Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Interests and Foreign Policy: The Cuban Revolution and US Response, 1959–19611

Interests and Foreign Policy: The Cuban Revolution and US Response, 1959–19611 In this article, we test one explanation of the causes of adoption of destabilization as a foreign policy. Destabilization, a risky policy which targets the political leadership of another sovereign state, is a widely-used foreign policy practice. But under-conceptualization, specifically around the causes of destabilization, has thus far limited its use in scholarly analysis of foreign policy. This paper aims to remedy that deficiency. Building on Taliaferro's (2004) balance-of-risk theory, we examine the rapid decay and adoption of destabilization in relations between the US and Cuba as a critical empirical test of this theory. We argue that the risky decision to adopt destabilization is the result of perceived crisis of security, economic and ideological interests. Our findings have implications for other scenarios and times, because they provide a better understanding of destabilization as a practice of governments against one another. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Foreign Policy Analysis Oxford University Press

Interests and Foreign Policy: The Cuban Revolution and US Response, 1959–19611

Foreign Policy Analysis , Volume 13 (1) – Jan 1, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/interests-and-foreign-policy-the-cuban-revolution-and-us-response-1959-PzuJpuVUG1

References (37)

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© 2014 International Studies Association
ISSN
1743-8586
eISSN
1743-8594
DOI
10.1111/fpa.12067
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In this article, we test one explanation of the causes of adoption of destabilization as a foreign policy. Destabilization, a risky policy which targets the political leadership of another sovereign state, is a widely-used foreign policy practice. But under-conceptualization, specifically around the causes of destabilization, has thus far limited its use in scholarly analysis of foreign policy. This paper aims to remedy that deficiency. Building on Taliaferro's (2004) balance-of-risk theory, we examine the rapid decay and adoption of destabilization in relations between the US and Cuba as a critical empirical test of this theory. We argue that the risky decision to adopt destabilization is the result of perceived crisis of security, economic and ideological interests. Our findings have implications for other scenarios and times, because they provide a better understanding of destabilization as a practice of governments against one another.

Journal

Foreign Policy AnalysisOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2017

There are no references for this article.