The Impact of the Domestic Environment in the Change of Foreign Policy- The Case of Russian Policy towards the European Union after the End of the Cold War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to study the impact of the domestic environment’s components in changing foreign policy. Therefore, the paper focuses on analyzing Russia’s strategies, in the International arena, that has been structured by the domestic factors (leadership, military, security, economics, and identity). Design/methodology/approach – The paper follows three theories of studying the impact of domestic components into foreign policy in international relations; First it focuses on Foreign Policy Analysis as a traditional analysis in international relations; depending on “Determinants” influencing the foreign policy and the “Instruments/Tools” used to achieve the goals of foreign policy. Second, Neo-Classical Realism Theory, as it tried to explain the importance of internal factors in the foreign policy. Third, Constructivism Theory in International Relations as it concerns Non-state actors and refused the traditional viewing of main concepts in international relations. Findings – The domestic environment is the background context on which foreign policy is drawn. In general, the domestic environment is within the framework of society; according to it the decision-makers make decisions and include domestic policies (public opinion, geographical location, nature of the political system, main values of society, parties, lobbies…etc.); national expertise can be added in dealing with international political issues. Originality/Value – This paper proves that there are new forms for foreign policy variables related to the domestic environment and reflects the Economic capabilities, Military Power, Identity, and Leadership into the state's foreign policy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".