Advertisement

International Politics

, Volume 52, Issue 1, pp 20–44 | Cite as

Knowledge without power: International relations scholars and the US war in Iraq

  • James D Long
  • Daniel Maliniak
  • Susan M Peterson
  • Michael J Tierney
Original Article

Abstract

In this article we present several important first steps toward understanding the role of academics in shaping US foreign policy – identifying their policy views on one of the most salient foreign policy issues of this generation, the US War in Iraq; exploring how those views differ from public opinion more generally; and assessing the extent to which scholarly opinion was reflected in the public debate. To determine how IR scholars’ views on the invasion of Iraq differed from those of the public, we compare the answers of IR scholars at US colleges and universities to those of the US public on similar opinion survey questions. To this end, we analyze data from a unique series of surveys of IR scholars conducted by the Teaching, Research, and International Policy project.

Keywords

Iraq war public opinion international relations discipline foreign policy theory and practice 

References

  1. Abelson, D.E. (1996) American Think Tanks and Their Role in U.S. Foreign Policy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abelson, D.E. (2002) Do Think Tanks Matter: Assessing the Impact of Public Policy Institutes. Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Abelson, D.E. (2006) A Capitol Idea: Think Tanks and U.S. Foreign Policy. Montreal, Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Adler, E. (1992) Emergence of cooperation: National epistemic communities and the international evolution of the idea of nuclear arms control. International Organization 46 (1): 101–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Adler, E. and Haas, P.M. (1992) Conclusion: Epistemic communities, world order, and the creation of a reflective research program. International Organization 46 (1): 367–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Almond, G.A. (1950) The American People and Foreign Policy. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  7. Avey, P. and Desch, M.C. (2014) What do policymakers want from us? Results from a survey of current and former national security decision-makers. International Studies Quarterly 58 (4): forthcoming.Google Scholar
  8. Baum, M.A. and Potter, P.B.K. (2008) The relationships between mass media, public opinion, and foreign policy: Toward a theoretical synthesis. Annual Review of Political Science 11 (1): 39–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berinsky, A.J. and Druckman, J.N. (2007) Public opinion research and support for the Iraq war. Public Opinion Quarterly 71 (1): 126–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, P. and Desch, M.C. (2013) Rank irrelevance: How academia lost its way. Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139925/peter-campbell-and-michael-c-desch/rank-irrelevance.
  11. Demeritt, D. (2001) The construction of global warming and the politics of science. Annuals of the Association of American Geographers 91 (2): 307–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drake, W.J. and Nicolaidis, K. (1992) Ideas, interests, and institutionalization: ‘Trade in services’ and the Uruguay round. International Organization 46 (1): 37–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Drezner, D. (2013) On the foreign policy community and the IR academy in 2002. Foreign Policy Blog 21 February, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/02/20/on_the_foreign_policy_community_and_the_international_relations_academy_in_2002.
  14. Feaver, P.D. and Gelpi, C. (2004) Choosing Your Battles. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gallucci, R. (2012) How scholars can improve international relations. Chronicle of Higher Education, 26 November, http://chronicle.com/article/How-Scholars-Can-Improve/135898/.
  16. Gelpi, C., Feaver, P.D. and Reifler, J. (2005) Casualty sensitivity and the war in Iraq. International Security 30 (3): 7–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Haas, P.M. (1989) Do regimes matter? Epistemic communities and Mediterranean pollution. International Organization 43 (3): 377–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Haas, P.M. (1990) Obtaining international environmental protection through epistemic consensus. Millennium Journal of International Studies 19 (3): 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Haas, P.M. (1992) Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization 46 (1): 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Holsti, O.R. and Rosenau, J.N. (1977) The meaning of Vietnam: Belief systems of American leaders. International Journal 32 (3): 452–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jackson, R. (2007) Towards an understanding of contemporary intrastate war. Government and Opposition 42 (1): 121–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jackson, P. and Kaufmann, S. (2007) Security scholars for a sensible foreign policy: A study in Weberian activism. Perspectives on Politics 5 (1): 95–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jacobs, L.R. and Page, B.I. (2005) Who influences U.S. foreign policy? American Political Science Association 99 (1): 107–123.Google Scholar
  24. Jacobson, G.C. (2007) A Divider, Not a Uniter. New York: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
  25. Jentleson, B. (2002) The need for praxis: Bringing policy relevance back in. International Security 26 (4): 169–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jordan, R., Maliniak, D., Oakes, A., Peterson, S. and Tierney, M.J. (2009) One Discipline or Many?: TRIP Survey of International Relations Faculty in Ten Countries. Williamsburg, VA: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations.Google Scholar
  27. Kam, C. and Kinder, D. (2007) Terror and ethnocentrism: Foundation of American support for the war on terrorism. Journal of Politics 69 (2): 320–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kristof, N. (2014) Professors, we need you! New York Times 15 February, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/sunday/kristof-professors-we-need-you.html?_r=0.
  29. Maliniak, D., Oakes, A., Peterson, S. and Tierney, M.J. (2007a) The View from the Ivory Tower: TRIP Survey of IR Faculty in the U.S. and Canada. Williamsburg, VA: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations, College of William and Mary.Google Scholar
  30. Maliniak, D., Oakes, A., Peterson, S. and Tierney, M.J. (2007b) Inside the ivory tower. Foreign Policy March/April.Google Scholar
  31. Maliniak, D., Oakes, A., Peterson, S. and Tierney, M.J. (2011) International relations in the U.S. academy. International Studies Quarterly 55: 437–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maliniak, D., Peterson, S. and Tierney, M.J. (2012a) TRIP Around the World: Teaching, Research, and Policy Views of IR Faculty in 20 Countries. Williamsburg, VA: Institute for the Theory and Practice of International Relations, College of William and Mary.Google Scholar
  33. Maliniak, D., Powers, R. and Tierney, M. (2012b) Are there neoconservative wolves in the realist flock? Foreign Policy.com blog post, 25 January, http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/01/25/realism_episode_iii_return_of_the_realist_critics.
  34. Mearsheimer, J.J. and Walt, S.M. (2003) An unnecessary war. Foreign Policy 134: 51–59.Google Scholar
  35. Mueller, J.E. (1973) War, Presidents, and Public Opinion. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  36. Mueller, J.E. (1994) Policy and Opinion in the Gulf War. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Newsom, D.D. (1995–6) Foreign policy and academia. Foreign Policy 101 (Winter): 52–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nye, J. (2009) Scholars on the sidelines. Washington Post 13 April, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/12/AR2009041202260.html.
  39. Oldendick, R.W. and Bardes, B.A. (1982) Mass and elite foreign policy opinions. Public Opinion Quarterly 46 (3): 368–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peterson, S., Tierney, M.J. and Maliniak, D. (2005a) Teaching and Research Practices, Views on the Discipline, and Policy Attitudes of International Relations Faculty at U.S. Colleges and Universities. Williamsburg, VA: Reves Center for International Studies, College of William and Mary.Google Scholar
  41. Peterson, S., Tierney, M.J. and Maliniak, D. (2005b) Inside the ivory tower. Foreign Policy 151 (November/December): 58–64.Google Scholar
  42. Rathbun, B. (2012) Politics and paradigm preferences: The implicit ideology of international relations scholars. International Studies Quarterly 56 (3): 607–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rosati, J.E. and Creed, J. (1997) Extending the three- and four-headed eagles: The foreign policy orientations of American elites during the 80s and 90s. Political Psychology 18 (3): 583–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rosenau, J. (1961) Public Opinion and Foreign Policy. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  45. Walt, S. (2005) The relationship between theory and practice in international relations. Annual Review of Political Science 8 (1): 23–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walt, S.M. (2009) The cult of irrelevance. Post on Foreign Policy blog 15 April, ‘Stephen M. Walt, A realist in an ideological age’.Google Scholar
  47. Wiarda, H.J. (2010) Think Tanks and Foreign Policy: The Foreign Policy Research Institute and Presidential Politics. New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  48. Wittkopf, E. (1990) Faces of Internationalism: Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Woodward, B. (2004) Plan of Attack: The Definitive Account of the Decision to Invade Iraq. London: Simon and Schuster UK.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • James D Long
    • 1
  • Daniel Maliniak
    • 2
  • Susan M Peterson
    • 2
  • Michael J Tierney
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Political Science, University of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Government, College of William and MaryWilliamsburgUSA

Personalised recommendations