Vandenberg Vanished

US Congress and the Politicisation of Military Interventions

Bibliographic Data

ID6313628
AuthorsFlorian Böller (0000-0002-0386-4758, University of Kaiserslautern, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume75
Issue3
Pages676-696
Publication date2022-07-06
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueParliamentary Affairs (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-2290 • E-ISSN: 1460-2482
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/pa/gsab023
OpenAlexW3140707830
LanguageEN
Citations received10
References cited34

This article examines the extent and patterns of politicisation in the field of military interventions for the USA after the end of the Cold War. The analysis shows that key votes on war and peace in the US Congress are contested to a higher degree than in the European parliaments. It finds that Republican members of Congress (MoC) are in general more supportive of military interventions than Democrats. At the same time, party loyalty towards the president influences the level of support. Furthermore, an original content analysis of congressional debates reveals that MoC use specific argumentative frames in line with partisan ideology. Both parts of the analysis point to the relevance of partisanship and partisan ideology for understanding the politicisation of military interventions policies. Thus, the traditional bipartisan spirit, paradigmatically invoked by US Senator Arthur Vandenberg during the Cold War, has almost vanished

Argumentative · Cold war · Ideology · Loyalty · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Psychological intervention · Relevance (law · Sociology · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Psychology · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOI