Abstract
This article examines how decision-making dynamics in coalition cabinets influence states’ responses to international norms and foreign policy change. International normative structures may be interpreted differently by coalition partners, which share the authority for responding to external expectations and pressures. I examine two cases of internal contestation over international norms—Japanese decision-making over the ban of imported rice in response to international norms of trade liberalization (1993) and Turkish decision-making over the ban of the death penalty in response to international norms on human rights (1999–2002). In both cases, coalition partners disagreed over policy responses to the norm and I unpack the way in which the norm became entangled in internal coalition politics. The cases are examples of (eventual) policy change, which challenges a dominant image of coalitions completely deadlocked actors. The explanations of these case outcomes further our understanding of how domestic agents and structures respond to international norms and produce changes in foreign policies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The two cases in this paper, along with ten others, are developed fully in my book (Kaarbo 2012). The book focuses on explaining the outcomes of coalition disagreements and on the consequences of coalition politics for effective decision-making, foreign policy, and international relations. It is not directly focused on the question of international norms and foreign policy change, as is this article.
There is no evidence of direct presidential or military pressure or involvement in this case (Avci 2003).
References
Agence France Presse (AFP). (1993a). Hosokawa says Japan will not open rice market. September 26.
Agence France Presse (AFP). (1993b) Japan’s socialists again threaten to leave coalition over rice issue. December 6.
Agence France Presse (AFP). (1993c). Japan’s Fragile coalition bites the bullet on rice. December 13.
Agence France Presse (AFP). (1999). Turkey’s first step to EU membership a “landmark”: Ecevit. December 11.
Anadolu Agency. (1999). Turkish justice minister on Cakici Case, Ocalan Sentence. December 28.
Asahi News Service. (1993a). Japan split on importing rice, but worried about safety. November 10.
Asahi News Service. (1993b). Japan bound to bow on rice. December 7.
Associated Press. (1998). Turkey death penalty. November 25.
Associated Press. (1999a). Turkish premier signals lifting capital punishment for EU membership. December 4.
Associated Press. (1999b). EU says Turkey can’t execute Ocalan. December 12.
Associated Press. (2002a). Turks consider lifting death penalty. February 17.
Associated Press. (2002b). Deputy PM: Turkey can’t join EU for a decade, no hurry for reforms. June 11.
Avcı, Gamze. 2003. Turkey’s slow EU Candidacy: Insurmountable hurdles to membership or simple euro-skepticism? Turkish Studies 4: 149–170.
Başkan, Filiz. 2005. At the crossroads of ideological divides: Cooperation between leftists and ultranationalists in Turkey. Turkish Studies 6: 53–69.
Beach, Derek, and Rasmus Brun Pedersen. 2013. Process-tracing methods: Foundations and guidelines. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Blaker, Michael. 1998. Negotiating on rice: ‘No, No, a thousand times, No’. In International comparative studies of negotiating behavior, ed. Hiroshi Kimura, 211–240. Kyoto: International Research Center for Japanese Studies.
Checkel, Jeffrey T. 2005. International institutions and socialization in Europe: Introduction and framework. International Organization 59: 801–826.
Cortell, Andrew P., and James W. Davis. 2005. When norms clash: International norms, domestic practices, and Japan’s internalisation of the GATT/WTO. Review of International Studies 31: 3–25.
Curtis, Gerald L. 1999. The logic of Japanese politics: Leaders, institutions, and the limits of change. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dogar, Rana and Mark Dennis. (1998). Turkey versus Europe. Newsweek, 30 November.
Dunér, Betril, and Edward Deverell. 2001. Country cousin: Turkey, The European Union and Human Rights. Turkish Studies 2: 1–24.
Emiko, Torazono. (1993). Japan to offer rice compromise. Financial Times, November 25.
Eralp, Atila. 2004. Turkey and the European Union. In The future of Turkish foreign policy, ed. Lenore G. Martin, and Dimitris Keridis, 63–82. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Eralp, Yalim. 2003. An insider’s view of Turkey’s foreign policy and its American connection. In The United States and Turkey: Allies in need, ed. Morton Abramowitz, 109–143. New York: The Century Foundation Press.
Financial Times (FT). (1993a). Battle over rice imports will test coalition; Hosokawa faces a tough time selling Japan’s concession on farm trade. October 20.
Financial Times (FT). (1993b). Japan may partially lift rice ban: Compromise offer before GATT deadline. November 30.
Frantz, Douglas. (2001). Turkey’s Choice: European Union or the death penalty. The New York Times, May 30.
George, Alexander, and Andrew Bennett. 2004. Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hale, William. 2002. Turkish Foreign policy 1774–2000. London: Frank Cass.
Hale, William. 2003. Human rights, the European Union, and the Turkish accession process. Turkish Studies 4 (1): 107–126.
Hideo, Otake. 2000. Political Realignment and Policy Conflict. In Power shuffles and policy processes: Coalition Government in Japan in the 1990s, ed. Otake Hideo, 125–151. New York: Japan Center for International Exchange.
Japan Economic Newswire. (1993). Japan has already agreed to open rice mart, Kantor Says. December 11.
JIJI Press Ticker Service. (1993). Japan, renews opposition to tariffs for rice. October 15.
Kaarbo, Juliet. 1996. Power and influence in foreign policy decision making: The role of junior coalition partners in German and Israeli foreign policy. International Studies Quarterly 40: 501–530.
Kaarbo, Juliet. 2008. Coalition cabinet decision making: Institutional and psychological factors. International Studies Review 10: 57–86.
Kaarbo, Juliet. 2012. Coalition politics and cabinet decision making: A comparative analysis of foreign policy choices. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Kaarbo, Juliet. 2015. A foreign policy analysis perspective on the domestic politics turn in IR. International Studies Review 17: 189–216.
Kin, Kwang Weng. (1993). Japan’s socialists divided on opening of rice market. The Straits Times, December 14.
Manners, Ian. 2002. Normative power Europe: A contradiction of terms? Journal of Common Market Studies 40: 235–258.
Mclaren, Lauren M., and Meltem Müftüler-Bac. 2003. Turkish parliamentarians’ perspectives on Turkey’s relations with the European Union. Turkish Studies 4: 195–218.
Mochizuki, Mike M. 1995. Japan: Domestic change and Foreign policy. Santa Monica: Rand/National Defense Research Institute.
Müller, W.C., T. Bergman, and K. Strøm. 2008. Coalition theory and cabinet governance: An introduction. In Cabinets and coalition bargaining: The democratic life cycle in Western Europe, ed. K. Strøm, W.C. Müller, and T. Bergman, 1–50. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Naoto, Nonako. 2000. Characteristics of the decision-making structure of coalitions. In Power shuffles and policy processes: Coalition government in Japan in the 1990s, ed. O. Hideo, 102–124. New York: Japan Center for International Exchange.
Öniş, Ziya. 2003. Domestic politics, international norms and challenges to the state: Turkey-EU relations in the post-Helsinki Era. In Turkey and the European Union, ed. Ali Çarkoğlu, and Barry Rubin, 8–31. London: Frank Cass Publishers.
Oppermann, Kai, and Klaus Brummer. 2014. Patterns of junior partner influence on the foreign policy of coalition governments. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 16: 555–571.
Oktay, Sibel. 2014. Constraining or enabling? The effects of government composition on international commitments. Journal of European Public Policy 21: 860–884.
Ozkececi-Taner, Binnur. 2009. The role of ideas in coalition government foreign policymaking: The case of Turkey between 1991 and 2002. Dordrecht: Republic of Letters.
Özcan, Mesut. 2008. Harmonizing foreign policy: Turkey, the EU and the Middle East. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Radio Free Europe. (2000). Turkey: Party leaders agree to postpone Ocalan’s execution. January 13.
Rathbun, Brian C. 2004. Partisan interventions. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Robins, Philip. 2003. Suits and uniforms: Turkish foreign policy since the cold war. London: C. Hurst and Co.
Rumford, Chris. 2002. Failing the EU test? Turkey’s National Programme, EU candidature and the complexities of democratic reform. Mediterranean Politics 7: 51–68.
Schwartz, Frank J. 1998. Advice and consent: The politics of consultation in Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shinoda, Tomohito. 1998. Japan’s decision making under the coalition governments. Asian Survey 38: 703–723.
Sisler, Peter. (2002). EU’s death-penalty objection divides Turkey. The Washington Times, February 19, 2002.
Straits Times. (1993). Japan adopting wait-and-see stand on opening up its rice market. November 7.
Talmadge, Eric. (1993). In major concession, japan decides to drop ban on imported rice. Associated Press, December 13.
Tinc, Ferai. (1999). On death penalty with MHP member close to Europe. Hurriyet Daily. December 20.
United Press International (UPI). (1993a). Hosokawa rules out opening Japan’s rice market. October 4.
United Press International (UPI). (1993b). Opening rice market could split Japan’s ruling coalition. December 12.
Wiener, Antje. 2007. Contested meanings of norms: A research framework. Comparative European Politics 5: 1–17.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kaarbo, J. Coalition politics, international norms, and foreign policy: multiparty decision-making dynamics in comparative perspective. Int Polit 54, 669–682 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0060-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0060-x