Does Putin Decide To Go To War? Introducing Foreign Policy Analysis

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has divided international politics into two blocs: Ukraine, which is backed up by the United States NATO, and have all the support from a lot of countries; and Russia, backed up with China and condemned by a lot of actors for what they did. Nevertheless, Vladimir Putin, as the leader of Russia, continues to fight Ukraine. Although, many actors consider that Putin’s decision was not based on humanity but selfishness.

Does Russia being selfish? To put it into perspective, realism argues that a state is as selfish as a human being. Is it wrong? It depends on the perspective. But until now, many countries consider what Moscow enforces is wrong. Many of them dropped sanctions toward Russia, which affected the government and a lot of sectors running in Russia. Boycotts of various sectors from oil to media companies are also affected by Moscow’s decision. The various accusations of war crimes by Russia are under investigation.

Furthermore, criticisms from many leaders and people worldwide were also aimed at Russia. Protests are everywhere to try to tell Putin to stop the war. Even the President of Indonesia, Joko Widodo (Jokowi), also addressed the issue. He tweeted that “War is about ego, forgetting humanity, and only highlight interest and power.”

Then why did Putin, as a decision-maker—or perhaps, one of the decision-makers—take the chance to start a war? Isn’t war is an act that wrong? Why did such a leader make an unthinkable decision? It is necessary to know how and why Putin took that decision by analyzing it. To understand foreign policy, many aspects refer to that decision.

Sometimes when actors—even the public—judge that leaders should know the impact of their policies, the actor is voicing their hope that leaders should remember the responsibilities of their position.[1] This is something understandable because sometimes the making of a policy is behind a curtain that is not known to other actors so we cannot understand their vision and mission through a foreign policy. It is necessary to understand how we can understand the making of a foreign policy.

How is a foreign policy created?

Who or what influences foreign policy? Although leaders are quick to claim credit for foreign policy successes and the public often blames them for failures, leaders rarely make foreign policy alone.[2] In the study of foreign policy, many experts provide methods to analyze and understand why policymakers – in this case, Putin – can adopt policies that various actors see as big mistakes for Russia.

The definition of foreign policy itself is still being debated, but referring to Jean-Frederic Morin & Jonathan Paquin, foreign policy can be interpreted as “actions of an independent political authority” because it is reserved to sovereign states.[3] As the definition itself, foreign policy analysis is a complex field. There are many aspects and actors involved in the making and considered to understand a foreign policy. But one thing we can hold on to is that the main goal of foreign policy is to survive the international system to carry out the state’s national interest. But the national interest itself is a broad concept that includes economic security, health, energy, people, etc.[4] Regardless of the direction and way of foreign policy itself.

“There is always a gap between the real world and the perceived world,” said Marijke Breuning

Are the factors mentioned above important for formulating a foreign policy? Do every factor considered important by the decision-maker? The answer is yes and no. Decision-makers do consider many aspects, but the priority differs from one actor to another.

Every decision-maker has preferences constructed by ideas such as norms, identities, and discourse that built up to become a way of thinking of themselves to formulate a foreign policy. For some decision-makers, maybe the military is one of the essential aspects that need to be prioritized. However, it can be economical, natural resources, or else for some others.

Political constraints, openness to information, motivation to act, and leading style (according to MG Hermann, there are four styles of leading: crusaders, strategists, pragmatists, and opportunists) that come into play of formulating a decision.[5] And for Putin, it is not surprising if he is the predominant leader after all, but Breuning in her book “Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction” also said that whether one person bears the responsibility for foreign policy decision does not depend on whether that country is a democracy or not. It means that actors have roles that made Putin approve of the invasion.

The Leader is not the only key actor

Besides a lot of aspects mentioned, other actors influence a foreign policy. That means Putin was not the only one who considered the war to happen. Within one country, foreign policy decisions can be made by different decision units or concerning different types of issues.[6] There are actors, namely bureaucracy, institutions, public opinion, press, think tanks, etc., that drive foreign policy. But note that how they influence the decision-makers is determined by how close and influential they are to their decision-maker.

There are many factors and aspects to consider, not to mention how policymakers’ views determine the direction of a foreign policy. On the one hand, policy-making is often only known to a few people. However, various actors outside the policy-making group can indeed be influential.

The study of foreign policy analysis came to deepen the understanding of how and why decision-makers made policies that are unthinkable by many, or in this case, how Russia decided to use their military to reach their national interest by invading Ukraine, even when everyone criticized Moscow.

Putin does not necessarily become the most important actor in this policy. Suppose you analyze it through a study of foreign policy. In that case, other aspects can be considered to make Putin decide to go to war, even though Putin is also one of the important actors.

[1] Marijke Breuning, “Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction”, Palgrave Macmillan, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y., 2007, pp. 5

[2] Ibid., pp. 9

[3] Jean-Frédéric Morin and Jonathan Paquin, “Foreign Policy Analysis: A Tool Box”, Palgrave Macmillan Published by Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland, 2018. Pp. 3

[4] Ibid., pp. 6

[5] Margaret G. Hermann, Thomas Preston, Baghat Korany and Timothy M. Shaw, “Who Leads Matters: The Effects of Powerful Individuals”, International Studies Review Vol. 3, No. 2, Leaders, Groups, and Coalitions: Understanding the People and Processes in Foreign Policymaking (Summer, 2001), pp. 83-131 (49 pages), https://www.jstor.org/stable/3186566

[6] Op. Cit., Breuning, pp. 86