Conference Program

Greek foreign policy has undergone a transformative realignment in the last 15 years. The purpose of this paper is to theorize about this dramatic shift and evaluate the role of domestic versus international variables. During the eurozone crisis, while international attention was concentrated on Greece’s finances and its conflictual relationship with its creditors, Greek foreign policy moved away from traditional directions in ways that put it more “in line” with its Western allies. Greece capitalized on the souring relationship between Erdogan’s government and the West to build closer strategic ties with Israel, the United States and France. At the same time, Greece gradually distanced itself from Russia. This became evident in the agreement on the name of North Macedonia (which Russia tried to undermine) and culminated in Greece’s unequivocal support to Ukraine after Russia’s invasion. The shift was sustained across different governments during a period of high domestic tension, signaling significant continuity in foreign policy formulation and execution. Domestic factors would predict high contestation in foreign policy, considering the legacies and features of Greek politics (high polarization, the rise of the far right and far left during the debt crisis, strong anti-NATO and pro-Russian sentiments on the left, strong resistance to compromise on Macedonia and a tradition of antisemitism on the far right). The trajectory of the Greek leftist party, SYRIZA, and its foreign minister, Nikos Kotzias, is particularly used as a test case of how tactical, realpolitik considerations trumped long term ideological legacies in foreign policy decision making.

To study the importance of national political parties, as one of the domestic actors, in shaping India's foreign policy towards the European Union (EU). The research hypothesis: since the early 1990s, the importance of nationwide political parties in the process of shaping India's foreign policy toward the EU has been increasing. The hypothesis was formulated on the basis of observations of the changes that have taken place in India's party system, economic system, foreign policy, and through an analysis of the election programs of nationwide political parties in the context of foreign policy. Versification of the hypothesis will be possible by answering the researcher's questions:

1. What factors have influenced the growing interest in foreign policy issues toward the EU by nationwide political parties, and how is this change reflected in the election programs, statements of leaders and documents published by these parties?

2. What are the manifestations of formal and informal mechanisms of influence of nationwide political parties on the formation of India's foreign policy toward the EU?

3. What is the importance of nationwide political parties in the formation of India's foreign policy toward the EU?

The geopolitical surroundings of a country are the facts on the ground which play key roles in policy decisions. In other words, geopolitical factors often influence a country’s foreign policy decision-making process, and Mongolia is not an exception. The most important geopolitical factor that influences Mongolia’s foreign policy decision-making is its geographical location. As Mongolia is sandwiched between its two “immediate” neighbours - Russia and China, it is more dependent on them for its foreign policy conduct in Eurasia and beyond. On the other hand, the “third” neighbours like the United States, Japan and India equally hold importance in Mongolia’s foreign policy decision-making as they are considered to be a force to counterbalance inclinations from Russia and China. As such the rationale of this study lies into fact that in Mongolia’s case, geopolitical factors not only influence the course of forging viable foreign relations with “immediate” and “third” neighbours but also provide a greater range of foreign policy choices in order to expand room for maneuvering. A comparative study of geopolitical factors in terms of Mongolia’s “immediate” and “third” neighbours in the foreign policy decision making helps understand the country’s urge for sustaining its independent existence without any outside potential security threat. Moreover, in order to hit upon a fresh perspective at a time when foreign policy is in a world of flux, the central concern of this paper is to examine those geopolitical factors and the underlying domestic and international issues that matter significantly in Mongolia’s foreign policy decision-making.

The paper examines the impact of personal characteristics of heads of state on foreign policy behavior. The paper is based on the assumption that during a crisis or war leaders are under a greater influence of their personal traits and cognitive determinants, including their biases and beliefs. The chosen method is the LTA coding system, as it allows obtaining measurable results showing which traits of the leaders are meaningful and how they determine leader’s actions in different situations (crisis and lack thereof). The aim of this paper is to analyze the personality-based decision-making determinants in foreign policy in the context of an international conflict based on the examples of Aleksander Kwaśniewski’s and Tony Blair’s Iraq decisions.

It is a commonplace in neoclassical realist foreign policy theory that intervening variables at the unit-level such as institutions, domestic interest groups or state leaders' ideology and/or perception drive and shape a state's foreign policy in different, sometimes irrational - at least from a neo-realist point of view - directions. Patterns of these so called 'irrational' behaviour such as underbalancing, overbalancing, or expansionism are explained by low or high degrees of state-society cohesion, or powerful domestic actors, or successful resource extraction and mass mobilisation, or ideas such as democracy promotion, irredentism, or geopolitical revisionism leading to ideological driven wars against constructed enemies. Anyhow, most realists take these domestic and cognitive factors for granted as variables which can be identified clearly, isolated strictly, and assessed accurately in both its measurement and effects - like 'objective laws' if not determining but guiding a state's expectable foreign policy actions. In other words, these factors are rationalised by both, IR/FPA theorists in rationalist camps and self-declared rational and wise state leaders in practice. The paper puts this rationality assumption into question, and brings a reflexive understanding of the intervening variable 'history' on the table. History cannot be conceptualized and fixed once for all. History is a matter of contexts and (re)interpretation, and becomes a legitimisation for both, revisionist interventionism and non-interventionism and 'Appeasement'. This argument will be theoretically developed, and illustrated by the German foreign policy discourse on how to learn from history and to deal with Russia's war in the Ukraine in light of German history.