| ID | 121403 |
| Title Proper | Do leaders matter and how would we know? |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Jervis, Robert |
| Publication | 2013. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | This paper will explore the ambivalence or conflict in the literature about the extent to which leaders matter in international politics, commonly linked to the level-of-analysis question. One the one hand, national leaders are often larger than life figures with strong preferences and distinctive personalities who seem to leave their stamp on events. On the other hand, most ir scholars place great stress on the incentives and constraints posed by the environment, be it domestic or international. I will proceed in four sections. The first discusses the essential claims at stake, the kinds of evidence that could be adduced to support one position or the other, and the pathways by which individual differences can make themselves felt. The second section examines the implications for morality, responsibility, and democratic theory. This discussion too will point to relevant methods, including ones that are contested. I will then turn to post-Cold War American foreign policy, skeptically examine the claim that individual presidents, even George W. Bush, mattered as much as is generally believed and close by discussing the implications for democratic accountability and control. |
| `In' analytical Note | Security Studies Vol. 22, No.2; Apr-Jun 2013: p.153-179 |
| Journal Source | Security Studies Vol. 22, No.2; Apr-Jun 2013: p.153-179 |
| Key Words | International Politics ; Democratic Theory ; Post Cold War ; American Foreign Policy |