Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:52:44.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

National interests and foreign policy: A conceptual framework for analysis and decision-making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2009

Donald E. Nuechterlein
Donald E. Nuechterlein
Affiliation:
Visiting Fulbright Professor in International Politics, University College of Wales at Aberystwyth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The term “national interest” has been used by statesmen and scholars since the founding of nation-states to describe the aspirations and goals of sovereign entities in the international arena. Today foreign ministers, military strategists and academicians discuss the vital interests of their countries in ways suggesting that everyone understands precisely what they mean and will draw correct inferences from their use of the term. Nothing could be further from reality. In truth, the study of international politics as well as the art of diplomacy suffer from widespread ambiguity about the meaning of national interest, with the result that some scholars have proposed that the concept be abandoned and replaced by some other phrase. To my mind, this would be an abdication of the scholar's responsibility because, whether we like it or not, the term national interest is so deeply ingrained in the literature of international relations and diplomatic language that it is unlikely to be dismissed from our vocabulary simply because some scholars find it useless. Were we to attempt to substitute some new phrase, we would likely find even less consensus and could become engaged in yet another round of jargon-creation. A better alternative, I suggest, is to strive for a more precise definition of national interest and then provide a conceptual framework in which serious discussion of foreign policy and international politics can become more fruitful. That is the purpose of this paper.

Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , October 1976 , pp. 246 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 247 note 1 See Beard, Charles A., The Idea of National Interest (New York, 1934)Google Scholar; Morgenthau, Hans J., In Defense of the National Interest (New York, 1951)Google Scholar; Frankel, Joseph, National Interest (London, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nuechterlein, Donald E., United States National Interests in a Changing World (Lexington, Ky.), 1973Google Scholar

page 247 note 2 This does not mean to imply that the two spheres do not overlap considerably, as in the impact on the domestic economies of western Europe and the United States when the Arab oil countries imposed an oil embargo in 1973. It does suggest, however, that there is utility in thinking of national interests as the way in which a sovereign state interacts with its external environment, whereas the public interest is the way in which the sovereign state deals with its internal environment.

page 248 note 1 The order in which these four basic interests appear does not suggest any priority of one over another, although it might be argued that, unless a nation-state has the capability of defending its territory and citizens (either through a strong military force or alliance with a major power), none of the other three basic interests is likely to matter much. Czechoslovakia in 1938 is an example. Ideology for some states may be more important than either economic advancement or a stable world order.

page 248 note 2 As used here, ideological interest refers to the values which a nation-state believes to be important. Obviously, states differ widely regarding the values they feel are important and the extent to which they are willing to defend or compromise them. In its extreme form, ideology can be fascism, Leninism or a Spanish Inquisition. It should also be noted that this discussion does not concern moral or immoral behaviour of states - only the degree to which values affect perceptions of interest. Too often a state may think it is operating on the basis of high moral standards while other states are convinced it is acting in an arrogant or deceitful manner.

page 249 note 1 If we say survival entails an immediate and credible threat to the very existence of a country and its form of government, then no economic, world order or ideological issue would qualify because they could not be similarly threatened individually. Only national defence entails immediate destruction.