Why seek international organisation approval under unipolarity? Averting issue linkage vs. appeasing Congress
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4444023 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stefano Recchia (0000-0002-4865-5757, University of Cambridge, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 78-101 |
| Publication date | 2016-03-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Relations (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0047-1178 • E-ISSN: 1741-2862 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0047117815593137 |
| OpenAlex | W2339209950 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 11 |
What motivates the United States, the world's most powerful country, to seek multilateral approval from the United Nations or NATO for its military interventions? Drawing on interviews with top-level US policymakers and combining process tracing with a structured-focused comparison of several cases, this article reveals that American leaders do not value multilateral approval primarily to avert negative issue linkage, or 'soft balancing' in other policy domains. Instead, they are motivated by narrower concerns. Their main goal is to facilitate sustained military and financial burden sharing on the prospective intervention, in the expectation that this will assuage congressional concerns about resource costs, reducing the risk that Congress might withdraw its support once American troops are deployed. The article therefore demonstrates that (1) US policymakers worry less about issue linkage than many International Relations theorists, as policymakers are confident that overall, US power inclines other countries to bandwagon with the United States, and (2) contrary to widespread belief, executive-branch concerns about congressional opposition do significantly influence US military intervention decision-making
Bandwagon effect · International relations · Interventionism (politics) · Linkage (software) · Opposition (politics) · Political science · Politics · Psychological intervention · Public relations · Worry · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Political Conflict and Governance · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Psychology · Public Administration
The Paradox of American Power
Elite Consensus as a Determinant of Alliance Cohesion
The Domestic Politics of Humanitarian Intervention
Soldiers, Civilians, and Multilateral Humanitarian Intervention
Waiting for Balancing
Soft Balancing against the United States
Government's little helper
Let’s Get a Second Opinion
Ballotbox Diplomacy
The Political Origins of the UN Security Council's Ability to Legitimize the Use of Force
The United Nations Security Council and the Rally 'Round the Flag Effect
| Citations per year | 0.44 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2017 - 2024 (8) |
| Highly cited | No |