Religion or History
Agreeably, foreign policy decision-making is considered as the most instrumental in the state’s disposal to pursue vital national interests. Also, it is regarded as the political activity of a nation. An excellent foreign policy leads a country to fulfill national interests and acquire the right position among the inter-state integration. With that, the study of foreign policy plays a central role in international studies. However, a challenge faced when understanding foreign policy aspects is not only the definition but what factors play an essential role in shaping decision making. Religion is meant to influence decision making as it teaches morality. The involvement of religion in political scope has seen results such as increased engagement of state or non-state actors. Similarly, history indelibly influences foreign policy by helping state officials understand the nations and people. The purpose of this paper is to discuss which factor between history and religion is most important in shaping foreign policy decision-making.
Religion Factor
To better understand and take a stance on the most crucial factor in shaping foreign policy decisions, it is paramount to address each distinctly with a contribution to foreign policy. At a glance, religion can be said to have a defining set of ideas through the theology model. A central place to think of the role of religion in foreign policy is to consider how the idea plays a part within institutions. What it means to think religion as an idea is that the concept is a theological doctrine guiding for living a moral life in the manner of religious conceptualization (Svensson 3). When different religious groups practice versions of their religion, they thus have distinct ideas about goals and ways to attain them. As such, the foreign policy arena and the participants in decision making are influenced by religious belief shared among them, as a subset of knowledge about national interests (Svensson 5). To the extent that religion is part of shared beliefs, it thus affects foreign policy decision processes.
Religion might be considered essential to shaping policy decision-making in the aspect of the role it plays during conflict resolutions. A large number of studies argue that religious armed conflicts are intractable when compared to non-religious ones. Such might be true and proved in the context where religion is used to build peace between nations in disputes. The problem arises when religion is dissimilar or incompatible. According to studies, religious incompatibilities will unlikely help in proper decision making on foreign policy affairs due to conflicting religious beliefs (Svensson 7). Ethnic cleavage does not adequately allow an opportunity, for example, for peaceful civil war settlement. Typically, there are significant assumptions out there pertaining to what religion is. The concept is not that can be contained, fixed, or defined according to authors (Wilson 11). In most cases, what people understand about religion varies according to geography, politics, cultures, and the economy. As such, religion is rarely one thing from one place to another, and this influences policy as well as practices daily.
The conflict enhancement under religious potential is something familiar enough. However, the problem that emerges from this relationship between international politics and religion is broad. Major efforts are visible at peace-keeping, and this has been undertaken by numerous faith groups in states like South Africa, Northern Ireland, Rwanda, and Mozambique (Kratochwil 2). Although a religious effort to build peace in these nations was unsuccessful as well as resulting peace was fragile; still, a religious factor cannot be neglected in conflict resolutions. On the contrary, the effect of religion on political affairs presents a paradox in that religion appears to be the cause of conflicts at some point. For example, faith not only does it exhort men to peace but also justifies violence in defense of scared. Since this factor seems to cause peace and conflict at the same time, it is thus unclear on the overall importance in the aspect of foreign policy matters. Such a perspective on how religion is a less significant factor in the foreign policy decision process leads to a notion that the concept is no more than a rationalization of other factors.
Religion is a concept on beliefs and values, whereby holding to these factors concerning shaping foreign policy decisions-making, they can impact progress by inhibiting developments. For instance, if the foreign policy decision intends to enhance the promotion of better healthcare and educational services, religious beliefs in some cultures may hinder the proper execution of policies. As such, shaping foreign policy positively may not be fully attained, as intended. In certain studies, by Nilsson (7), one possible reason why war in a state like Iraq continued was due to commitments to problems- religious beliefs. Religion can inhibit learning and update of beliefs.
History Factor
History influences foreign policy in a way that cannot be forgotten, and by taking a stance, it is the most important factor compared to religion. Consciously or unknowingly, officials in government rely on the level of understanding of the past to when seeking to address what is happening in the present. Leaders and policy enforcers try to render emerging and complex issues more legible by reflecting on what has been there before (Cederman 16). Such is not a bad thing because history knowledge, when well utilized, has a high constructive impact on policy. History can help officials in a state like America to have an understanding of the nations as well as citizens with which they relate. History provides a perspective as well as analytical leverage on critical issues: it can allow statesperson access to wisdom that predecessors utilized at a considerable expense. Of course, one cannot policy cannot be made solely based on historical knowledge, but this has significant contributions.
Typically, social theorists like Weber, argue that most people, at times, act in the world habitually without a reflection (Hopf 1). Cognitive neuroscientists have identified that individuals routinely perceive, act as well as feel before they can think (Hopf 2). In other words, they respond to the world without reflecting rationally. Although this study of habit is absent from the concept of international politics, the deliberate actions of agents are paramount and worth of attention. People have been ignoring what others do in their social lives. In that way, there is an exaggeration of actors’ rationality, uncertainty, and agency. What has been underestimated is the patterns of collaboration and conflicts in the political world while mistaking the causes. Such is to infer that, paying attention to history and record of the past is crucial. In institutional settings, citing records of the past or habits is essential for the logic of operation, for example, in the foreign policy bureaucracies or the international monetary fund (IMF) (Hopf 3). The associated routines, standards, and procedures in these sectors are relatively valuable to cite. In the world of politics, according to scholars, it should be suspected that logic or habit is significant. What to keep in mind is that a reflective decision process is made on the background of habit structures.
Nations sometimes tend to content over an issue like territory, and international rivals compete over a varying range of issues simultaneously. The conflict over the problems usually is an accumulation and builds an image of enmity over one another (Dreyer 12). As such, states start to view each other as threatening. Once multiple issues lie on one agenda, the problem is linked to a country. Accumulatio of issues within this approach increases the chances of rivalry, making it possible to bear the cost of militarized conflict seeking and settlements of the problem in favor of one (Crescenzi et al. 1). The approach to addressing such situations is critical to focus on the historical concepts to reveal the path of issues piling. Understanding the conflict process, according to studies, is vital to know the root cause of interstate hostilities, a credit to history factors that gear influence on foreign policy.
America is experiencing a challenging foreign policy outlook since the end of the cold war. Issues in the country are evident in nearly the world’s strategic theaters: from east Asia to Europe (Taylor and Botea 3). The task for foreign policy officials in the US is getting harder, and given the circumstances, it is vital to evaluate how history informs effective crafting of a state. In an ideal world, history presents a valuable overview that cuts across complexities of particular policy issues and shines a light on the way forward. One of the most applied historical analogies in the US is the Vietnam concept (Taylor and Botea 4). The experience of America in Vietnam is frequently invoked to debate the potential military measures that can be employed today. History can conduce to better policy, even though it cannot produce it without support. The challenge, especially with the use of historical analogies, is the problematic analogical reasoning. The sensitivity of policymakers can be diminished to the extent of leading one to overstate the continuity of the past and the present. Also, it can cause a tendency to strip-mine lessons from one event and apply it to another. However, in the light of such dangers, scholars inform that it would be better for policymakers to avoid over-reliance on analogies. The trick is to use history with care, a critical and rigorous mind.
History is most important because it provides analytical leverage on critical policy debates. Historical knowledge arms policymakers with the necessary information to question assumptions, sharpen perspectives, and cut thigh generalizations. History help reminds that amid a situation, the issue is not experienced for the first time. For example, the period 1950s, 70s, 80s, and others have predicted American decline (Haas 6). Applying history in foreign policy decision processes pushes stakeholders to take a thorough look at the projections of an issue, holding strength and weaknesses into consideration.
In conclusion, this paper has looked into depth the application of religion and history in foreign policy decision making. Paying attention to significant benefits by each factor, history is most important in shaping foreign policy. By using historical knowledge, policymakers seek out opportunities to serve in the capacity of policy while sensitizing to issues, challenges, pressures, or threats which are all familiar.
Works Cited
Cederman, Lars-Erik. “Back to Kant: Reinterpreting the Democratic Peace as A Macro historical Learning Process.” The American Political Science Review, vol 95, no. 1, 2001, pp. 15-31., Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Crescenzi, Mark J. C., et al. “Reputation, History, And War.” Vol 44, no. 6, 2007, pp. 651-667., Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Dreyer, David R. “Issue Conflict Accumulation and The Dynamics of Strategic Rivalry.” International Studies Quarterly, vol 54, no. 3, 2010, pp. 779-795., Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Haas, Mark L. “Ideological Polarity and Balancing in Great Power Politics.” Security Studies, vol 23, no. 4, 2014, pp. 715-753. Informa UK Limited, doi:10.1080/09636412.2014.964991. Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Hopf, Ted. “The Logic of Habit in International Relations.” European Journal of International Relations, vol 16, no. 4, 2010, pp. 539-561. SAGE Publications, doi:10.1177/1354066110363502. Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Kratochwil, Friedrich. “Religion And (Inter-)National Politics: on the Heuristics of Identities, Structures, And Agents.” Alternatives, vol 30, 2005, pp. 113-140., Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Nilsson, Marco. “Causal Beliefs and War Termination.” Journal of Peace Research, vol 55, no. 1, 2017, pp. 94-106. SAGE Publications, doi:10.1177/0022343317730120. Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Svensson, Isak. “Fighting with Faith: Religion and Conflict Resolution in Civil Wars.” The Journal Of Conflict Resolution, vol 51, no. 6, 2007, p. 930949., http://www.jstor.com/stable/27638586. Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Taylor, Brian D., and Roxana Botea. “Tilly Tally: War-Making and State-Making in The Contemporary Third World.” International Studies Review, vol 10, no. 1, 2008, pp. 27-56., Accessed 4 Aug 2020.
Wilson, Erin K. “Theorizing Religion as Politics in Postsecular International Relations.” Politics, Religion & Ideology, vol 15, no. 3, 2014, pp. 347-365., http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2014.948590. Accessed 4 Aug 2020.