Every sovereign country in the world has a foreign policy that they subscribe to and use in the international environment. Foreign policy has for many years been used to shape and even alter the course of events internationally. The factors and prevailing circumstances used to formulate foreign policy are numerous.
Leaders of governments are tasked with the responsibility of making decisions to be used in structuring their countries foreign policy. The effect and results of foreign policy range from the mild and unobtrusive to the overt and life altering. Some examples are the decision to wage war or make peace, and imposing of social and economic sanctions.
In studying foreign policy, it has emerged that culture plays an important role in influencing the type of policy adopted. In studying foreign policy, empirical evidence is relied upon to critically analyze the policy and its effect in the environment how it was implemented (Adam 1991). The following article will seek to determine that cultural representation matters in formulating foreign policy.
Foreign policy is affected by various factors which include social changes, culture, international policy and domestic policy. The success or failure of foreign policies can only be determined after the implementation of the policy because in most cases, the policy operates in fluid environments.
Decision makers must carefully consider all the possible scenarios that might arise from particular foreign policies and choose the best option. Learning from the mistakes and success of previous foreign policies is an essential tool for individuals involved in creating foreign policies for their countries. The time required for the construction of various foreign policy decisions varies from adequate to limited schedule.
In some cases, leaders make intuitive foreign policy decisions when they are time barred and their personality traits play a major role in the type of decision made (Ahmad 1992). With many factors affecting the formulation of foreign policy, it is clear that the process is not an exact science and at times relies on human nature which has the tendency of being unpredictable and can also be shaped by culture of a particular society.
Culture can be described as the norms and collective identities of a particular society. After the cold war ended, theories in international relations began to incorporate culture as an important element of international relations. The theories included constructivism, soft power and clash of civilization.
In clash of civilization, Huntington proposes that after the cold war period, global politics began to be influenced by culture and were increasingly multi polar. He also proposed that state affairs and interaction with other states began to be influenced by elements of culture and civilization.
The conflicts in the world began to change and he describes clash of civilization as the conflict between the West and other cultures that are different from the West’s. He also proposes that regional politics adopted a racial dimension while global civilization dimension and competition among world powers involves clash of civilization dimension (Barker, Hulme and Iversen 1994).
Joseph Nye’s theory of soft power proposes that the post cold war period changed international relations as power changed from hard power which was military focused to soft power which was cultural and economic based. The constructivism theory proposed by Alexander Wendt incorporates culture as one of the main elements that should be taken into account when developing foreign policies.
Constructivism identifies culture in relation to foreign policy as the shared or common international knowledge including international law and international procedures of protocol. The theory looks at states and nations as the result of social phenomena and constructed by the practices of people. The theory goes on to propose that international systems have been built from common social practices.
The theory further categorizes the relationship between states into three categories. The Lockean culture where there is rivalry, the Hobbesian where there is enmity and the Kantian where there is mutual friendship. All these theories propose that culture should not be ignored because it is an important element in foreign and international policy especially during the post cold war period (Bernal 1991).
In some academic spheres relating to the study of international relations, culture is not viewed or accepted as an important factor on foreign policy. Various explanations and reasons have been given to support this perspective.
One explanation views culture as a guise which is used by some nations and states to justify their foreign policies while in actual fact, other factors are the true motivators of the adoption of particular foreign policy.
Culture can be used as an ethical justification for foreign policy, while under other circumstances, the policies would be very unpalatable especially to a morally conscious public and to bodies that defend and uphold human rights such as the United Nations. In many situations, the foreign policy that claims to have the defense of culture as their prime motivator is usually sensitized.
Culture is seen not to impact on foreign policy and consequently, cultural representations do not matter in foreign policy. In formulating foreign policy, some states may justify the use of certain foreign policy as a way of preserving their own cultural beliefs or as a way of liberating others from cultural practices that violate human rights.
There are various examples used to show how governments and leaders may manipulate media and society to believe that foreign policy are based on ethics but in reality they are other motives such as expanding power the power base of a country (Salter 2002).
American foreign policy has for many years been pegged on the need to spread their ideology to other countries. The Americans have been accused of imposing their ideas of morality and righteousness. A form of exceptionalism defines the American psyche. In the war against terror, the US and its allies invaded Iraq with the intention of rooting out terrorism and protecting the citizens in their countries.
In the course of the war when weapons of mass destruction were not discovered, other reasons were floated to justify the military action, one of the reasons was the liberation of citizens in the countries that had been invaded. In Afghanistan the justification used was the liberation of citizens from the oppressive Taliban regime. The war would liberate the cultural identity of Afghanistan.
In Iraq, the war was to liberate the country from Saddam Hussein’s oppressive regime and to introduce democracy in the country. The reason for war took a cultural dimension which is contrary to the initial intention of the war. This example illustrates how cultural representation do not matter in foreign relations but is sometimes used to hide the true reasons behind the policy (Carrier 1995)
Cultural representations in international relations come in different forms and the environments in which they operate vary from one country to another. In the post war era, countries in the West emerged with new identities which promoted values that advocated for democracy and upholding of human rights.
Countries such as the United States of America sought to spread the gospel of democracy as the most superior system of government. The United States and other Western powers embarked on a mission to export their beliefs and ideologies to counter other ideologies such as communism.
This had a great influence on the nature and type of foreign policies adopted by the West in relating to other countries especially third world countries. The western powers believed their culture and ideologies was the most ideal and sought to transform cultures and ideologies that did not conform to their own; this was done mainly through foreign policy and diplomacy.
The West had adopted a new form of imperialism as they considered their culture and ideologies superior to any other. Foreign policy in these instances did not take culture into consideration (Castle 2001).
According to Salter (2002), he articulates the nature of foreign policy by Western countries towards third world countries. He describes two forms of sovereignty, positive and negative. Positive sovereignty describing the original form of statehood gained from collective efforts of citizenry to protect their sovereignty especially the areas of economy and defense.
Negative sovereignty on the other hand is when states are born out of ratification of the international laws that had previously prevented their existence. Third world countries are often the benefactors in negative sovereignty and Salter observes that this has the effect of producing states and quasi states.
This has an impact on foreign relations in that, the West views third world countries as inferior in many aspects and thus the foreign policy developed for these countries is skewed to support prevailing stereotypes.
The Western foreign policy towards third world countries often do not take into account the regional social and cultural aspects. It can be concluded that imperialism was a central theme in the formulation of foreign policy (Rich 1999)
The emergence of neo colonialism in the post war era has greatly changed foreign policy in many countries. In the colonial period, foreign policy had not yet developed to be an issue of priority to the governments of the time. The end of colonialism heralded the beginning of governments drafting national foreign policy for diplomatic purposes.
In the neo-colonial period, former colonial powers were faced with new challenges forcing them to re invent their foreign affairs policies. Western powers realized the complexities of the new relationship with their former colonies and the cultural make up of the colonies was one of the factors that influenced a change in foreign policy.
During the colonial period, United States opted not to interfere with the colonial relationship of colonies and their respective colonial masters. Agitation for independence in the colonies did not favor the American national interests of the time. The Americans favored peaceful colonies where their nationals could pursue economic interest without the threat of conflicts.
In the neo colonial period, America changed foreign policy and was involved especially in Africa in the creation, promotion and ending of different conflicts to suit their national interests. Foreign policy of former colonial masters in the colonies began to be influenced by the cultural and societal frameworks of the countries (Said 1978).
Different cultures demanded different approaches in foreign policy. In Africa, the United States formed the African Crisis Response Initiative to deal with foreign policy in Africa. An example is the intervention of the Western powers in the eighteen year conflict of Southern Sudan.
After the terrorist attacks of 9/11 the Americans pressured the Sudan government to engage in peace talks with the South. This was to prevent terrorist groups using the lawless area as a haven. Religious groups in the United States identified with the plight of Southern Sudan Christian communities and pressurized their government to intervene.
United States of America and European countries imposed tough economic sanctions on Sudan and eventually peace was realized and South Sudan became a sovereign state. The cultural similarity between the Americans and the South Sudan people influenced a change in the foreign policy of the US government and they got involved in a conflict which there was initially no much to be gained in terms of national interests (Hunt 1987).
In discussing cultural factors that may have an influence on foreign policy, oriental’s comes to mind. Eastern cultures have greatly influenced the foreign policy adopted by the West. The history of the West and the East has been full of strife and conflict, from the era of the crusades to the modern day war on terror. The West has used the culture of the east as a reason for their foreign policies.
During the crusades, religion and culture of the east were viewed to be different to the west belief systems and war was the outcome of perceived differences. The foreign policy adopted at the time was one that favored conflict rather than diplomacy. Today, a different war is being waged but it is still a result of foreign policy. The West and its allies have waged the war on terror and on the receiving end is largely the Islamic world.
In his book covering Islam, Edward claims that Islam takes a radical view and accuses the West of poor foreign policy based on negatively skewed views of the modern Islamic world. After the terror attacks of September 11th, the West and its allies launched the war on terror which mainly targeted the Islamic world. Edward argues that the Western media has painted the wrong or misinformed picture of Islamic countries.
The media has constantly bombarded the public in the west with negative imagery and descriptions of the Islamic world and campaigned for the need to change the negative aspects of Islamic culture such as fanaticism. All this has been done to provide justification for the kind of foreign and economic policies imposed on Islamic countries which are accused of funding and harboring terrorists.
The foreign policy has included the use of military force such the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. Justification for the foreign policy is presented as the need to free the citizens in Islamic countries from retrogressive culture (Hardt 2000).
Gender as an aspect of culture can be used to support the argument that cultural representation matters in foreign policy. Women are more often than not underrepresented in decision organs of governments which could be explained by cultural beliefs and practices which do not promote gender equality.
Some feminist propose that the lack of women representation has contributed to governments choosing military options as opposed to diplomatic options to resolve conflicts (Grovogui 1996). In some cases governments have used the plight of women as a reason for authorizing military in their foreign policies.
The governments depict the plight of the women as a violation of human rights and justify their use of force as a way of emancipating the women. This calls to mind the use of military force in the war on terror in Afghanistan. The USA and its allies used the plight of the oppressed afghan woman as one of the reasons to justify the war on terror.
Race is another aspect of culture that can be said to influence foreign policy. Great crimes against humanity have taken place in the name of racial segregation but with the end of segregation, there has been greater tolerance among different races.
Race has at times been used as a topic by which foreign policy has been formulated. In the United States, Truman and Eisenhower administration distanced themselves from racial segregation and adopted laws that eventually led to more civil rights for the African American community.
This was caused by the effort of the US government to clean their image abroad in their quest to legitimize and affirm their position as a world leader. The Soviet Government used the racial tensions and segregation practiced in the US at the time to promote anti-American rhetoric.
Asian governments viewed the US with suspicion due to their racial policies. In these examples, it is clear that the US government used race relationship which is part of the culture to change their domestic and foreign policies (Doty 1996).
Race is an element of culture and in the apartheid era in South Africa, it managed to shape the foreign policies of many governments. In South Africa the white minority had for years imposed apartheid a system which advocated and practiced the spate development of races. The majority black community of South Africa was segregated and oppressed by the White community.
The Black South Africans were involved in struggle for equality in their country. They held several demonstrations and rebellious activities to show their struggle for equality. The world watched and could no longer remain silent to the plight of the black community in South Africa. The United Nations imposed economic sanctions on South Africa and many countries were party to the sanctions.
This is an example where the cultural practices of another country shaped the foreign policy of another country. Some countries imposed travel bans to their citizens not to travel to South Africa to press for the abolishment of apartheid. In the end, the sanctions worked and apartheid ended. This was largely as a result of foreign policy (Chowdhry 2000).
The West is often accused of exercising policies that advance post colonialism and America in specific is often accused of practicing imperialism. Culture does not inform mankind of foreign policy. In the post colonial period, United States was involved in influencing African politics. The Americans were involved in many conflicts both negatively and positively. America sold weaponry to various warring groups in Africa at the time.
The interest of the American government was largely economical and the human suffering that was brought about by the conflicts did not influence the policies taken to fund wars and conflicts on the continent. National interest of the Americans came before the concern for human rights.
Despot rulers were enabled by the Americans if they helped further American interests. The impact on social and culture of the counties involved was not taken into consideration. This clearly shows that culture does not matter in foreign policy (Darby 1997).
One of the main reasons for culture is projecting of identity abroad. Each country has a national identity which distinguishes it from other countries in the world. Symbols of national identity help in identifying with one’s own country and even foster patriotism. The symbols can be flags, songs or even national dress. This identity is formed and influenced by culture. In some cases countries can be identified by some cultural aspects.
An example is that Italians are famous for rich art culture while Germans are famous for their discipline. These are aspects of culture that uniquely identify a country or people. The world has become a global village and cultures often merge and diffuse into different regions.
The projection of culture abroad will have the effect of easing relations and enhancing interactions among different countries. The countries might use strong cultural relationships to promote trade and diplomacy amongst themselves (Chambers 1994).
Immigration is a cultural aspect that can be used to show how foreign policy and cultural representation are related and linked. People in less developed countries usually migrate to developed countries in search of work and a chance to improve their lives, while other people migrate to work in host countries. In some cases, people migrate to escape a place where their lives may be in danger in the case of asylum seekers.
Migration leads to the introduction of new culture to an existing cultural framework. Governments formulate foreign policy in light of the mentioned scenarios. The policies govern the kind of migrants to enter a certain country and the activity they are to undertake. Foreign policy thus allows the introduction and accommodation of new culture into a country.
The West is grappling with the problem of illegal migrants in their countries. Illegal migrants bring new challenges to host countries. The host countries’ social and cultural order is affected. The immigrants migrate with their cultural identities and integration can at times be challenging.
Host countries view illegal immigrants as a problem and adopt policies to curb the problem. An example is when a country formulates policies that allows or denies entry of immigrants from certain countries or regions. Foreign policy in this case takes into account culture as an important factor in structuring of the policy (Celestin 1996).
Foreign policy is created to achieve various goals. The features of foreign policy are designed and geared to establish and enhance relationships between different countries. Citizens’ workings abroad as expatriates and in other capacities are assured security through foreign policy. Foreign policy also helps to ensure the protection of a countries territory mainly from threats of secession.
The promotion of trade and commerce is assisted by foreign policy. The decisions are made concerning peace and related to foreign policy. The cooperation among countries on issues that affect humanity as a whole such as global warming is greatly enhanced by foreign policy. Cultural representation is thus an important factor in foreign policy. The culture of people is often their identity.
The identity of the people will have a great influence on the way they conduct business and interact with others. Hence, the culture of people will influence the type of foreign policy they adopt. An example is countries which value religion andl incorporate religion into their policies whether foreign or domestic (Chakrabarty 2000).
Foreign policy can also be used to advance the culture of a country. In cases where the country is interested in spreading their culture, it can use foreign policy to advance its effectiveness. The policy may take a diplomatic or even a military angle. An example is the establishment of cultural centers in foreign countries. The countries design their foreign policy to favor the advancement of their societal and cultural practices.
This is used as a way of promoting greater cooperation between countries and also promoting peaceful coexistence. The countries having the cultural centers established in them gain from exposing their citizens to new culture which is important in the age of globalization.
This proves that culture indeed does matter in foreign policy. In some cases where the spread of culture is done in a forceful manner, the result is a bad foreign policy but which is not motivated by culture.
The culture of a country can influence the identity and the character traits of individuals. Policies are formulated by people who have inherited their character traits from living in certain cultural environments. In this way, it is very likely that the kind of policy that they formulate will be influenced by the culture of the country they live in.
The cultural environment will have an effect on the foreign policy they draft. Leaders of various countries govern people with different cultural identities. In leadership, there is the need to please the citizens, which can translate in the formulation of policies that are culturally inclined. In this way, foreign policy might be as a direct result of culture.
This is because culture can shape the thinking of people and their actions as well. In this way culture influences the making of foreign policy as the leadership strives to stay in their positions by pleasing the masses. This propagates the notion that supports the inclusion of cultural representation in foreign policy (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin 1998).
The foreign policy needs to take into account the promotion of principles that advocate for human rights. From the arguments in the essay, we have seen that there are two ways through which policies are formulated through cultural strings. There is the genuine case where the values of a country are considered while the other is through promotion of self interest.
Therefore, it is the responsibility of policy makers to consider genuine policies. This means that foreign policy will be influenced by the culture of all parties involved. In the global village, that is the world today, the rights of other people has become an important issue and respect of positive culture is promoted in most countries.
If foreign policy involves exporting of a countries’ identity, then it cannot be completely removed from culture. This means that cultural representation does matter when foreign policy is concerned (Alloula 198).
Cited references
Adam I, Tiffin H. Past the last post: theorizing post-colonialism and post-modernism, London: Harvester Wheat sheaf, 1991. 46-49.
Ahmad A. Orientalism and after ambivalence and cosmopolitan location on the work of Said, Edward, Economic and Political Weekly 1992, 30: 98-116.
Alloula M. From the colonial harem in N. Mirzoeff (editor) the visual culture reader, London: Routledge, 1998, 401p.
Ashcroft B., Griffiths G., Tiffin, H. Key concepts in post-colonial studies, London: Routledge. 1998. 445-446.
Barker F., Hulme P., Iversen, M. (editors). Colonial discourse, postcolonial theory, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994. 22-23.
Bernal M. Black Athena the Afro-asiatic roots of classical civilization: Volume I: the fabrication of Greece 1785-1985, New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1991. 12p.
Carrier J G., editor. Occidentalism: images of the West, Oxford: Clarendon, 1995. 14p.
Castle G., editor. Post-colonial discourses: an anthology, Oxford: Blackwell, 2001. 15p. Celestin R. From cannibals to radicals: figures and limits of exoticism, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996. 505p.
Chakrabarty D. Provincializing Europe: postcolonial thought and historical difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000. 90p.
Chambers I. Migrancy, culture, identity, London: Routledge, 1994. 9-10.
Chowdhry G, and Nair, S. Power in a postcolonial world: race, gender and class in IR, London: Routledge, 2002. 50-55.
Darby P., editor. Post colonialism at the edge of international relations: post colonialism, gender, and dependency, London: Pinter, 1997. 240-24.
Doty R., editor. Imperial Encounters, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996.155-156.
Grovogui S N. Sovereigns, quasi sovereigns, and Africans, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996. 101p.
Hardt M, and Negri A. Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2000. 20p.
Hunt M H. Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy, New Haven: Yale University Press 1987. 290p.
Rich P. European Identity and the Myth of Islam: A Reassessment’, Review of International Studies1999, 25: 435-541 Said E. Orientalism, London: Penguin, 1978. 333p.
Salter M B. Barbarians and Civilization in International Relations, London: Pluto, 2002. 99p.