Want better foreign policy analyses? Use the relational power approach.

What is it about?

This article argues that cases of "anomalies", for instance, Japan, could be better understood if foreign policy analysts use a different concept of power, namely that of Lukes' three-dimensional view: "A exercises power over B when A affects B in a manner contrary to B's interests (Lukes 1974, p. 34). How do we study relational power? First, we examine what A did or failed to do with B. Secondly, we examine B's interests -- did A succeed in affecting B's interests? Here, we should be concerned with not only causal effects but also with constitutive ones, focusing on how actors change others' perceptions of reality. Lastly, we assess if an established connection between A's policy and B's interests can be interpreted in terms of relational power. Could A have acted differently? Did the outcome serve A's interests? To demonstrate these steps in practice, the paper analyzes two case studies from Japan's policies vis-a-vis China.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Foreign policy analysis has often measured a state's power as its various capabilities. While FPA may be a separate branch, it nevertheless takes stock from IR theories. But it is this fixation on power as capacities that render "anomalies" like Japan, which doesn't act as expected by realist or neorealist theorists, a puzzle to observers. This is partly why critiques have ascribed to Japan many different "labels" that do not accurately how the country exercises power.

Perspectives