991. Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Solingen, E. 1998. Regional Orders at Century’s Dawn: Global and Domestic Influences on Grand Strategy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Solingen, E. 2007. Nuclear Logics: Contrasting Paths in East Asia and the Middle East. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Staton, J. K. and Moore, W. H. 2011. Judicial power in domestic and international politics. International Organization, 65(3), 553–587.Google Scholar
Sudduth, J. K. 2017. Strategic logic of elite purges in dictatorships. Comparative Political Studies, 50(13), 1768–1801.Google Scholar
Svolik, M. W. 2012. The Politics of Authoritarian Rule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thacker, S. C. 1999. The high politics of IMF lending. World Politics, 52(1), 38–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tingley, D. 2010. Donors and domestic politics: Political influences on foreign aid effort. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 50(1), 40–49.Google Scholar
Trubowitz, P. 1998. Defining the National Interest: Conflict and Change in American Foreign Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, G., 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vengroff, R. 1976. Instability and foreign policy behavior: Black Africa in the UN. American Journal of Political Science, 20(3), 425–438.Google Scholar
Verdier, P. H. and Versteeg, M. 2019. Separation of powers, treaty-making, and treaty withdrawal in Bradley, C. A. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Foreign Relations Law. New York: Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-comparative-foreign-relations-law-9780190653330?cc=us&lang=en&#Google Scholar
Voeten, E. 2000. Clashes in the assembly. International Organization, 54(2), 185–215.Google Scholar
Waldner, D. and Lust, E. 2018. Unwelcome change: Coming to terms with democratic backsliding. Annual Review of Political Science, 21, 93–113.Google Scholar
Walt, S. M. 1987. The Origins of Alliance. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Weeks, J. L. 2014. Dictators at War and Peace. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wiegandt, M. H. 1995. Germany’s international integration: The rulings of the German federal constitutional court on the Maastricht Treaty and the out-of-area deployment of German troops. American University International Law Review, 10(2), 889–916.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. C. and Woldense, J. 2019. Contested or established? A comparison of legislative powers across regimes. Democratization, 26(4), 585–605.Google Scholar
Yarhi-Milo, K. 2018. Who Fights for Reputation: The Psychology of Leaders in International Conflict. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Yarhi-Milo, K., Kertzer, J. D. and Renshon, J. 2018. Tying hands, sinking costs, and leader attributes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 62(10), 2150–2179.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Domestic Interests, Democracy, and Foreign Policy Change
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Domestic Interests, Democracy, and Foreign Policy Change
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Domestic Interests, Democracy, and Foreign Policy Change
Available formats
×