1. USING ROLE THEORY TO ANALYZE THE LINK BETWEEN EXCEPTIONALISM
AND THE USE OF MILITARY FORCE BY STATES
By John M. Eyre
An Independent Study Thesis
Submitted to the Department of Political Science
At The College of Wooster
March, 2015
in partial fulfillment of the requirements of I.S. Thesis
Advisor: Dr. Jeffrey S. Lantis
Second Reader: Dr. Kevin P. Marsh

2. i
Acknowledgements
To my parents, for allowing me to attend The College of Wooster, and for their
never-ending support that they have shown me in a countless number of ways through the
years.
To my Wooster friends, who from day one have given me a collection of lifelong
memories that I will cherish for the rest of my life.
To my friends and colleagues from my semester in Washington, D.C. who helped
shape my off-campus study opportunity into the incredible learning experience it turned
out to be. Specifically, I would like to give thanks to my professor from American
University, Dr. Christian Maisch. His efforts to engage our Foreign Policy class of 25
students from all over the world in the course material and field trips to embassies and
think tanks were endless and always thoughtfully planned. It was his class, all the friends
I met from all corners of the world, as well as the overall experience from my time in
D.C., which provided the inspiration for this thesis.
To Professor Matthew Krain, my Junior Independent Study advisor and professor,
who helped me to start thinking critically about my project and the I.S. process overall.
To Professor Jeffrey Lantis, my Senior Independent Study advisor, whom I offer a
sincere and heartfelt expression of gratitude. Dr. Lantis always encouraged me to think
big picture with my thesis. His consistent posing of questions at our meetings and
determination to provide high quality edits always helped me to not only think and reason
judiciously, but to also very much engage with all parts of my project. Without his
unceasing support and guidance, this thesis surely would not be the piece of writing it
came to be. For that, I am forever appreciative.

3. ii
Table of Contents
Introduction…………………………………………………………………….………..1
Chapter One: Literature Review and Theory…………………………………………4
Themes in Role Theory
Individual versus Collective…………………………………...………….5
Material versus Ideational………………………………………….……16
Continuity versus Change………………………………………….…….22
Chapter Two: Research Designand Methodology…………………………………...28
Independent Variable: Level of Exceptionalism in National Role Conception…30
Dependent Variable: Level of Aggressiveness in Foreign Policy Behavior…….36
Methodological Approach…………………………..…………………………...38
Chapter Three: The United States and India in Syria……………………………….43
Background………………………………………………………………………43
Independent Variable: United States………………….…………………………47
Dependent Variable: United States………………….......………………………56
Analysis: United States………………………………………………………….59
Independent Variable: India……………………………………………………..60
Dependent Variable: India……………………….………………………………65
Analysis: India………………………………….………………………………..67
Chapter Four: Russia in Crimea………………………………………..…………….70
Background……………………………………………………...………………70
Independent Variable…………………………………………...……………….74
Dependent Variable…………………………….……………..…………………81

4. iii
Analysis………………………………………………………………………..83
Chapter Five: The United Kingdom in the Falkland Islands……………………..86
Background……………………………………………………………………86
Independent Variable………………………………………………………….90
Dependent Variable……………………………………………………………96
Analysis………………………………………………………………………..98
Chapter Six: Analysis and Conclusion………………………….………….………100
Case Study Analysis………………………………..........................................100
National Role Conceptions and Foreign Policy Behavior...………….101
Aggressiveness in Foreign Policy..........................................................104
Conclusion…………………………………………………………….………106
Limitations and Ideas for Further Research…………………………………..110
Bibliography…………………………………………….…………………………...114

5. iv
List of Figures
Figure 1: Arrow Diagram……………………………………………….….…….29
Figure 2: Coding Scheme for Content Analysis……………….………….………34
Figure 3: Predictive Chart between Independent and Dependent Variables….…40

6. 1
Introduction
This Independent Study thesis examines the degree to which the sociological and
political phenomenon of exceptionalism plays a role in affecting the foreign policy
behavior of a state. Specifically, this project will analyze how levels of exceptionalism
exhibited by the leadership of a state may create the propensity for conflict among states.
In some cases, states may even seek exemptions from ordinary rules and norms that
dictate international relations and the greater international system.1 An example of a state
exhibiting an exceptionalist type of foreign policy is when it acts upon a perceived
responsibility to liberate other states suffering from some sort of outside conflict inflicted
upon by an aggressor state. For example, in contestation over sovereignty of the Falkland
Islands, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom David Cameron and British leadership
acted on its perceived responsibility to protect the Islands and its inhabitants from
Argentine influence. In working to fulfill their responsibilities to the international system,
states that claim to be exceptional act as if they were free from external rules and norms.2
This is especially apparent in today’s international climate, as global superpower states
like the United States have been addressing foreign challenges in Syria, while Russia has
engaged itself with matters of international concern in Crimea.
Social scientists have developed role theory and national role conceptions as a
means to study exceptionalism. The exceptionalism literature points to the idea that this
type of foreign policy contains themes of states embracing a mission to liberate other
countries from evil. This is the justification for exceptional states not following
international rules or norms that establish relations among ordinary states, or states that
do not claim to be exceptional. Exceptional states tend to see the world as a hostile place

7. 2
with threats existing everywhere, while also acting according to a special international
role derived from their self-proclaimed uniqueness. Role theory is a general science that
studies both behaviors that are relevant to persons within a particular context and the
processes by which such behaviors are produced, explained, or affected.3 Specifically,
this project will utilize role theory by focusing on national role conceptions. According to
K.J. Holsti, national role conceptions are decision-makers’ personal definitions by which
their state comes to appropriate orientations, decisions, commitments, rules, and actions
in presenting an image towards the international community. These conceptions are the
image of the ‘appropriate’ orientations or functions of a state toward the external,
international environment.
The focus of this Independent Study project will be to determine whether or not
the phenomenon of exceptionalism demonstrates any generalizable impact on the foreign
policy behavior of state leadership. The independent variable will be the level of
exceptionalism in a state’s expression of its national role conceptions, while the
dependent variable will be the level of aggressiveness in foreign policy behavior, as
measured by the intensity of militarized foreign involvement. My hypothesis will be as
follows: If a state displays an exceptional national role conception, it is likely to adopt an
aggressive foreign policy behavior.
This project will implement a structured focus comparative case study using
content analysis as the appropriate methodology. The case studies include the eventual
decision of the United States to militarily intervene in the Syrian Civil War in 2013-2014,
India’s decision not to intervene in the 2013 Syrian Civil War, the Russian Federation’s
2014 annexation of Crimea, and the United Kingdom’s decision in late 2013 to uphold its

8. 3
commitment to the Falkland Islands in contestation over sovereignty with Argentina and
engage in military exercises on the Islands in early 2014.
This Independent Study will proceed as follows: Chapter One will build a
foundation for the project by discussing and summarizing the review of relevant literature
and major works, theory, and empirical research that address this topic; an explanation of
how the study compares to current knowledge of the topic will also be provided. Chapter
Two will detail the Research Design and Methodology component of this Independent
Study project. Furthermore, a precise explanation of the specific theory that will be used
in this research and the definition of the concepts that concern the variables will be
offered, concluding with a clear hypothesis. Chapter Three through Five will examine the
case studies, including the actions of the leadership of four great powers. Chapter Six will
offer an analysis of the case study results and conclude with a discussion of the
implications of the research findings in connection to the existing literature, as well as
potential avenues for further research.
1 K.J. Holsti, “Exceptionalism in American Foreign Policy: Is it Exceptional?” European Journal of
International Relations, 17, 3 (November 2010), p. 381.
2 Holsti, “Exceptionalism in American Foreign Policy: Is it Exceptional?” p. 384.
3 Biddle, Bruce J, Role Theory: Expectations, Identities, and Behaviors (New York City: Academic Press,
Inc., 1979), p. 4.

9. 4
Chapter 1: Literature Review and Theory
This chapter surveys the relevance of role theory as a theoretical foundation for
the investigation of links between exceptionalism and foreign policy. In his work,
“National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy,” K.J. Holsti first lays out the
political science concept of a role. Role refers to the coherent collection of behavioral
norms that apply to all persons who interact together and occupy the same position within
a particular environment. As such, relevant decision-makers are aware of the norms
associated with the role, and knowingly adapt their behavior to such norms.1 Holsti
argues that while role, or role performance, makes up the behavior and actions of a
decision-maker, role prescriptions are the norms attached and engrained to a particular
position through different cultures, societies, institutions, or other groups.2 Such a
description of role has thus far addressed the collective or group sense of role, yet there is
an individual dimension of role and role conception to consider as well. Holsti, among
other theorists, contend that role conceptions are a singular decision-makers’ personal
conception of his or her position, functions, and relevant behavior. In this context, role
conceptions also derive from the decision-makers’ interests, goals, attitudes, values, and
personality needs.3
Holsti draws on role theory and foreign policy analysis in an attempt to further
explain roles. He defines national role performance as the set of decisions, attitudes,
responses, functions, and commitments a state has towards other states.4 Consistent with
national role performance are national role conceptions, which include a decision-
makers’ personal definitions of the decisions, commitments, rules, norms, and actions
appropriate to their state. National role conceptions also outline relevant functions the

10. 5
state should be performing on a regular basis within the international system.4 When
considering the utility of role theory in foreign policy analysis, the debate of the overall
scholarship on role theory in general is captured through a broader collection of themes.
These themes address the ways in which decision-makers come to identify with the
national role conceptions their state expresses, including individual versus collective,
material versus ideational, and continuity versus change.
Individual versus Collective
Often times decision-makers come to identify certain national role conceptions for
their state, either by means of an individual decision-maker ascertaining such role
conceptions appropriate for its state, or a state expressing certain national role
conceptions as demanded by the international, or collective, system. This is what
produces the individual versus collective theme; a majority of the literature and
scholarship on role theory and national role conceptions falls under the realm of such a
theme.
Relevance of National Role Conceptions
Holsti outlines an extensive list of contributors to the sources of decision-makers’
national role conceptions, including location, capabilities, and technical resources of the
state. For example, Holsti explains different national role conceptions, such as Sweden as
a mediator or Burma as an isolate, by making an additional reference to the internal
contributors of national role conceptions, such as national values and ideology, public
opinion ‘mood’, the personality and political needs of the decision-maker, mass

11. 6
movements, and socio-economic needs and demands expressed by political parties or
interest groups.4 National roles may direct decision-makers to either involve their state in
the international community through a certain function or commitment, or remain
completely uninvolved. Furthermore, Holsti points out an assortment of national roles
drawn from a collection of international relations literature as examples of national role
conceptions. Roles such as revolutionary leader-imperialist, bloc leader, and balancer
imply states that adopt these roles offer the greatest degree of international involvement
and presence, while roles such as isolate and protectee imply states that offer the greatest
degree of passivity in its foreign policy behavior.5 Holsti offers role theory as a general
framework for the description of role and its impact on foreign policy analysis through
role conceptions and national role performance.
The presence and importance of rhetoric also contributes to the relevance of role
theory in foreign policy analysis. Drawing upon Stephen G. Walker’s article “The
Correspondence between Foreign Policy Rhetoric and Behavior: Insights from Role
Theory and Exchange Theory,” the use of role theory is appropriate for determining
patterns of rhetoric and subsequent behavior at the national level.6 Walker describes four
distinctive propositions derived from role theory that describe foreign policy. Such
propositions include the tendency for there to be a congruent relationship between role
conception (foreign policy rhetoric) and role enactment (foreign policy behavior) for
third nations (nations that are not U.S. or USSR) and superpowers in their bilateral
relationships, and/or the tendency for third nations to avoid potential role conflict by
instituting foreign policy behavior towards both superpowers that emphasize balance and
congruence. Additionally, the effects of the expectations created by role conception

12. 7
(rhetoric) or cues that derive from role enactment (behavior) create potential deviations
from the first two propositions. Lastly, nations that have a balanced connection between
role conception and enactment have the tendency to show congruent relationships
between such foreign policy traits.7 Used in this sense, congruence relates to the
matching of a state’s rhetoric to its associated behavior.
While Walker concludes that a minor lack of correspondence between the role
conceptions and role enactments for the group of states taken under analysis exists, he
points out that differing expectations, cues, and the state’s role conceptions all influence
the selection of a particular role. Expectations and cues can be confusing and imperfect,
and states can even behave in ways that have no correlation with its own known
collection of role conceptions.8 The potential for uncertainty between the role conceptions
and subsequent role enactment can account for the idea that a state needs reinforcement
through a direct stimulus in the external environment, the underpinnings of exchange
theory.
In addition, Walker articulates an extension of role theory known as exchange
theory. Exchange theory describes the act of giving or taking one thing while expecting
another in return. Two relevant propositions in exchange theory include, first, the idea
that if an actor’s decision does not receive an expected reward or receives unexpected
punishment, aggressive behavior becomes more likely. This is because an actor chooses a
specific action under the very assumption that he will be rewarded for pursuing such a
course of action, and if such rewards are not granted or punishment is incurred, it is
understandable to anticipate aggressive behavior as a response. Second, if an actor’s
action receives an expected reward, or does not receive an expected punishment, such

13. 8
actor is more likely to perform approving behavior.9 The justification for this is similar to
that of the previously mentioned first proposition; there is the reciprocal nature with the
idea that an actor will express approving and less aggressive behavior because he
anticipated the result of either being rewarded or not punished as a result of choosing to
make the decision in the first place.
Dimensions of Role Enactment
There are a few key dimensions of an individual decision-maker’s role enactment
that explain how well such an individual or state performs a role once selected.
According to scholars, such dimensions include the number of roles, the effort expended
upon a certain role, and the time spent in one role compared to other potential roles.10
While the traditional view of the international system is that states only play a single role
within such a system, critics argue that states will often identify with and express
multiple roles. Furthermore, it has been argued that there is significant overlap in the
various roles attributed to states of superpower status. For example, between 1946 and
1975, both the U.S. and USSR expressed self-identified national role conceptions relating
to promotion of universal values, regional protection, liberation support, development,
and promotion of personal values. While these role conceptions varied in their degree of
aggressiveness and specificity, the U.S. also expressed a mediator role while the USSR
conveyed a role pertaining to the protection of its own state.11
At times, then, a state may find itself concurrently in two or more foreign policy
situations requiring contradictory role enactments. This is a problem known as inter-role
conflict. Scholars argue that foreign policy decision-makers experience a large amount of

14. 9
strain or stress as a direct result of conflicting national role expectations placed upon
them. These conflicting role expectations derive from the state’s location in private social
systems, governmental institutions, domestic society, and interactions among appropriate
parties within the decision-making unit. In order for decision-makers to come to a
conclusion about which role will be enacted in the case of interrole conflict, critics
suggest that decision-makers create what are known as role scenarios. Role scenarios are
action scripts that help the decision-maker determine which role to enact, of the many
that conflict. Role scenarios can become elaborate, and have the tendency to adapt and
change over time as well.
A second dimension of role enactment includes the amount of effort to which a
state involves itself in a particular role. This dimension can range from the expending of
no effort and complete noninvolvement in a role, to a level of complete involvement
where a tremendous amount of effort is expended in the role. Holsti offers an example of
an isolate role, and a state’s complete noninvolvement and lack of effort expenditure
likely corresponds with Holsti’s isolate role. This range of involvement also can
implicate a state’s identity. If a state engages in complete involvement, the role is the
state’s identity. Conversely, if a state engages in complete noninvolvement, the role does
not implicate the state’s identity in any way.12
A third dimension of role enactment offered by scholars involves the amount of
time the decision-maker spends expressing one role relative to another. This is a matter of
determining whether such a role has been ascribed or achieved. Ascribed roles are roles
that the state determines and chooses for itself, while achieved roles are placed upon, or
earned, by a state. Critics argue that new or emerging states in their early stages of

15. 10
development tend to express more ascribed roles over achieved roles. Additionally,
existing and more well established states of the international system often times express
multiple achieved roles on top of their particular ascribed roles.13
Key Variables in the Study of Roles
Drawing upon work from scholars like Biddle and Holsti, additional key variables
in the study of roles include role expectations, role demands and location, and the effects
of audience and cues. While role expectations are the norms and beliefs that concern a
decision-maker’s role performance, or behavior, such a decision-maker must take into
consideration the role behaviors of other occupants within the decision-making unit. In
turn, this makes a role conceptually interbehavioral. These role expectations may vary
depending on if the decision-maker holds such beliefs, coming to be known as role
conceptions, or national role conceptions.14
Furthermore, role expectations can vary on other dimensions, including their
degree of generality or specificity, scope or extensiveness, clarity or uncertainty, and if
the positions of the role are formal or informal. As role expectations become unclear,
behavior tends to become less predictable, creating a propensity for conflict. Clarity of a
role expectation usually varies by how much information is available to a decision-maker
regarding knowledge of the role expectation itself.
Role demands are another key variable in the study of roles. If a state is demanded
to take up a role, this places constraints on the choice of role that a state may express in a
certain situation. For example, critics argue that role demands account for Ukraine’s
choice to give up nuclear weapons, as role demands associated with the great power role

16. 11
were present. Ukraine did not believe it could enact the great power role at the end of the
Cold War.15
Additional variables that affect role enactment include audience and role location.
The audience is usually comprised of a member who observes the interaction process
between the role performer, or decision-maker, and the individual in a complementary
role to the performer. In the article “Role Theory and Foreign Policy,” Cameron Thies
and other scholars argue the audience serves to establish consensual reality for the role,
while also providing different cues to guide the decision-maker’s role enactment, or
behavior. The audience also engages in social reinforcement of the role through the
positive or negative sanctions related to the role enactment, alongside contributing to the
maintenance of a role behavior over time. This is usually due to a continual observance or
acceptance of the role enactment by the state. Furthermore, critics argue role location
affects role enactment in the way that a decision-maker must select and enact a role that
is appropriate to the situation at hand. Role location is a cognitive process whereby
decision-makers appropriately locate themselves within the international social structure.
Role location is often reinforced through socialization of states, where states within the
international system learn and enact their appropriate roles based upon the cues and
demands placed upon them by the audience of member states.16
Individual Motivation
Many times, national role conceptions are associated with a particular
motivational orientation. As is the case with interpersonal relationships, decision makers
can express role conceptions that may be individualistic, cooperative, competitive, or

17. 12
mixed (cooperative-competitive). One example of the individualistic role conception is
the isolate, where the decision-maker of such a state may recognize the severe domestic
and internal problems that place limitations on the state’s ability to interact
internationally, thus the decision is made to expend little to no resources within the global
arena. Often times though, states express national roles that have an international
orientation over an individualistic or domestic orientation, whereby they are motivated
through either competitive or cooperative means. Drawing upon the foundational work of
K.J. Holsti, scholar Naomi Bailin Wish provides a few examples of cooperative and
competitive roles. Cooperative roles include the faithful ally, mediator-integrator, and the
regional subsystem collaborator, while competitive roles include the anti-imperialist
agent, the bastion of the revolution-liberator, and the anti-Communist agent roles.
Furthermore, states may express a cooperative-competitive role if the decision-makers of
such states encourage their states to cooperate with one or more states in order to
compete with others. State functions that involve blocs are often relevant examples of the
cooperative-competitive role, especially if the purpose is for the cooperative bloc to
engage in the ensuing of competition with an entirely different bloc.17
Environment Perceptions and Subsequent Roles
Because national role conceptions play such an important part in determining the
foreign policies a decision-maker proposes, it is important to grasp exactly how
cognitions and perceptions inform and influence role conceptions, and ultimately, the
foreign policy behavior of a state. According to political scientist Marijke Breuning, it is
the decision-maker’s views of their state’s role and position in the international

18. 13
environment that end up forming important cues to motivations and objections that
ultimately dictate the policies pursued.18 Furthermore, it is the decision-maker’s
perceptions of the international environment that matter in determining the opportunities
and constraints relevant to foreign policy behavior. As a decision-maker’s perceptions of
the international environment and their role in such an environment are ‘two sides of the
same coin,’ it is these perceptions of the international environment that define a state’s
role within the international environment. The way in which the international
environment is structured includes not only constraints perceived by decision-makers, but
also the perceptions of positive and negative possibilities offered by the international
environment for a decision-maker’s policy choices.
Interpretive Approach to the Determination of Roles
An alternative approach to determining roles and role conceptions put forth by
scholars is the interpretive approach. In this method, structural patterns do not directly
determine foreign policy behavior. Rather, this line of thought stresses the relevance and
importance of human activity, or agency, over structure of the international system.
Individual decision-makers under this approach are agents that have the ability to modify
different inherited norms and languages following their own reasoning.19 As agency
occurs against a certain historical foundation that initially influences it, the actions and
practices carried out by decision-makers are explained while referring to the influence
and presence of traditions and dilemmas. The presence of traditions plays an important
function in determining the way in which decision-makers ascertain the role conceptions
for their state, whether that be through the influence that a certain tradition of a state

19. 14
provides as the basis for a role conception, or by means of particular historical
international traditions influencing a state’s selection of its role conceptions. On the other
hand, the presence of dilemmas provide an opportunity for decision-makers to respond
and remedy such an instance either through an individually-ascertained national role
conception, or through a collective role conception assigned to that state by the
international system.
Traditions and Dilemmas
Leslie Wehner and Cameron Thies are two scholars who show that traditions are
the starting point for human activity, through either the historical inheritance or patterns
that determine the way in which individual decision-makers act and reason. A decision-
maker receives a collection of understandings, or traditions, but such traditions do not
necessarily precisely determine the policy behavior of the decision-maker. Rather, it is
argued that traditions are a set of influences that have the ability to be changed by means
of individual decision-makers exerting the agency to do so.19 Individuals are at the very
core of traditions, as it is the mutual interaction between such agents that determine how
patterns and structures emerge. Based upon their existing beliefs and traditions, such
actors use their agency to develop national role conceptions. Scholars also consider the
presence of dilemmas to be another relevant factor in determining the role conceptions
and subsequent actions and practices of decision-makers. Dilemmas have the potential to
promote dissonance and role inconsistency. Also, decision-makers will use creativity, or
agency, to change the role currently being enacted in order to tackle the dilemma.
Traditions may provide the plan for a decision-maker to take when deciding on how to

20. 15
react and respond to an existing dilemma. Critics argue that roles are expected to change
or adjust as a dilemma is faced, according to traditions of foreign policymaking.20
Traditions and dilemmas play an important role in exploring the differing voices of a
decision-maker and ultimately determining the most appropriate role conception and role
for such a state to exert within the international system.
Elites and National Role Conceptions
It is most common for scholars of role theory to study and investigate the national
role conceptions held by foreign policy elites. The notion of national role conceptions
held by elites is related to the individual versus collective debate in the sense that at
times, individual elites, or decision-makers, will often express a national role conception
on behalf of their state according to what they personally perceive to be most appropriate.
These scholars have indicated two accounts as to why the national role conceptions of
foreign policy elites can stand on behalf of the entire state. The first explanation is that
role conceptions have a social origin to them, and therefore can be shared among all
individuals within a state. This explanation is seemingly logical, as sources of roles
include a nation’s history, culture, and social characteristics, among other features as
well. Additionally, role theory scholars contend that since roles are intersubjective, they
are shared by society at large. Secondly, national role conceptions held by elites serve as
an indication of a state’s national role conceptions because the foreign policy elites are
the individuals who ultimately make policy decisions regarding how the state will behave
in the international system. On top of this, elites supposedly will behave in accordance
with their ideas as to what would be acceptable to the people of their state. While public

21. 16
opinion or the society at large may disagree with the national role conceptions promoted
by elites, this variable of public opinion and the masses in general has not been
considered in a serious manner.21
Material versus Ideational
The focus of the second theme explains the way in which decision-makers express
certain national role conceptions according to either the material attributes their state
possesses, or in conjunction with the ideational, or more perceived, national role
conceptions and roles that decision-makers claim for their state. These material and
ideational origins of national role conceptions bridge over to explain a state’s perceptions
about what its role(s) should be. This theme can be labeled as material versus ideational.
Characteristics in Variation of Perceived National Role Conceptions
A number of scholars argue an important foundation of role theory is the impact
of a state’s national attributes on national role conceptions. This is relevant to the
material versus ideational debate because a state’s national attributes serve as the material
ways in which decision-makers come to express certain national role conceptions for
their state. In her piece, “National Attributes as Sources of National Role Conceptions: A
Capability-Motivation Model,” Naomi Bailin Wish expands upon Walker by analyzing
the variance of the national role conceptions a state exhibits. As argued by Wish, the
national attributes of a state correspond highly with such a state’s national role
conceptions and foreign policy behavior.22 Wish’s national attribute-national role
conception model compares to a capability-motivation model in that a state’s foreign

22. 17
policy behavior is largely a result of its national attributes or capabilities, and that its
decision-makers’ national motivations are conveyed as the state’s national role
conceptions.23 With her national attribute-national role conception model, Wish follows
up by claiming that since decision-makers from larger and more capable states often have
more resources at their disposal than those of smaller states, such decision-makers from
the larger states will perceive larger domains of national influence and roles that involve
more competitive rather than cooperative interests, along with the expression of roles that
are concerned with security and territory. Furthermore, critics argue that the decision-
makers from larger states perceive themselves as wielding a greater potential for
international influence. Therefore, such states will perceive national roles that heighten
the propensity for difference of policy and conflict with other nations. As these national
roles involve competition, these states will not convey a desire to change the course of
the international system. Rather, such states often express a more territorial or policeman
of the world role in order for it to maintain its own security as well as the status quo of
the international system.24
The level of economic development of a state has been indicated in the literature
as another characteristic in the variation of national role conceptions and subsequent
foreign policy behavior. Economic development is related to the material vs. ideational
debate because the level of a state’s economic development serves as a singular indicator
of such a state’s material attributes. Drawing very similar parallels to roles adopted by
decision-makers from states that are larger populated, decision-makers from more
economically-developed states often perceive their state’s national role to incorporate
larger domains of international influence and perceive a greater number of national roles

23. 18
concerned with political/diplomatic/universal issues and the seeking of less international
system change. As the attributes of economically developed states and attributes of states
with greater size and capability seemingly overlap, decision-makers from states that
embody both types of attributes often will express a greater concern with demonstrating
dominance and spreading influence over a larger domain. Decision-makers from these
states will also resist and challenge the urge to change or reform the international system,
as its domestic living standards are built around the structure of the existing international
political and economic system that directly benefits its society.25
Furthermore, the literature on national attributes as sources of national role
conceptions also indicates the political orientation of a state as a contributor to variation
in a state’s foreign policy behavior. Decision-makers of states that are more open and
democratic will perceive a greater number of national roles that are concerned with
political, diplomatic, universal, and economic issues of the international system. Such
decision-makers also will perceive a lesser number of national roles that involve
competitive over cooperative interests and relations. Expression of national roles
concerning a cooperative orientation will ensue from states with an open and democratic
system because with industries like trade, financial investment, and tourism, these states
understand the influence of areas of the private sector in decreasing national role
expressions that exemplify conflict.26 Additionally, the open and democratic states that
have an influential private sector are encouraged to express national roles that embrace
less individualistic and competitive motivations, and more roles that express diplomatic
and economic issues. In the long run, expression of such roles ultimately satisfies a
state’s national interests of maintaining both its territorial and economic security. These

24. 19
material factors that contribute to and make up the national attributes of a state are one
instance where decision-makers can derive certain national role conceptions for their
state.
Structural Development of National Role Conceptions
National role conceptions can be structurally developed in a number of ways.
Breuning argues that national role conceptions in general are developed in a very
structural manner, claiming that such conceptions are derived from multiple sources.
These sources include the sense of the state’s place within the international environment
and its relation to the state’s perception of the current international context and historical
context.27 As scholars have claimed that national role conceptions are “foreign policy
makers’ perceptions of their nations’ positions in the international system,” it is clear that
such scholars are endorsing a structural version of role theory.28 Additionally, drawing
from Waltz, it is argued that international politics can only be understood through some
sort of systems theory. Where the system is comprised of a structure and subsequent
interacting units, with structure defining the system, the structure of relations between
states determines the interactions between two or more states. According to Kenneth
Waltz, the international system is made up of both a structure and its interacting units,
with the structure defining the way in which the interacting units, or states, are ordered or
arranged. The focus of the role conception debate should be on structure, since structure
is the feature that defines the international system.29
According to Leslie Wehner and Cameron Thies, it is argued that structure is a
priority when it comes to shaping and determining a role for a state to select and enact.

25. 20
Furthermore, the material capability of a state is important in determining the state’s
location within the interstate social structure, or international system. What is known as a
‘master role’ defines the most salient attribute of a state.30 It is in this way that roles are
incorporated and connected to the structure of the international system. Additionally,
scholars maintain the idea that while roles are advanced by structure, they are conversely
constrained by institutional settings. This is why both institutions and structures within
the international system shape foreign policy behavior. Scholars note that it is the
institutional settings within such structures that typically completely determine the
expectations of a state’s role behavior. Institutional settings are not always consistent
with role behavior however, as structures can be subject to potential changes by agents
within the international system.31 Since role theory is a departure from the traditional
sense of realism in the way that identities can be constructed through role conceptions, it
is important to take into consideration a state’s perception of its status within the
international system.
Status Perception
Another critical aspect of a national role conception is a state’s perception of
status in the international system. Status directly relates to power and influence.
Perception of status is directly relevant to the material versus ideational debate because as
opposed to the national attributes that were indicators of a state’s material derivations of
national role conceptions, a state can perceive its status in the international system as
either one rooted in materialism or idealism. While it is often the case that power and
influence directly relate to a state’s material claim of status by means of material national

26. 21
attributes, states may also claim and perceive a higher status in the international system
according to a decision-maker’s personal beliefs, resulting in the reflection of expression
of certain national role conceptions. Critics have defined the status of a state to entail “a
location in the social structure defined by expectations for performance by an
incumbent…the status dimension is correlated with legitimate power and social
esteem.”32
In many cases, status is measured by a state’s domain of influence and the degree
to which the state wields influence. Domains of influence can range in size, most
commonly either domestic or global. A state with greater international status is more
influential in larger domains, as opposed to smaller domains. The international
community would perceive the roles expressed by leaders of western or Communist bloc
states, for example, to be more influential. This would consequently indicate these states
as possessing higher status within the international system. Naomi Bailin Wish offers an
external environment classification list, indicating the size or level of influence domain of
a state with which a certain role is associated. These domains and associated roles include
1) domestic, where a state only acts within its own internal affairs; 2) bilateral, where a
state interacts with another state that is not a superpower; 3) dominant bilateral, where a
state interacts with another state of superpower status; 4) subordinate, where a state
interacts with a particular geographic and non-organizational group within a particular
region (Eastern Europe, Latin America, etc.); 5) subordinate other, where a state interacts
with a non-global or intergovernmental organization such as NATO, SEATO, etc.; and 6)
global, where a state interacts with a superpower and its bloc, a global organization, or
the entire international system.33

27. 22
Continuity versus Change
The last theme highlights the possibility of the degree to which some decision-
makers feel the structure of the international system, that pre-determines national role
conceptions for states to express, has the potential to be altered or changed according to a
particular decision-makers’ desires. This theme is known as continuity versus change.
System Change Motivation
Another variable that accounts for variation in foreign policy behavior is a
decision-maker’s desire or motivation for the amount of system change within the
international structure. System change motivation is relevant to the continuity vs. change
debate because different decision-makers may possess different desires to either change
or continue the current international system, according to the national role conceptions
expressed by such decision-makers. As a result, such role conceptions can motivate
decision-makers to take action either for or against system change. Decision-makers can
adopt national role conceptions that reflect their aspiration for an array of change, ranging
from maintenance of the status quo/no change, all the way to a complete overhaul of the
international system. Roles involving mediator or developer imply a decision-maker’s
desire for moderate change; protectee or isolate roles imply the desire for minimal
change or a maintenance of the status quo, and roles involving a desire for much change
imply an association with the bastion of the revolution-liberator role.34
National role conceptions also can be categorized according to an issue or
substantive problem area. These roles are interpersonal and classified by manner of
economic, political, military, and religious means. National roles often times fall under

28. 23
one or more of these classifications. States can perform economic, political, and/or
military roles, while interpersonal religious roles of the decision-maker often times
translate to that state expressing a national role conception that concerns an ideological
and/or religious role. An example of this role type would be Holsti’s defender of the faith
role, where the decision-makers that embrace this role conception make foreign policy
decisions in defense of value systems (liberty and freedom, humanitarianism over
militarism, etc.) rather than specific territories.
Moreover, there exist national roles that have no correlation with economic,
political, military, or ideological values. Such roles solely tend to focus on the promotion
of universal values, such as the promoting or defending justice, peace, and/or racial
harmony (ex, defender of the faith). While it may seem that states express national role
conceptions that promote universal values in order to gain a positive public relations
standing, it is suggested by Holsti that such national role expressions are not related to
behavior in any way. Wish and other critics define and place these ideological, economic,
political, universal, and territorial values of national role conceptions into certain
categories as such: 1) territorial/defense, where a state maintains, defends, or expands its
own or its collaborator’s territorial integrity/security, or inhibits that of its competitor
states, 2) ideological, where a state defends/promotes/inhibits a certain value system or
way of life (ex. Communism, capitalism, democracy), 3) political/diplomatic, where a
state affects the positions or relationships between states (ex. a decision-maker
determines his state’s relationship with other states to be peacefully coexistent, or
nonalignment), 4) universal values, where a state promotes a certain situation of peace,

29. 24
racial harmony, and/or justice, and 5) economic, where a state maintains and/or expands
upon its own or another’s industrial development or other economics resources.35
Impact of Domestic Politics in Contestation of Roles
As states determine which national role conceptions to express, another factor to
consider includes the effect of the states’ domestic politics. A state’s domestic political
agenda can serve to create variation in expression of national role conceptions, and this in
turn has the potential to affect the way in which a state can go about determining role
conceptions and subsequently the degree to which such a state feels it can alter or change
the existing international system that pre-determines roles. This, in turn, is relevant to the
continuity vs. change debate because a state’s current domestic political structure could
for example be in favor of encouraging a decision-maker to follow continuity of the
international system, while a different domestic political structure could rise to power in a
future administration that would be in favor of discouraging continuity and subsequently
encouraging change of the international system. The contestation of role conceptions and
roles can surface from conflict over policy between governing elites and political
opposition, within governing coalitions, and among various bureaucratic agencies.36
Differing incumbent governments and political opposition have the tendency to
instigate conflict over what such a state’s national role conceptions should be. Political
parties that hold a majority of seats in one house of government may come to spar with
opposition parties that may have control in a different house. Specifically, parliaments
allow for a wide range of viewpoints to be discussed, leading to the potential for
discourse and conflict to arise. Additionally, national role conceptions could derive from

30. 25
party ideology and be further institutionalized within electoral platforms, serving to
concrete a state’s national role conceptions according to the ruling political party.
Role conception conflict that may surface in political parties has the potential to
also rise within the cabinet, the primary body of a government for making foreign policy
decisions. Coalition governments that have multiple parties present within the cabinet
share the decision-making authority on foreign policy, so disagreement over foreign
policy may be a result of differing views of national role conceptions.37 Party conflicts
within such governments relate to more general conflicts over expression of a certain
national role conception(s). Contention over expression of national role conceptions is
especially prevalent in the legislatures of parliamentary democracies, as national role
conceptions can often be enshrined in party platforms, whereas opposition parties use
whatever means necessary to ensure the party in power does not implement and express
its version of the state’s national role conception.38
The presence of bureaucratic agencies within a state also creates the potential for
a state to vacillate over its national role conceptions and ability to instill change from its
system-dictated role conception expressions. Such bureaucratic agencies have different
organizational missions and political/personal incentives to account for, but may also
have entirely different worldviews that elicit distinctive national role conceptions. As a
result, scholars have often lumped together the national role conceptions expressed by
bureaucratic agencies in accordance with the overall role expressed by the national
elites.39 Additionally, cabinet members that serve as heads of bureaucratic organizations
frequently adopt positions of national role conceptions commensurate with the particular
interests of their organization. As cabinet members all collaborate on agenda setting,

31. 26
assuming a context of the “foreign policy security executive,” the different positions
taken by these cabinet members are likely to lead to the promotion of different competing
national role conceptions. As a result, it is most often the case that the primary decision-
maker, or single most powerful member of the government, imposes his will on the
cabinet to ultimately ensure that the predominant leader and decision-maker determines
the selection of a national role conception.40
In summary, there exists a sweeping collection of contending theoretical
perspectives when it comes to evaluating the utility of role theory in foreign policy
analysis. The various themes previously mentioned in this chapter serve as a means of
structure and reference for the ways in which national role conceptions are formed and
subsequent foreign policy behavior is acted upon. As initially argued by Holsti, the
national role performance of a state, or foreign policy behavior, is consistent with its
national role conceptions in the sense that the role conceptions are the groundwork for
expression of the national functions and commitments of a state.
1 K.J. Holsti, “National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy,” International Studies Quarterly
14, 3 (September 1970), p. 238.
2 Ibid, p. 239.
3 Ibid, p. 240.
4 Ibid, p. 245.
5 Ibid, p. 255.
6 Stephen G. Walker, “The Correspondence between Foreign Policy Rhetoric and Behavior: Insights from
Role Theory and Exchange Theory,” in Role Theory and Foreign Policy Analysis,ed. Stephen G.
Walker (Durham: Duke University Press,1987), p. 81.
7 Ibid, p. 82.
8 Ibid, p. 84.
9 Ibid, p. 85.
10 Cameron G. Thies, “Role Theory and Foreign Policy,” International Studies Association Compendium
Project (May 2009), p. 4.
11 Ibid,p. 5.
12 Ibid,p. 7.
13 Ibid,p. 8.
14 Ibid, p. 9.
15 Ibid,p. 10.
16 Ibid, p. 11.

32. 27
17 Naomi Bailin Wish,“Foreign Policy Makers and Their National Role Conceptions,” International
Studies Quarterly 24, 4 (Dec. 1980), p. 538.
18 Marijke Breuning, “National Role Conceptions and Foreign Assistance Policy Behavior Toward a
Cognitive Model,” (PhD dissertation,The Ohio State University, 1992), p. 20.
19 Wehner, Leslie E., and Cameron G. Thies, “Role Theory, Narratives, and Interpretation: The Domestic
Contestation of Roles,” International Studies Review 16 (2014), p. 416.
20 Ibid, p. 417.
21 Cantir, Cristian, and Juliet Kaarbo, “Contested Roles and Domestic Politics: Reflection on Role Theory
in Foreign Policy Analysis and IR Theory,” Foreign Policy Analysis 8 (2012), p. 7.
22 Naomi Bailin Wish, “National Attributes as Sources of National Role Conceptions: A Capability-
Motivation Model,” in Role Theory and Foreign Policy Analysis,ed. Stephen G. Walker
(Durham: Duke University Press, 1987), p. 95.
23 Ibid, p. 96.
24 Ibid, p. 97.
25 Ibid, p. 98.
26 Ibid, p. 99.
27 Breuning, “National Role Conceptions and Foreign Assistance Policy Behavior Toward a Cognitive
Model,” p. 20.
28 Breuning, “National Role Conceptions and Foreign Assistance Policy Behavior Toward a Cognitive
Model,” p. 23.
29 Breuning, “National Role Conceptions and Foreign Assistance Policy Behavior Toward a Cognitive
Model,” p. 24.
30 Wehnerand Thies, “Role Theory, Narratives, and Interpretation: The Domestic Contestation of Roles,” p.
414.
31 Wehnerand Thies, “Role Theory, Narratives, and Interpretation: The Domestic Contestation of Roles,” p.
415.
32 Wish,“Foreign Policy Makers and Their National Role Conceptions,” p. 536.
33 Wish, “Foreign Policy Makers and Their National Role Conceptions,” p. 537.
34 Wish, “Foreign Policy Makers and Their National Role Conceptions,” p. 539.
35 Wish, “Foreign Policy Makers and Their National Role Conceptions,” p. 540.
36 Cantir and Kaarbo, “Contested Roles and Domestic Politics: Reflection on Role Theory in Foreign Policy
Analysis and IR Theory,” p. 12.
37 Ibid, p. 14.
38 Brummer, Klaus and Cameron Thies, “The Contested Selection of National Role Conceptions,” Foreign
Policy Analysis 0 (2014), p. 5
39 Cantir and Kaarbo, “Contested Roles and Domestic Politics: Reflection on Role Theory in Foreign Policy
Analysis and IR Theory,” p. 16.
40 Brummer and Thies, “The Contested Selection of National Role Conceptions,” p. 7.

33. 28
Chapter 2: Research Design and Methodology
In the previous chapter, I reviewed the relevant literature on role theory and
national role conceptions. This chapter details my research design and methodology. I
provide my hypothesis and causal model alongside a description and justification of the
case studies and methodology used for this Independent Study.
It is critical to understand the importance that national role conceptions play in
providing a foundation for a state’s foreign policy behavior. KJ Holsti, who first argued
this position in the 1970s, asserts that the roles expressed by a state and its leadership are
correlated with the subsequent decisions, actions, and behaviors of a decision-maker,
eventually setting the foundation for much more in the sphere of role theory and foreign
policy analysis. Furthermore, these national role conceptions are the decision-makers’
personal definitions of the decisions, commitments, rules, norms, and actions deemed
appropriate to their state. As a result, national role conceptions are seen to have an effect
on the subsequent foreign policy behavior expression of a state.
As noted in Chapter 1, national role conceptions can be generated in a variety of
ways. National role conceptions are seen through the position of the decision-maker on
behalf of the state. Many times, predetermined characteristics make up such role
conceptions that the international system then assigns to states, as referenced by scholars
such as Breuning, Wish, and Thies. Moreover, material attributes that determine a state’s
status within the international system are one means by which national role conceptions
can surface. Take for example one of the most prominent material attributes, the level of
economic development of a state, and compare that with the likes of the United States or
Russia. These states have well-established and developed economies, and as a result, are

34. 29
able to express more influence and clout within the international system. Often times
interstate disputes, especially militarized, can surface as states expressing such role
conceptions interact with other actors the international system. While a state may not
have a certain elite status within the system, it is still possible for a decision-maker to
perceive its state to have status, expressing a national role conception pursuant to such
thought. As argued by scholars like Wish and Breuning, certain states can express
national role conceptions according to the individual motivations of singular decision-
makers, or elites. While some national role conceptions may be expressed in a collective
sense, derived from the demands of the international system, it is often the decision-
maker’s individual definitions and conceptions of the role its state should play that are
most important. Each national role conception that is expressed by a state has a
predictive quality to it; essentially, political scientists and role theorists assume such
conceptions can work to explain a certain outcome of foreign policy behavior. I
hypothesize that if the leadership of a state displays an exceptional national role
conception, it is likely to adopt an aggressive foreign policy behavior.
Figure 1: Independent and Dependent Variable Arrow Diagram
Independent Variable Dependent Variable
Level of Exceptionalism
in National Role Conceptions
Level of Aggressiveness
in Foreign Policy
Indicators:
 Political Structure
 National Attributes
 Regional versus Unilateral Leadership
Indicators:
 Intensity of foreign military involvement
 Militarized Interstate Disputes (MIDs)

35. 30
Independent Variable: Level of Exceptionalism in National Role Conception
The indicators of certain national role conceptions whose characteristics overlap
with those of exceptionalism need to be considered in determining the independent
variable. Additionally, previous studies have not explicitly claimed that the expression of
certain national role conceptions will directly result in a specific foreign policy behavior.
Rather, the literature suggests that national role conceptions have a predictive ability in
working towards determining the foreign policy behavior of a state. As such, it is the
perceptions held by the decision-makers of states that ultimately determine the national
role conceptions. This in turn may impact the subsequent foreign policy behavior of the
leadership of such states.
Exceptionalism: Conceptualized
As previously noted in Chapter One, exceptionalism is a psychological
phenomenon that influences a type of foreign policy commensurate to the expression of
uniqueness. According to scholars like Holsti, an exceptionalist foreign policy is one that
includes characteristics of states claiming exemptions from the ordinary rules and norms
that dictate international relations and the greater international system as a whole.
Furthermore, states exhibit exceptionalist foreign policy when they act upon a perceived
responsibility to liberate other states suffering from an outside aggressor state imposing
conflict. States with exceptionalist foreign policies often fulfill their self-perceived global
responsibilities to the world as if they were free from the external rules and norms that
govern the relations among the lesser states. Often times, exceptionalism is claimed
through means of moral and ideological foundations.

36. 31
Embodiment of Exceptionalism through National Role Conceptions
There are a variety of factors that affect how and why states express certain
national role conceptions. One of the most influential characteristics that affect the
expression of national role conceptions of a state is the impact of a state’s national
attributes. Argued by Wish, the tangible and physical elements that inform a state’s level
of national attributes can give the decision-maker of such a state more authority within
the international system. As states that are larger and more materially capable typically
have more resources at their disposal than those of smaller states, decision-makers from
these larger states many times will perceive larger domains of international influence and
role conceptions that involve competitive over cooperative interests. As such perceptions
of strengthened international influence surface, these states will perceive national roles
that heighten the propensity for conflict and difference of policy with other states. As
Holsti argues, exceptionalist states tend to perceive global responsibilities involving the
liberation of other states through the prevention of globalized threats. It is important to
consider the idea that often times it is the state with a greater amount of national
attributes at its disposal that may often perceive a national role conception overlapping
with exceptionalism.
Holsti presents a collection of different national role conceptions, ranging from
roles that imply a greater amount of international foreign policy action, to roles that
imply a degree of lesser activity and more passivity. According to the characteristics that
make up exceptionalism, and in line with the reasoning of Holsti, I have identified several
individual national role conceptions that imply a dynamic amount of foreign policy
activity with undertones of exceptionalism. These national role conceptions include

37. 32
regional leader, regional protector, active independent, liberation supporter, and
defender of the faith. I plan on using the characteristics that make up these national role
conceptions as the basis for my content analysis scheme. The following is a list of
explanations as to how each national role conception is defined.
Regional Leader
This national role conception emphasizes the themes of a state perceiving for
itself leadership in acting upon special specified duties or responsibilities in its relations
to other states. These other states exist within a particular region with which the state
expressing the regional leader national role conception identifies.1
Regional Protector
The themes associated with this national role conception somewhat overlap with
those of the regional leader role conception. The regional protector role conception
implies the special leadership responsibilities of a state on a particular regional and/or
issue-area basis. However, this national role conception emphasizes the function or duty
of such states to provide protection for adjacent regions, often by means of providing
military security.2
Active Independent
States expressing this national role conception perceive the idea that they are free
from military commitments to other major powers, alongside the shunning of permanent
ideological or military commitments. This national role conception also promotes themes

38. 33
of the necessity and importance in cultivating relations with many states in order to
ensure not only self-determination, but also potential mediation functions or active
programs aimed at the extension of diplomatic and/or commercial relations on an
international scale.2
Liberation Supporter
This national role conception does not specifically encourage states to act upon
formal responsibilities to organize, lead, and/or tangibly support liberation movements
abroad. Rather, states expressing this national role conception will often speculate on and
articulate more unstructured and vague attitudes about actions required to support
liberation abroad, either through a verbal commitment of solidarity by such a decision-
maker or by means of rhetoric emphasizing the ability of the state in search of liberation,
all to accomplish such liberation.3
Defender of the Faith
A state’s expression of this national role conception implies its commitment with
foreign policy objectives to defend value systems, such as democracy or communism, as
opposed to a specified territory, from attack. States that express the defender of the faith
role conception assume specific responsibilities designed to ensure the commonality of
ideology for a group of other states for which the defender of the faith is securing. Often
times, such special responsibilities are acted upon by means of military action abroad.4

39. 34
Exceptionalism: Operationalized
It is necessary to consider that the leadership and decision-makers of states may
or may not outright claim the idea of their state being exceptional in nature. Rather, it is
the perceptions of the decision-makers that need to be analyzed in relation to their
expression or disapproval of certain characteristics that inform exceptionalism. If a
decision-maker expresses the indicators of exceptionalism in its elite rhetoric, the
decision-maker will be perceived to embrace exceptionalism in its foreign policy
decisions. Conversely, if the decision-maker of a state expresses perceptions of the role(s)
its state should play in the international system are not in line with perceptions of
exceptionalism, the decision-maker will be perceived to not have exceptionalism
influence its foreign policy decision-making. The coding scheme that forms the basis of
the content analysis (see Figure 2) will be informed by characteristics of each of the
individual national role conceptions to be studied. The following is a scheme of the
various sources of the national role conceptions to be analyzed. Derived from Holsti, the
following is a coding scheme used to operationalize exceptionalism.
Figure 2: Coding Scheme
Role Conception Sources and Coding Procedure
Regional Leader
Superior capabilities of state, expression of a
traditional national role
Focus on references to certain duties and/or
responsibilities in the context of the particular
region with which the state identifies
 Special regional role, responsibility
 Reference to a lone, moral obligation

40. 35
Regional Protector
Perceptions of threat according to geographic
location, adherence to traditional policies and
needs of threatened state(s)
Focus on phrases or references highlighting
special responsibilities involving leadership on
regional/issue-area basis, providing of
protection to such regions
 Emphasis on protection
 Threat of developing nations
 Security of the developing world
Active Independent
Anti-bloc attitudes, foreign policy decisions
made to support the state over international
interests, freedom of military commitments to
any major powers, encouragement of
continuity of international system
Focus on words related to cooperation over
conflict, terms emphasizing individuality over
permanent international commitments,
affirmation of national independence and/or
nationalism, pronouns referring to the self
(self-confidence)
 Independence of foreign policy
 Self-determination
 Potential mediation functions
Liberation Supporter
Ideological principles, anti-colonial attitudes
Focus on words related to instigation of
conflict, ideological and/or moral principles,
and anti-colonial attitudes, phrases involving
vague attitudes and actions to take over
explicit formal responsibilities
 Unstructured/no clear action to be
taken
 “We support this struggling nation…”
Defender of the Faith
Ideological principles, adherence to traditional
national role, perceptions of threat
Focus on words related to instigation of
conflict and defense of value systems over
specific territories, reference to militarism and
humanitarianism, defense of
life/liberty/freedom
 “We have a common purpose and
interest to defend…”
 Ensuring survival/success of liberty

41. 36
Dependent Variable: Level of Aggressiveness in Foreign Policy
Aggressiveness of Foreign Policy: Conceptualized
Understanding how terms such as ‘aggressiveness’ and ‘foreign policy’ are
defined is instrumental in determining and explaining the dependent variable. For the
purposes of this study, aggressiveness of foreign policy will refer to the intensity of a
state’s foreign military involvement in the affairs of another state. In defining foreign
military involvement, this study will associate such involvement as the one-time decision
of a state whether or not to militarily intervene into the sovereign affairs of another state.
Such foreign military involvement is in congruence with militarized interstate disputes,
and according to the Militarized Interstate Disputes (MIDs) data set introduced by
scholars Daniel M. Jones, Stuart A. Bremer, and J. David Singer, there exists a set of
criteria to use for reference when defining these incidents of involvement. Militarized
incidents must be explicitly directed towards one or more interstate system members and
also must be a clear, non-routine, and governmentally authorized action.5 Furthermore,
such actions must be decided upon by the governmental representatives, or individual
decision-makers, of the state.
Aggressiveness in Foreign Policy: Operationalized
The intensity of foreign military involvement will be operationalized according to
different levels of intensity explained through the MIDs data set. Operationalizing the
aggressiveness of a state’s foreign policy, as determined by the intensity of an act of
foreign military involvement, includes classifying specific military interstate disputes

42. 37
according to the parameters of the MIDs data set descriptions. These categories are made
up of a “high”, “medium”, and “low” intensity of involvement. The MIDs data set
classifies instances of militarized action according to their magnitude. The “high”
intensity of involvement is concurrent with actual use of force by a state, the “medium”
intensity of involvement is concurrent with display of force, and the “low” intensity of
involvement is concurrent with threat of force.6
A “high level” of foreign military involvement, indicating an intense act brought
upon by an aggressor state, would consist of the actual use of force by an aggressor state.
This use of force could be exemplified by the aggressor state’s initial military presence
within the occupied state, accompanied over time by a sustained presence of such
military personnel alongside heavy casualties experienced by the occupied state. This
level of intensity of aggressiveness in foreign policy also may include the aggressor state
formally declaring war on the occupied state, or implementing a blockade or use of
chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons against the forces of the occupied state.
A “medium level” of foreign military involvement would consist of displays of
force by an aggressor state, to a smaller degree than displays of force commensurate with
the “high level” of foreign military involvement. These displays of force could include an
initial military presence by the aggressor state, yet as opposed to a sustained military
presence within the occupied state; the aggressor state may execute some level of
oversight over the affairs of the country either through military or other means. Such
oversight could involve mobilization of troops, show of ships and/or planes, or the alert
of an increase in the military readiness of the aggressor state.

43. 38
A “low level” of foreign military involvement by an aggressor state would
furthermore consist of a smaller degree of threats of military force. This would include
the initial military presence of the aggressor state within the occupied state, but with little
to no subsequent further military intervention or presence within the occupied state. The
threats of force also could include threats to fire upon the armed forces of the occupied
state, threat to blockade, to occupy territory, to declare war, and/or to use nuclear
weapons. While seemingly initially aggressive, these acts all constitute a “low level” of
foreign military involvement because they are solely threats as opposed to tangible
actions.
Methodological Approach: Comparative Case Study
This study will employ the comparative case study methodology. This is a
methodology that incorporates the “systematic comparison of two or more data points
obtained through the use of the case study method.”7 Scholars Juliet Kaarbo and Ryan K.
Beasley provide basic, general definitions of such terms that encompass the method. A
‘case’ is an instance or data point that can act as experimentally derived measurements,
survey responses, or classifications of different historical events. The ‘case study’ is then
“a method of obtaining a case or a number of cases through an empirical examination of a
real-world phenomenon within its naturally-occurring context, without directly
manipulating either the phenomenon or the context.”5 Case studies allow for the holistic
description of the phenomenon to be studied. Moreover, the theoretical foundations of a
study can be used to explore, examine, and interpret the case study at hand. The study can
be enhanced through the examination of such theoretical foundations within the

44. 39
boundaries of an individual empirical instance.8 Consequently, the comparative case
study offers a method of structured and focused comparison of empirical instances.
Alongside the use of the comparative case study methodology will be content
analysis. According to scholars Janet Buttolph Johnson and H.T. Reynolds, content
analysis involves relying on the use of written records in order to support an observation
or relationship. It is a methodology that uses the written record through systematic coding
and classification of the content of a set of records.9 Coding schemes are created as a part
of the content analysis; such schemes are sets of categories consisting of certain units
including words, phrases, sentences, and/or paragraphs and entire documents to be coded.
Content analysis is suitable for this study because the methodology allows for the
production of a qualitative measure of decision-makers and their perceptions of their
state’s national role conceptions.
Case Selection
In order to test my hypothesis, utilizing the comparative case study approach is
most appropriate for this project. The case studies consist of different states, and the
comparative case study approach allows for the examination of such states and their
decision-makers, national role conceptions, and foreign policies. It is necessary to select
cases that reflect variation for purposes of comparison, and in creating my research
design I select cases that vary across the independent variable. Varying across
exceptionalistic national role conceptions, as outlined in Figure 2 of this chapter, will
allow for the testing to determine whether the expression of such role conceptions leads

45. 40
to a certain foreign policy behavior outcome. The comparative case study methodology is
the most appropriate to utilize since it allows for variation to exist.
In the following figure (Fig. 3), there is a chart indicating the independent and
dependent variables, along with the outlined categories by which each variable will be
measured. The independent variable section has the five national role conceptions
outlined that will be analyzed, while the dependent variable section has a listing of the
three categories by which the foreign policy behavior will be measured, according to the
parameters of the MIDs data set that were previously outlined in this chapter. The shaded
boxes in Figure 3 line up with my hypothesized expectations and predictions for the
results of the study (e.g., I anticipate the leadership of states that express the defender of
the faith national role conception will exhibit a high foreign policy behavior).
Figure 3: Predictive Chart
Independent Variable: National Role Conceptions
Regional
Leader
Regional
Protector
Active
Independent
Defender
of the Faith
Liberation
Supporter
Dependent
Variable:
Foreign
Policy
Behavior
Low
Medium
High
Each case in the comparative case study will consist of one instance of militarized
foreign policy behavior from a state. The states analyzed will include the United States of
America, India, Russia, and the United Kingdom. The case studies include the lead up

46. 41
and eventual decision of the United States to intervene and engage in airstrikes in the
Syrian Civil War from 2013-2014, India’s decision not to intervene in the 2013 Syrian
Civil War, Russia’s 2014 occupation and annexation of Crimea, and the United
Kingdom’s decision in 2013 to uphold its commitment to the Falkland Islands in
contestation over sovereignty with Argentina and engage in military exercises on the
Islands in 2014.
These cases are selected because they fit into certain criteria that are
representative of variation. In selecting these case studies, I control for time by picking
cases that fall within a two-year timeframe of each other, that being 2013 to 2014.
Furthermore, the curiosity about whether or not such indicators of exceptionalism such as
environmental perceptions, governmental structure, level of economic development,
preference for type of leadership and/or action in international affairs, etc., can all be
accounted for with these cases. The cases involve states with varied governmental
structures, along with differing perceptions of the international environment because of
the varying cultural and social dynamic that makes up each state’s conception of its
influence in the international system.
1 K.J. Holsti, “National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy,” International Studies Quarterly
14, 3 (September 1970), p. 261.
2 Ibid, p. 262.
3 Ibid, p. 263.
4 Ibid, p. 264.
5 Daniel M. Jones,Stuart A. Bremer, and J. David Singer, “Militarized Interstate Disputes,1816-1992:
Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns,” Conflict Management and Peace Science 15, 2
(1996), p. 169.
6 Ibid, p. 170.
7 Juliet Kaarbo and Ryan K. Beasley, “A Practical Guide to the Comparative Case Study Method in
Political Psychology,” Political Psychology 20, 2 (1999), p. 372.
8 Ibid, p. 375.
9 Janet Buttolph Johnson and H.T. Reynolds, Political Science Research Methods (Los Angeles,CA: CQ
Press, 2012), p. 292.

47. 42

48. 43
Chapter 3: The United States and India in Syria
This chapter presents the cases of both the United States and India’s respective
foreign policy decisions related to the Syrian civil war, from 2013 to 2014. The chapter
first provides a background and context to the Syrian civil war generally. The chapter
will continue with a short analysis of the United States and India’s corresponding roles in
the conflict, as well as an analysis of the two states’ foreign policy behaviors in relation
with the independent and dependent variables of the study. As stated earlier, each foreign
policy case analyzed in this study focuses on a decision by the state to either militarily
intervene or not into the sovereign affairs of another state.
Background
The Syrian Civil War was a domestic level crisis that has now evolved into a
catastrophe for the international community. The conflict has claimed over 200,000 lives,
and the bloody violence associated with the war continues to this day. This conflict
started in March of 2011, where fashioned like an Arab Spring movement, pro-
democracy protests started to surface in and around the city of Deraa, Syria. These
protests were encouraged after local teenagers were arrested and tortured for painting
revolutionary slogans on a school wall. Governmental security forces responded by
openly firing upon demonstrators, eventually triggering nationwide protests that
demanded President Bashar al-Assad’s resignation. The Syrian government responded
with brutal violence and the country plunged into civil war, with governmental forces
sparring against rebel groups. The resolve of the protesters strengthened with the help of

49. 44
the Assad-incited violence, to the point were hundreds of thousands of Syrians were
taking to the streets across the country by July 2011.1
As the violence continued, the United Nations reported a sweeping number of
alleged human rights violations committed by the Syrian government. Evidence showed
that both the government and rebel forces engaged in heinous war crimes, including
murder, torture, rape, and forced disappearances. Furthermore, investigators accused the
government of having promoted civilian suffering through blocking access to food,
water, health services, and other items of survival necessity as a method of war. Since
December 2013, the government has dropped barrel bombs onto rebel-held areas in the
capital city of Aleppo. The UN has noted that the regime in certain cases would
deliberately target civilian gathering areas, inciting continual violence and ruthless
massacres.2
Hundreds of people in districts around Damascus were killed in August 2013 after
rockets filled with the nerve agent sarin were fired into the city and its surrounding parts.
This incident was one of the most controversial developments in the Syrian civil war.
Many Western powers, including the United States, immediately blamed the Syrian
government, saying the move could only have been taken by the regime. At the same
time, the regime and its superpower ally Russia blamed rebel groups for the attack.
United States President Barack Obama responded by saying this attack crossed a “red
line.” From this point on, and as tensions continued to escalate, President Obama
contemplated an American military response to the sarin rocket firing and killing of
hundreds of Syrians. While Obama’s preferred method of addressing the issue was

50. 45
through means of diplomacy, he did not rule out the possibility that the United States
might potentially respond to the situation with military force.
Under threat of western military assault, President Assad agreed to the complete
removal and destruction of Syria’s arsenal of chemical weapons. Syria also signed onto
the Chemical Weapons Convention, an agreement that bans the production, storage,
and/or use of chemical weapons. The United Nations, American and Russian diplomats,
and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) collectively led a
joint mission that spurred the creation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. The
destruction of chemical agents and other munitions was complete in a year. At the same
time, though, the OPCW has since documented the presence and use of toxic chemicals,
including chlorine and ammonia, by Syrian government forces in attacks on northern
rebel-held areas between April and July 2014.2
The United States was not the only country to threaten military action in response
to the sarin bombing of the Syrian government. The United Kingdom Prime Minister
David Cameron and President of France Francois Hollande also amped up rhetoric
regarding the justification of military action. Ever since the chemical weapon prohibition
framework agreement came to order, insurgent forces have continued to exacerbate the
civil war around Syria proper and beyond. The insurgents claimed that such an agreement
gave Assad and the Syrian government legitimacy in the eyes of the international system,
something with which the insurgents vehemently disagreed.3
This violence also contributed to a humanitarian crisis in Syria. Since the start of
the conflict in March 2011, over 3 million people have fled Syria for neighboring
countries including Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon. The mass exodus of refugees

51. 46
accelerated considerably as conditions in Syria deteriorated. On top of the 3 million that
fled Syria, an additional 6.5 million people were internally displaced within Syria,
bringing the total number of 9.5 million people, half of Syria’s population, having fled
their homes.
Furthermore, the Syrian civil war also acquired sectarian overtones, pitting
Syria’s Sunni majority of rebels against Assad’s Shia Alawite sect.4 This eventually drew
in another dimension of players including neighboring states and world powers, and
created a vacuum of power allowing for the rise of various jihadist groups like Islamic
State. As the chaos and violence grew widespread throughout the area, the extremist
group Islamic State (IS) grew out of al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Islamic State gained regional
influence by taking control of huge areas of territory across Syria and Iraq. The regional
bitter sectarian violence only served to intensify the volatile crisis. The Islamic State’s
large collection of foreign fighters battled rebels and others in the area that objected to
their tactics and influence, and continue to do so today. The presence of Islamic State has
heavily contributed to the greater instability of Syria and that region of the world. This
instability, even still present to this day, created a number of international repercussions,
placing major players in the international system at odds with one another.5 The volatility
that surfaced from the region at that time is what led to the United States-led coalition to
launch air strikes inside Iraq and Syria in an effort to “degrade and ultimately destroy”
what it deemed to be a vicious terrorist organization, the Islamic State.6
The next section of this chapter will include an analysis of the United States’
foreign policy decision to launch airstrikes in Iraq and Syria to degrade Islamic State.
Furthermore, in this chapter I will also analyze the foreign policy decision of India not to

52. 47
directly and unilaterally intervene militarily into the conflict associated with the Syrian
civil war. In Chapter 2, I presented an arrow diagram that showed how the case studies
would be analyzed. The independent variable of the study is the level of exceptionalism
in national role conceptions, while the dependent variable is the level of aggressiveness in
foreign policy. I proposed a hypothesis that specified if a state displays an exceptional
role conception, it is likely to adopt a more aggressive foreign policy behavior. Important
indicators of the independent variable are the political structure and national attribute
capabilities of the state, alongside the state’s capability and/or preference for unilateral or
regional leadership. Dependent variable indicators included the level of intensity of the
foreign military involvement according to the Militarized Interstate Disputes, or MIDs,
data set. These indicators will be analyzed in the upcoming sections of this chapter.
Independent Variable: National Role Conceptions (United States of America)
Evidence suggests that leadership of the United States government expressed the
regional leader national role conception in its decision to address these broader foreign
policy issues within Syria. The most important and influential decision-maker to consider
in the United States is President Barack Obama.1 With respect to the Syrian civil war,
President Obama ultimately involved the U.S. military through targeted airstrikes on
Islamic State compounds throughout regions controlled by the terrorist group. He
appealed to the heart and soul of the American people by not only referencing that
America’s interests were at risk, but also by eloquently expressing the brutality
associated with the humanitarian aspect of the crisis as well. The White House used
1 Because it is nearly impossible to categorize and generalize the decision-making behavior of the United
States based solely off content analyzing a select number of speeches,it is important to narrow down the
selection of what to consider to one individual in the leadership.

53. 48
pictures of Syrian civilians having been gassed, murdered, or tortured in some sort of
other merciless manner to emphasize Obama’s point.
Obama made the case to Congress and the American people that if the United
States and the greater international community failed to act in stopping these types of
attacks by the Assad-led Syrian government forces, the regime would see no need to step
down and disengage in its use of chemical weapons to promote violence and strife among
its people. The crisis was only further exacerbated through sectarian violence that
occurred from raging extremist groups plotting to take control of the area and greater
region, one of which was the Islamic State. By painting the picture in this way, Obama
vividly made the case for why the United States should militarily involve itself in the
sovereign affairs of another state.
Remarks by Obama in Address to the Nation on Syria, Statement on ISIL and Remarks on
Airstrikes in Syria
Two distinct parts in this chapter need to be considered. With respect for the 2013
to 2014 time frame for which this case study is based, the first challenge for the United
States was the issue of Assad and the violence with the Syrian civil war. The second part
is the challenge with the Islamic State, or ISIL, that eventually rose as a result of the
conflict associated with the civil war. On the night of September 10, 2013, President
Obama took the opportunity to address the nation on the general situation in Syria. Here,
Obama went into great detail informing the American public about how President Assad
was violating international law and committing atrocities across the entirety of Syria and
amongst its citizens. About a year later, on the night of September 10, 2014, and

54. 49
September 23, 2014, Obama specifically addressed the nation about the threat that was
ISIL (Islamic State), what the U.S. was planning on doing to combat the group, and the
status with the military airstrikes in the region.
In an effort to inform the American people about the atrocities taking place in this
area of the world, and much like one of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s famous fireside chats,
Obama made appearances on primetime television to share this information. The
president explained why the Assad regime was dangerous and how it was in violation of
international law and more broadly, common humanity, through the use of chemical
weapons in its fight against rebel forces. Furthermore, he made the case as to why the
United States, and the international community at large, should intervene in these
matters. Obama claimed that such an intervention was in the national security interests of
the nation, as the rise of the Islamic State that stemmed from the Assad-initiated
instability in Syria posed serious threats to both the United States and to the international
community at large. Particularly, the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime, and
how such weapons were inhumane and abhorrent, was something that President Obama
stressed throughout the course of his statements.7
Political Structure
One of the indicators of level of exceptionalism in national role conception that I
offered in Chapter 2 was the political structure of the state. The political structure of a
state has the potential to create differing national role conceptions for the state to express,
based primarily off factors that include political party representation in the lead decision-
makers’ cabinet, structure of houses of government, the makeup of political majority in

55. 50
the houses of government, and conflict between the governing elite and political
opposition.
The United States is a constitutional federal republic with a strong tradition of
democratic values. Decision-making power is invested in three different branches of
government, the judicial, legislative, and executive branch. Executive power is granted to
the chief of state, the President, who also acts as the head of government. The legislative
branch is made up of a bicameral legislature, or Congress, that consists of a 100-seat
Senate and 435-seat House of Representatives that may serve an unlimited amount of six
and two year terms, respectively.8 During the time of the Syrian Civil War, the 113th
United States of Congress presided. Here, while President Obama was the head of
government and chief of state, a Democratic Party majority controlled the Senate, while
the Republican Party majority controlled the House of Representatives. The Speaker of
the House, also the third in line to the presidency under the Vice President, was John
Boehner (R-OH) at the time of this session of Congress.
As was previously noted, the differing structure of a political system can lead to
different outcomes in the states’ expression of national role conceptions. As such, it
would seem sensible that since President Obama, a Democrat, and the Democratic Party
did not exercise a majority of both houses of Congress, they would not able to put forth a
unified idea of what national role conception to express in response to how to answer to
the Syrian civil war crisis. However, in this case, President Obama appeared to enjoy
bipartisan support among leaders in Congress with respect to the efforts in engaging in
airstrikes on the ground in Syria against the Islamic State and other governmental forces
of Assad. Obama wanted the United States to look strong and unified in its efforts to take

56. 51
on the evils of the Islamic State, and in working to encourage bipartisan support for
intervention, he suggested sending a powerful message to the international community
embracing the notion that the United States would do what was necessary to defend the
homeland.
In responding to the Syrian civil war crisis, it would seem that the differing
political parties that controlled the Congress, along with a President and his lofty
aspirations to achieve security of the U.S. homeland, would result in a conflict of
thought-processes for the United States regarding the appropriate course of action to take.
The tendency for political infeasibility in garnering complete bipartisan support for
Obama’s initiation of airstrikes in Syria suggests a sense of naivety. However, he
appealed to the general American population for military action in Syria through
highlighting the grave consequences to the interests of the nation that would surface
should no action be taken, alongside noting how America was seen as a pillar of global
security and referencing the burden that America had been historically given to ensure
such international security. In this time of crisis, even though the crisis did not directly
affect the homeland of the U.S., the fact that it subjected the interests of the United States
abroad was enough for Obama to rally enough political support to engage in the foreign
policy decision of dropping airstrikes in Syria, starting in mid-September 2014.
National Attributes
Another indicator of the level of exceptionalism in national role conceptions is the
national attributes, or material wealth, of a state. A discussion surrounding the impact of
states with a greater accumulation of wealth versus states with a lesser amount of wealth,

57. 52
and how this status of material wealth affected a states’ propensity to engage or
disengage in international politics, took place in Chapter 1. According to the literature,
states with a greater amount of national attributes at their disposal are likely to engage
themselves in international affairs because they perceive a greater sphere of national
influence and are more concerned than smaller states with aspects like territory and
security.
The United States is a nation that possesses the most technologically powerful and
advanced economy in the international system. Its Gross Domestic Product, or
purchasing power parity, is the strongest in the world at an estimated $16.72 trillion, with
GDP per capita at $49,800 and the GDP real growth rate at 1.6%. Additionally, the
United States’ labor force is 155.4 million, and its biggest industries include petroleum,
steel, motor vehicles, aerospace, and telecommunications.9 Because of these indicators of
the United States’ economic capability and material wealth that make up its overall
collection of national attributes, the United States certainly has the ability to extend its
reach in international affairs with anything that may concern its national interests.
Whether such action is by means of unilateral, bilateral, or multilateral action, the United
States has the ability to involve itself in any sort of global crisis or situation, as backed up
by its inordinate amount of material wealth and national attributes.
The United States possesses one of the most advanced militaries that a nation
could have as well, thanks to the likes of owning the world’s most technologically
advanced economy. The branches of the United States Military include the Army, Navy,
Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard. The U.S. spends approximately 4.35% of its
GDP on military-related expenditures. With a large budget, the United States certainly

58. 53
has the latitude to engage in any sort of military escapade that it may deem fit to follow
up on or defend its national interests in the greater scope of international affairs.
Throughout the course of his addresses to the American people on Syria and
Islamic State, Obama consistently made reference to the superior capabilities of the
American military. In his statement on the Airstrikes in Syria, Obama claimed the
American military as being the world’s finest through stating “…the American people
give thanks for the extraordinary service of our men and women in uniform, including the
pilots who flew these missions with the courage and professionalism that we’ve come to
expect from the finest military that the world has ever known.”10 This exceptional view
of military power, and American power as a whole, primarily derives from the fact that
America possesses the most advanced and technological economy in the world. Yet even
in the face of the great force that the United States had the ability to initiate on its own,
Obama and the U.S. promoted the foundations of the regional leader national role
conception in its dealings with the Syrian civil war crisis.
Regional versus Unilateral Leadership
Another very relevant indicator in the determination of the level of
exceptionalism in national role conception is a state’s inclination for regional versus
unilateral leadership in international affairs. States that adopt a very independent-oriented
mindset when it comes to international affairs may be predisposed to unilateral action,
while states that adopt a more regional outlook may support a more multilateral action
approach in engagement with international affairs and subsequent foreign policy
decisions.