| ID | 188391 |
| Title Proper | Reacting to the Olive Branch |
| Other Title Information | Hawks, Doves, and Public Support for Cooperation |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Mattes, Michaela ; Weeks, Jessica L.P ; Jessica L.P. Weeks |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | A popular view holds that foreign policy hawks have an advantage at bringing about rapprochement with international adversaries. This idea is rooted in domestic politics: voters respond more favorably to efforts at reconciliation when their own leader has a hawkish rather than a dovish reputation. Yet, domestic reactions are only part of the equation—to succeed, rapprochement must also evoke a favorable response by the adversary. In this research note, we argue that hawks who make conciliatory gestures may face international liabilities that could offset their domestic advantages. Foreign audiences should view doves who make overtures as more sincere and should therefore be more willing to support cooperation with foreign doves than with foreign hawks. We field a pair of survey experiments to examine whether Americans respond differently when foreign hawks versus foreign doves deliver the olive branch. We find that foreign doves fare better at eliciting cooperation because they are deemed more sincere, though the prospect of military vulnerability limits how willing Americans are to respond positively even to a dove who makes a gesture. Thus, while past research has shown that hawks are better positioned domestically to initiate rapprochement, our findings suggest that they have a harder time eliciting a favorable response from the adversary. |
| `In' analytical Note | International Organization Vol. 76, No.4; Fall 2022: p.957 - 976 |
| Journal Source | International Organization Vol: 76 No 4 |
| Key Words | Public Opinion ; Peacemaking ; Rapprochement ; Leader reputation ; hawks and doves ; costly signals |