How would a Trump presidency play out in the real world? Using
different decision-making models leads us to different predictions about the
future. Two such decision-making models are the rational choice model and the
organizational model. The rational choice model assumes that a state is a
unitary actor, has ranked preferences, and can choose the best policy option
for the situation at hand. The organizational model recognizes that a state's
policy on a given subject is the combination of various institutions’ own
policies regarding the subject. These internal agencies represent many
different sides of an issue and each has its own set of preferences and end
goals.
Assuming the Trump administration aligned with rational
choice theory, meaning President Trump’s foreign policy was decided by a
rational, unitary actor, we could predict the foreign policy toward Russia to
be a reset in relations to wipe the slate clean and start over. The precedent
for resetting relations with Russia was established by George H. W. Bush and
upheld by all three U.S. presidents since then. Given Trump’s favorable
rhetoric toward Putin, there is no reason to conclude he wouldn’t attempt to
renew favorable relations with Russia after Obama’s tenure ends on less than
favorable terms with Putin.
How would a positive relationship between Trump and Putin
affect the situation in Syria? If we place faith in Trump’s self-proclaimed
ability to negotiate with Putin, we would expect Russia to stop supporting the
Assad regime in Syria and instead assist us in our efforts to support the
Syrian rebels, or at least to stop working against us and the Syrian rebels.
This, of course, assumes that Trump is a rational actor and that his claims
hold weight.
On the other hand, the organizational model’s view of a
Trump administration’s policy toward Russia takes into account the various
institutions that contribute to ultimately forming foreign policy. These
organizational actors include but are not limited to presidential national
security advisors, the Department of State (DOS), and the Department of Defense
(DOD), each with its own view of the Russia/Syria situation and policy
objectives. The national security advisors offer expertise on how to handle
situations. The DOS aims to settle disputes through negotiating ceasefires and
peace talks. The DOD aims to meet external conflicts with offensive force to
prevent the need for defensive force at home. The combination of these policy objectives
will likely lead to hesitation to rely on Russian assistance, and continue to
focus on supporting the Syrian rebels in their struggle against the Assad
regime.
No comments:
Post a Comment