Andrew Kerester

Prof. Stephen Dyson

Pols 3442 – American Foreign Policy

Midterm Paper #1

September 27, 2015

Foreign Policy: Political Science or Political Art?

The crafting of foreign policy carries enormous consequences, both for America and the

rest of the world, and therefore we must ensure we take the most practical approach to crafting

foreign policy. There are two common approaches to viewing foreign policy: 1. Treat it as a

scientific process with pre-formed rigid rules, procedures, and “formulas” for handling given

scenarios or 2. Treat it as an art form, where creative solutions are used to adapt to changing

scenarios on the fly. However, there exist far too many complex factors that make up foreign

policy to break it down into a scientific process whereby leaders apply specific, rigid and

calculated protocols to any given foreign policy dilemma. The sheer complexity of the factors

which can affect foreign policy simply precludes the practical use of a purely scientific approach.

Instead, a more effective method to craft foreign policy is to treat it as a work of art, viewing it as

an ever-evolving project where any given action can have radically different outcomes

depending on the scenario. Dilemmas in the realm of foreign policy necessitate quick adaptation

and creative thinking, traits that using a more consistent, calculated scientific approach would

hinder. Strategy still plays an important role in foreign policy, but in the artistic approach

strategy acts as more of a general guideline or list of goals, rather than a set step-by-step plan for

1

accomplishing a goal start to finish, as in the case of a scientific approach, thereby allowing the

foreign policy “artists” more flexibility in achieving their goals while still having a coherent

framework to guide their actions. The main assertion this paper aims to prove is that the making

of foreign policy strategy cannot optimally execute its intended goals if treated as a purely

scientific process, and instead we must treat foreign policy as a delicate art form where creativity

and intelligent adaptation trump rigid consistency in the face of ever-evolving global situations

and new challenges, for which there exists no single scientific formula that can decisively

achieve a state’s goals. In order to exhibit the validity of my main argument, the discussion will

first focus attention on the characteristics inherent to foreign policy, and show how these

characteristics cause foreign policy to lend itself better to treatment as an art rather than as a

science. The next focal point of discussion will entail demonstrating why creativity and

adaptation prove more essential in achieving foreign policy goals than rigid consistency. After

accomplishing this, the discussion will conclude by reiterating my main argument and

reconciling it with the notion of a pre-planned strategy. This is accomplished by demonstrating

how even though a looser, more creative attitude toward foreign policy proves most effective,

strategy still remains relevant in the context of an “artist’s” approach to foreign policy.

Let us now turn the discussion to exploring the various characteristics intrinsic to

conducting foreign policy and how these characteristics create an “image” of foreign policy that

appears far more like a manifestation of art than a work of traditional science. To begin, we

must note that no two states have identical circumstances, meaning that, “A country’s size,

geographical location, history and economy all influence the way it conducts foreign policy.”1

Since every state differs in these aspects and more, any given state cannot easily develop an

1 Green, Michael. "Foreign Policy and Diplomatic Representation." Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Last modified January 8, 2013. Accessed September 28, 2015.

2

effective universal scientific doctrine to apply to its foreign policy while adequately taking all

these differences into account. However, these myriad differences are much better handled via

an artistic approach, since any given scenario can be treated as its own independent case with its

own unique solution instead of trying to apply solutions from past dilemmas to new dilemmas

that have slightly different but consequential factors, as the scientific approach tends would tend

to do. Another vital characteristic to take into account is the fact that foreign policy is often

carried out by individual leaders or a representative of their choosing. In America’s case the

President has far more influence and control over foreign policy than Congress. Due to this

general characteristic, individual leaders possess the ability to utilize, improvise and implement

“artistic” and creative solutions to foreign policy dilemmas, rather than being bound by a fixed

“scientific” doctrine pre-set by legislators who typically do not directly partake in major foreign

policy decisions. For instance, this week (9/28/15-10/2/15) is the annual UN General Assembly

debates and President Obama has stated that he will meet with Russian president Vladimir Putin

to discuss global issues, specifically the ongoing crises in Syria and Ukraine.2 The meeting

between these two powerful heads of state may culminate in consequential decisions with

tangible outcomes, and both men possess the freedom to make decisions as individuals

representing their respective countries. This context of individual leaders meeting and crafting

foreign policy while retaining relative flexibility and personal discretion in decision-making

facilitates an artistic approach whereby leaders may adapt on the fly to rapidly changing

circumstances and/or seize opportunities as they appear, actions which would likely be very

difficult, if not impossible, if leaders were bound by rigid, scientifically calculated doctrines.

Evidence of how these meetings between individual leaders, a standard feature in the realm of

2 Khalilzad, Zalmay. "Face-to-Face: Obama Meets Putin." The National Interest. September 28, 2015. Accessed September 28, 2015.

3

foreign policy, creates an environment conducive to applying an artistic touch exists in the fact

that the meeting between Obama and Putin could cause a number of different outcomes

depending on the skill and creativity of these two “artists”: “Against the backdrop of a forward

Russian strategy in Syria and Ukraine, and the uncertainty about Russian objectives in both

theaters, the summit could be a success if it leads to a conceptual agreement for a balanced

settlement to one or both of these conflicts. Failure should lead to a significant adjustment in

U.S. strategy in both conflicts to increase pressure on Russia.”3 Furthermore, regardless of

actual global circumstances, the skill of “foreign policy artists” plays a major role in determining

foreign policy outcomes. In this case, Obama, as a “foreign policy artist,” possesses the ability

to apply pressure and negotiate a settlement with Putin over Syria and Ukraine by emphasizing

to Putin the reality that Russia in its current situation is exposed.4 Whether Obama applies this

leverage or not is up to his discretion as an individual artist. Adopting a rigid scientific approach

does not lend itself well to these types of encounters between leaders which frequently determine

major foreign policy outcomes, as rigidity restricts the ability of the “artists” to do what they do

best (or worst, depending on your political opinions): create works of art, in the case of our

discussion, the art of foreign policy.

Although the crafting of foreign policy exhibits core characteristics which make it

advantageous to treat it as an art form, there remains another crucial question to answer: what

carries more value, creativity or consistency? While in practice creativity and consistency exist

to differing degrees in both the scientific approach and the artistic approach, for the sake of

argument we will associate creativity as being more closely related to the artistic approach and

consistency as being more closely related to the scientific approach. With this in mind, let us

3 Khalilzad, “Face-to-Face: Obama Meets Putin” 4 Khalilzad, “Face-to-Face: Obama Meets Putin”

4

consider a common technique employed by the scientific approach which exemplifies the

principle of consistency: the trial-and-error method. This method as referenced in the context of

foreign policy within this paper will be defined as the application of solutions that worked in the

past to similar new situations. In this sense, a trial-and-error scientific approach cannot provide

reliable solutions to newly emerging problems, as even different scenarios which may appear

identical can have subtle variations in their contributing factors which could necessitate vastly

different solutions. A direct example of the failure of trial-and-error to reproduce effective

results is evidenced by the botched “European Neighborhood Policy”: “In contrast to the success

of its eastward enlargement drive that transformed former communist countries into thriving

market democracies, the European Neighbourhood Policy launched in 2003 has been a

spectacular flop.”5 While the EU successfully integrated many former soviet states into the EU,

it is all but staring into the face of defeat in its attempt to use the same strategy to integrate more

states on the periphery of the EU. By attempting to apply the same strategy that worked

previously with several former soviet states to periphery states, the EU’s use of relatively rigid

consistency failed to take into account key differences between states: “It [the European

Neighbourhood Policy] set out a one-size-fits-all relationship for states with widely diverse

levels of economic development and governance, most of which are ill-equipped to apply

swathes of EU market, environmental or health and safety legislation.”6 Furthermore, the

European Neighbourhood Policy failed to appreciate the finer details and nuances of the North

African and southern Caucasus countries it tried to incorporate by incorrectly assuming that

these countries wished to cooperate and trade with one another, when in actuality no such desire

for trade and cooperation existed between these countries.7 The EU policymakers made the 5 Taylor, Paul. "EU 'Ring of Friends' Turns into Ring of Fire." Reuters. September 27, 2015. Accessed September 28, 20156 Taylor, “EU ‘Ring of Friends’ Turns into Ring of Fire”7 Taylor, “EU ‘Ring of Friends’ Turns into Ring of Fire”

5

mistake of over-emphasizing the importance of consistency, presuming that what worked on one

occasion would also work again in a similar situation, and neglecting the finer details unique to

each situation. After recognizing this failure the EU began to shift its approach and, “Now the

EU neighborhood policy is undergoing a fundamental rethink, with a more modest, flexible and

differentiated approach due to be unveiled on Nov. 17 [2015].”8 In other words, one could

accurately say that the EU has decided to take a more artistic approach to its foreign policy.

Creativity deserves prominent recognition of its importance in the crafting of effective

foreign policy, as the next example from recent events will show. President Obama met with

Vladimir Putin during the UN General Assembly debates this week of 9/28/15, as mentioned

earlier within this paper, and Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei

Lavrov also met, to discuss foreign policy issues9. Since these leaders possess the capacity to

freely negotiate on behalf of their respective states, the nature of their meetings inherently

operates under an artistic approach to foreign policy. This creative freedom allowed these

leaders to arrive at an agreement on several goals for handling the ongoing Syrian conflict.10 In

the words of John Kerry, “There was agreement that Syria should be a unified country, united,

that it needs to be secular, that ISIL needs to be taken on, and that there needs to be a managed

transition.”11 Although Kerry also mentioned that Russia and the USA have differing views on

what such a “managed transition” would consist of,12 there now exists an established framework

of basic goals under which mutual cooperation can take place. Had the USA and Russia used

former policies as a basis for foreign policy, such as following their older Cold War-era policies

8 Taylor, “EU ‘Ring of Friends’ Turns into Ring of Fire”9 Heavey, Susan. "U.S., Russia Agree Syria Must Be United and Secular: Kerry." Reuters. September 29, 2015. Accessed September 30, 2015. 10 Heavey, Susan. "U.S., Russia Agree Syria Must Be United and Secular: Kerry." 11 Heavey, Susan. "U.S., Russia Agree Syria Must Be United and Secular: Kerry."12 Heavey, Susan. "U.S., Russia Agree Syria Must Be United and Secular: Kerry."

6

towards each other, than their leaders would be constrained by more rigid limitations, thereby

restricting their ability to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution, and the outcome of the

meetings would likely have been far more confrontational. However, these leaders were allowed

the creative freedom to adapt to new situations and make unconventional decisions, such as

agreeing on common goals for Syria even while the two states remain very much at odds over

Ukraine. This creativity appears as if it will pay off, as when questioned about whether it is

possible to use Russia and Iran’s influence over Syria to put an end to President Bashar al-

Assad’s use of barrel bombs on his own people, an interest of the United States, Kerry

responded, “Absolutely…They are both in the position, in exchange perhaps for something we

might do, they might decide to keep Assad from dropping barrel bombs.”13 Thus, through use of

an artistic approach to creatively craft foreign policy the USA can potentially accomplish goals

important to its interests without directly intervening or coming into direct conflict with other

major powers, as it likely would have had it implemented the more confrontational policies

towards Russia which it successfully used during the Cold War. Here in the examples of the

EU’s failed “European Neighborhood Policy” and the high-level diplomatic talks between the

USA and Russia at the very recent UN General Assembly debates, we have found an answer to

our question and can observe how creativity in foreign policy triumphs over rigid consistency

based on past successful policies.

However, this conclusion does not mean that strategy or set plans and steps for

achieving foreign policy goals are of no use in the artistic approach. It simply means that

whatever strategy is implemented must be flexible, open to adjustment as necessary and, most

importantly, able to adapt to changing circumstances. The artistic approach to foreign policy

13 Heavey, Susan. "U.S., Russia Agree Syria Must Be United and Secular: Kerry."

7

provides a basis for executing more effective policies than a rigid scientific approach; however,

by mixing artistic creativity with advance strategic planning, states can achieve even better

outcomes. In other words, if foreign policymakers make use of their creativity to craft a number

of different plans or strategies contingent on differing circumstances than they will be better

prepared for whatever situations may develop and have an easier time adapting to changing

circumstances. For instance, recall how during the UN General Assembly debates this week

Putin met with Obama to discuss Syria and Ukraine and agreed on a few basic goals for Syria.

While Russia and the USA can agree on these basic goals, they disagree on the specifics, leading

to a murky situation where cooperation and confrontation coexist between these states. So while

they can cooperate on some issues, such as the need to defeat ISIS, both must prepare multiple

different strategies to react to any unexpected moves the other state may take. This brings us to

Russia’s recent actions on 9/30/15, when Russian air forces launched air strikes against targets in

Syria; however these air strikes appear to target, not ISIS, but a rebel group in Syria supported by

the USA.14 While both states agree that Syria needs a stable unified government, the USA

desires a regime change while Russia supports the incumbent President Bashar al-Assad, leading

to a key divergence in interests between the two nations and a source of tension and mistrust. As

the situation unfolds many different factors may change and both states must be ready to

confront whatever challenges may come their way, whether those challenges come from each

other or a third party. To maintain this state of readiness and to execute the most effective

foreign policy, these states, and any other state confronting foreign policy challenges, must adopt

an artistic approach to foreign policy and utilize their creative abilities to the fullest within the

bounds of their overall strategic goals.

14 Kenner, David. "Russia’s First Strikes in Syria Hit U.S. Ally, Not Islamic State." ForeignPolicy.com. September 30, 2015. Accessed September 30, 2015.

8

Works Cited

9

1. Green, Michael. "Foreign Policy and Diplomatic Representation." Te Ara Encyclopedia

of New Zealand. Last modified January 8, 2013. Accessed September 28, 2015.

http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/foreign-policy-and-diplomatic-representation/page-9.

2. Heavey, Susan. "U.S., Russia Agree Syria Must Be United and Secular: Kerry." Reuters.

September 29, 2015. Accessed September 30, 2015.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/29/us-un-assembly-usa-russia-

idUSKCN0RT1DF20150929

3. Kenner, David. "Russia’s First Strikes in Syria Hit U.S. Ally, Not Islamic State."

ForeignPolicy.com. September 30, 2015. Accessed September 30, 2015.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/09/30/russias-first-strikes-in-syria-hit-u-s-ally-not-islamic-

state/?

utm_content=buffer18175&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campai

gn=buffer

4. Khalilzad, Zalmay. "Face-to-Face: Obama Meets Putin." The National Interest.

September 28, 2015. Accessed September 28, 2015.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/face-face-obama-meets-putin-13948

5. Taylor, Paul. "EU 'Ring of Friends' Turns into Ring of Fire." Reuters. September 27,

2015. Accessed September 28, 2015. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/27/us-

europe-migrants-neighbourhood-analysi-idUSKCN0RR09020150927

10