Every aspect of life is influenced by decisions made at individual, group, local, regional, national and international level. Decisions made at international level have a great impact as they govern the lives of many people and may attract international reaction in a highly interconnected world. Therefore, the way in which these decisions are made, the actors involved and other influential factors are of utmost importance. Decision-makers not only have the power of decision but they also bear responsibility for the effects of their decisions. The increasing power of international organisations, technological development, rapid spread of information and threats including terrorism and pandemics have only made the decision-making process more challenging than ever before. It has become harder to make legitimate decisions in short periods of time especially in the context of mass information available and under the permanent pressure of the media and the eyes of the public.

The volume Searching for decision-making models in international politics, edited by Professor Dr. Melania-Gabriela Ciot, offers a complex analysis of the decision-making process and presents several decision-making models worthy of being taken into account by any decision-maker. The book is a collection of nine studies dealing with the object of analysis. In the Foreword, the editor presents a general overview of these studies and expresses her opinion regarding the reasons behind the current crisis that Europe is going through and the need to redefine the European Union and its leadership.

In the first study, Prof. Ciot analyses the current pandemic crisis that hit the European Union in light of the organisation’s decision-making process, specific leadership style and challenges and improvable health policies. The author also presents a model of decision-making that, according to her, would best address possible (future) situations of pandemic crises. Ciot notes that, after almost four months since the beginning of this crisis, the European Union still lacks coherence in decision harmonisation at institutional and member state level.  

The Multistreams model, based on the problem, policies and political streams, is presented as the decision-making model to be used both at national and European levels in cases of pandemic crises for better coordination. According to this model, decision-makers perceive a window of opportunity and go for pre-elaborated solutions to solve the actual situation. The author expresses her view about the European health policy eventually becoming a common policy. Prof. Ciot shortly describes the four main perspectives of EU leadership in contemporary literature, namely the German leadership of the EU, the impact of European leadership on EU policies, leadership perceived as an expression of soft power and leadership in situational context. A comparison between the Eurozone crisis and the current pandemic crisis is made to illustrate the general behaviour of European leaders, influenced both by their personal beliefs and the contextual conditions, in face of crises situations and the factors that could change their beliefs.

Prof. Ciot underscores the need to rethink and restructure the European health policy as a common policy, to improve the efficiency of healthcare systems and develop support technologies for rapid medical intervention, all of these processes requiring continuous efforts in the long run. Decisions on investment in the healthcare sector should be made by considering the long-term benefits of this kind of spending. An economic crisis of the same amplitude is thought to be following the current pandemic crisis. The author calls for the European health policy to become a common policy, draws the general lines for the future of this policy and proposes a new political decision-making model to be used by the European Union in pandemic crises, based on the Multistreams model with some new elements of interdependency, leadership and partnership, as well as mechanisms of cooperation and coordination that would promote innovative policies and prospective decisions.

The second study, carried out by Renata-Marilena Musta and Bogdan Rus, PhD candidates at the European Paradigm Doctoral School, is an analysis of the main decision-making models in the literature, the alternatives to these models and the new models of decision-making in foreign policy, bringing a personal note to the analysis. The main decision-making models examined are the rational actor model, based on the assumption of a decision-making leader who chooses the best alternative in a certain situation with the most benefits and lowest risks, the organizational behaviour model, focusing on the achievement of the objectives of the organisation represented by the leader, and the government policies model, based on the idea of a negotiation in which participants try to impose their personal opinions and gain power.

The recalled alternatives to these decision-making models are the cybernetic model, using feedback loops for the minimisation of uncertainty and lacking an analysis of the alternatives to the chosen outcomes, the prospective theory, based on the idea of risk aversion which may impede leaders from evaluating objectively certain situations, the poliheuristic theory, focusing on political leaders’ choice to fulfil political rather than economic or societal objectives, the Multiple streams model, based on the provision of pre-existing solutions to all kinds of problems that may occur, and psychological approaches, centred on the influence of emotions, perceptions and context on the choices of the political decision-makers.

There are several new models of foreign policy decision-making analysed and exemplified by the authors. The small group model is based on the formation of small formalistic, competitive or collegial groups by leaders to make decisions in certain situations in which pre-existing solutions fail, high-level diplomacy is involved or the problem is perceived as a crisis. Group-sharing points to the importance of social sharing mechanisms within foreign policy decision-making groups and the knowledge model focuses on the way in which knowledge, particularly collective knowledge, becomes the basis for any political decision.

The identity of the decision-makers is a central feature of the elite theory, which presumes that elites may manipulate power in societies to fulfil their own interests. Risk-seeking overconfident decision-makers, who use past performances to overestimate their capacities, engage in risky behaviour and make commitments they are unable to meet, are specific to the risk-taking based on overconfidence decision-making model. The cognitive patterns model reflects the influence of political elites’ values and particularities on their leadership styles and of the latest media dynamics on the decision-making process. Pluralism upholds competition between the leadership groups in the society, the final decision fulfilling the interest of the dominant group.

Foreign policy change occurs in the context of a window of opportunity created by domestic or international sources of change or by decision-makers which brings about the redirection of a state’s foreign policy. The criminal liability exposure model describes the way in which leaders make decisions which subject them to criminal liability. Diversionary foreign policy is a model used by vulnerable leaders to divert attention from domestic problems and gain domestic support by manipulating foreign policy through foreign military interventions, peacemaking activities and other means.

The multilevel network theory emphasises the influence of international and transnational actors on foreign policy decision-making. The actors’ participation model is used by Switzerland, which includes actors like interest groups, institutions and representatives of its cantons in the foreign policy decision-making process. The Rubicon theory of war applies to situations in which leaders perceive war as imminent and adopt implemental mind-sets which trigger overconfidence and may lead to war. Ethical foreign policy implies that powerful states in world politics should lead with responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.

In the third study of the book, PhD student at the European Paradigm Doctoral School Iulia-Anamaria Ghidiu presents the US foreign policy decision-making process under the Trump administration and its effects of the transatlantic relation. According to the author, two psychological approaches apply to US foreign policy decision-making, namely the cognitive approach and groupthink, which show the way in which emotions, personal beliefs and coalition consensus influence the leader’s decision-making behaviour that, in President Trump’s case, affects the transatlantic relation.

Ghidiu begins her analysis with a short description of the cognitive approach, which points to the influence of the leader’s personal convictions and thinking patterns or historical analogies on his reactions and decisions in certain situations, and of the groupthink model, which focuses on a small group of decision-makers’ tendency to reach consensus while ignoring opposite points of view specific to the advisory system in the Trump administration. The effects of President Trump’s leadership style and decision-making behaviour on the transatlantic relation’s evolution represent the main point of the entire analysis. Concepts like narcissism, disagreeableness and grandiosity are used to describe the American President’s personality, while his advisory system consists of like-minded senior advisors.

The transatlantic relation experiences, on the one hand, a change in American vision on European role and involvement and, on the other hand, European leaders’ uncertainty about American engagement in partnership. The US-EU relation is approached from three angles: international trade, environmental issues and security. During the Trump administration, the EU is seen more like a fierce competitor or even enemy in trade-related issues, which brings tension to the transatlantic relation. The US’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate action is perceived as an isolationist move based on the leader’s protectionist ambitions supported by his inner circle. President Trump’s perception of an obsolete NATO, his critics of European behaviour under NATO and suggestions of American intention to withdraw from the Alliance further affect the transatlantic relation. In the end, the author expresses her opinion on the imperative of US-EU cooperation and partnership for the maintenance of stability and proper leadership in world politics.

The fourth study, carried out by Ramona Sferlic, PhD student at the European Paradigm Doctoral School, presents the foreign policy decision-making model promoted by Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission President, and Josep Borrell, the European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. An analysis of these European leaders’ discourses and strategies discussed between them is made to illustrate the model they promote. From the very beginning of the study, the author mentions the need for a revision in Europe’s direction, a revision guided by the principles of unity, solidarity and strong leadership, as well as a strong voice to be heard in world politics. The struggle for power between the European Council and the European Parliament is also analysed. Ursula von der Leyen calls for cooperation between these two European institutions. Sferlic presents the European Union’s role of support in the management of the pandemic crisis by the European states and offers the solution of transparency for the revival of people’s trust in the European institutions.

The President of the European Commission envisions a more strategic, united and connected Europe capable of making rapid and proper decisions in any situation. The recurring concepts in her speeches are unity, solidarity, cooperation, management, flexibility and leadership. She calls for cooperation with European neighbours, urgent action and proper investments for recovery after the pandemic crisis that hit the European continent. According to the author, Ursula von der Leyen’s firm negotiation position offers the image of Europe as a global power with both soft and hard power characteristics. Von der Leyen’s strategy aiming at creating a new alliance, her efforts and powerful messages are seen as a driver for the creation of a new and stronger Europe. Nevertheless, there are challenges to her strategy which need careful consideration.

The European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, supports cooperation and coordination between the EU institutions, the EU services, the EU member states and private actors. He also aims at strengthening collaboration involving international partners including NATO and OSCE. Borrell’s main objective is to make Europe a stronger actor in world politics. He shares von der Leyen’s advocacy for a strong Europe capable of facing other global powers and calls for change in the foundation of the alliance with an emphasis on its power. Nevertheless, he uses concepts as unity, solidarity, cooperation and collaboration to describe the proper behaviour in difficult times of pandemic crisis. In the author’s view, Josep Borrell is an example of rational negotiator and his behaviour in foreign policy decision-making illustrates the rational actor model. Sferlic mentions that Europe needs efficient management and competent leaders capable of acting in the spirit of solidarity and cooperation.  

In the fifth study, PhD candidate at the European Paradigm Doctoral School Radu Constantin Mureșan examines cyber security and the way in which it can be improved at European Union level. The author begins by defining the concept of cyber security at EU level and by presenting the main objectives of cyber security and the latest threats to it, namely cyber-attacks. An analysis of the way in which cyber terrorists operate, their motivations, the costs and consequences of cyber-attacks is also made by the author. The measures adopted at EU and international level for the prevention of cybercrime and the security of the digital space are mentioned throughout the study. A security strategy, based on cross-border collaboration, risk and attack prevention, is thought to ensure the stability and security of the cyberspace.

Mureșan presents the role of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity, the vulnerabilities related to hardware, software, network type and human error which may appear in the cyberspace and the causes of such vulnerabilities, including unsecured ports or internet browsing, weak passwords and lack of updates at the operating systems, and makes recommendations for the elimination of vulnerabilities. The author mentions the cyber security’s role in diplomacy, presents the concept of digital diplomacy as communication between leaders and the general public through social networks or the media, and stresses the importance of collaboration between states on digital diplomacy. He also mentions the challenges to digital security and presents the way in which the digital space becomes an issue of foreign policy through the debates of states in international forums on problems arising from cyber-attacks or other issues related to the virtual environment.

Relating to the current pandemic crisis, the authorities’ use of smartphones is suggested as a possible way to identify the number of people to be tested in case of suspicion of infection. The author believes in the importance of a digital diplomacy including human rights promotion, internet safety, as well as threat and conflict prevention. He concludes by mentioning the way in which the digital space becomes part of foreign policy through contributions in the security field, technological development, international communication and cybercrime prevention.

PhD candidate at the European Paradigm Doctoral School Ovidiu Lungu’s study examines the European Council’s decision-making process, whose outcomes shapes the direction of the European community and influences the living conditions of the European citizens. The study is a qualitative research, and the main method employed is document analysis. The author begins with a short description of the European Council’s historical evolution since its foundation in 1974 and presents its institutional architecture by referring to its group composition, role, adoption of regulatory acts, with an emphasis on the conclusions, and position within the European Union’s institutional system marked by a significant authority.

Lungu offers an analysis of the European leaders’ deliberations on the Multi-annual Financial Framework 2021-2027 to identify the main features of the European Council’s decision-making model. He learns that, in the context of the MFF negotiations, states rather pursue their own interests, which makes them adhere to either the “cohesion” camp if they can benefit from the cohesion policy or to the “Frugal five” camp if they mainly contribute for this policy. Moreover, even if France and Germany form the most popular power club in the European Council, they have different positions on the future financial framework, meaning that Germany is part of the “Frugal five” camp while France is inclined towards cohesion.

The national interest is also the one that guides political affiliation to the left-wing or right-wing party families in the discussions on the MFF. Nevertheless, the spirit of collegiality characterises all the debates and works of the European Council’s group. The author presents the role of the President of the European Council in agenda setting and consensus finding and the confidentiality of the EC meetings. He concludes with the importance of features like collegiality between group members, work confidentiality, careful agenda setting and informal meetings on reaching an agreement at the level of the European Council, which is the main objective of the institution’s decision-making process. The limits of the research relate to the limited literature on this subject and the confidentiality of the EC meetings.

The seventh study, carried out by PhD student at the European Paradigm Doctoral School Andreea-Dalina Petrașca, analyses the role of cultural diplomacy in foreign policy decision-making and presents some new foreign policy decision-making models. The author recalls a classification of foreign policy decisions into macro-decisions, implying a long time and many actors, micro-decisions, or administrative decisions, and crisis decisions, marked by the existence of a threat, time pressure and high-level involvement. Another classification of foreign policy decisions is the one into single decisions and decisions made by groups. Petrașca also mentions the players of foreign policy and the levels of decision-making, namely the individual level, characterised by the influence of the players’ thinking behaviour, beliefs and priorities on decision-making, the nation-state level, based on the state-society relationship, and the systemic level, focusing on the influence of the international system’s nature on decision-making.

According to the author, the foreign policy decision-making process may be multifactorial, as many internal factors including the public opinion and leaders or external factors such as military strength, economic power or international norms can influence it. Petrașca mentions the foreign policy decision-making models of the rational actor, bureaucratic politics, organizational process, political process and inter-branch politics in her study. She defines the concepts of soft power and smart power, underlines the importance of smart power strategies in foreign policy and presents the role of culture in soft power strategies, some definitions of cultural diplomacy in the literature, a short history of this type of diplomacy and the differences in meaning between the notions of cultural diplomacy, public diplomacy, international cultural policy, international cultural relations, cultural exchange and propaganda.

The players involved in cultural diplomacy may be both governmental and non-state actors, the main objectives of cultural diplomacy include the promotion of common values, cooperation and partnership and its target audience is made up of both leaders and the general public of foreign countries. The author presents the benefits of integrating cultural diplomacy in a state’s foreign policy, reflected through the state’s ability to engage in partnerships and alliances, to become an important player in world politics, to make its voice heard, to influence decisions and strengthen its legitimacy through good reputation.

Petrașca mentions the steps made by the European Union to reinforce its foreign policy through cultural diplomacy and presents the way in which the rational actor model, through the long time needed to fulfill cultural diplomacy objectives and used to prepare strategies and act rationally, the organizational process model, through the need of standard procedures, the political process model, through the necessary openness to personal perspectives, and the inter-branch politics model, through the combined efforts made towards the achievement of cultural diplomacy goals, best reflect the process of making decisions in a foreign policy influenced by cultural diplomacy. The conclusions of the study underline the power of cultural diplomacy to model foreign policy decisions.

The study of PhD student at the European Paradigm Doctoral School Liakouris Evangelos examines the role of Artificial Intelligence in the foreign policy decision-making process and the need for a reconceptualisation of foreign policy decision-making in the context of rapid technological development. The author presents the analogy made by scholars and politicians between foreign policy decision-making and chess due to the strategic nature of this board game. The study focuses on the way AI machines simulating human intelligence influence foreign policy decision-making and can alter the international balance of power.

Evangelos presents the geopolitical competition for AI dominance which includes players like the USA, China and the European Union, some definitions of Artificial Intelligence, the difference between Artificial Narrow Intelligence related to systems which can perform only some defined tasks and Artificial General Intelligence related to machines which can perform any human-specific intellectual task, some key notions including algorithmic decision-making, machine learning, deep learning based on the use of Artificial Neural Networks for the simulation of human decision-making, big data and data mining, as well as the reasons why artificial decisions are better than human decisions relating to features like their speed and accuracy.

The author mentions both the benefits of integrating Artificial Intelligence in foreign policy decision-making given by the AI systems’ capacity to process large data amounts, to identify patterns faster, to provide decisions which are not affected by emotions and to predict international level events, and the main criticism of it related to the reliability of the algorithmic decisions, algorithms’ ability for causation in data analysis, ethical issues and implications of the use of AI systems for the critical thinking of the decision-makers. According to Evangelos, Artificial Intelligence systems should have an auxiliary role in foreign policy decision-making by assisting the human decision-makers in formulating the final, high-quality decisions, opinion shared by political leaders like Emmanuel Macron. The use of Artificial Intelligence in foreign policy decision-making is thought to reaffirm the power of the rational actor model. The author concludes by mentioning the need to address the challenges of using Artificial Intelligence through new theoretical approaches and by proposing some possible research directions in this field.

The last study, carried out by PhD students in International Relations and European Studies Ana Damaschin and Cristian Vlad, PhD student in Administrative and Communication Science Fumiaki Tajiri and Nagaoka University of Technology Lecturers Tudor Tomoș and Anne Stenros, analyses the stages of the rapid global expansion of Murata Manufacturing Company, Ltd. with an emphasis on regional management development, the decision-making processes of Japanese-European businesses and the use of cultural symbols in the formation of an organisational culture. The authors present the history of Murata Manufacturing Company, Ltd. since its foundation in 1944 in Japan, the use of hierarchical models of decision-making in traditional Japanese corporate organizations, the influence of new business inclusion, local requirements, cultural practices, the rational actor model and the organizational behaviour model on Japanese traditional decision-making, analyse the consensual model of decision-making and propose social axiom as a new foreign policy decision-making model.

The focus is put on the way in which the rational actor model and the organizational behaviour model are used in Murata Electronics and Murata Manufacturing Company, Ltd.’s decision-making processes. Murata has experienced the involvement of its overseas subsidiaries and affiliates in the decision-making process and has implemented and benefited from strategies of talent inclusion, cultural integration and cross-layer coordination. The authors also identify the consensual decision-making model at Murata Manufacturing Company, Ltd., a model which is based on negotiation for the achievement of consensus with emphasis on the long-term consequences of this kind of arrangement. They mention the ways in which cultural factors influence the decision-making process and the importance of understanding social axioms for navigating cultural differences, propose the new model of decision-making of the social axiom and point to the benefits of using several decision-making models such as in the case of Murata’s use of the rational actor, organizational behavior and consensual decision-making models.

This volume offers a complex analysis of the recent foreign policy decision-making models as they are described in the specialty literature, as well as some innovative ideas and proposals of new foreign policy decision-making models based on today’s world realities which are highly influenced by technological development and interconnectedness. The authors’ bold ideas attract the reader’s interest, making them question the efficiency and applicability of the decisions made by leaders in foreign policy. The studies are worth reading by leaders and politicians, students and researchers in the field of foreign policy decision-making, as well as anyone interested in discovering different strategies and models of decision-making in international politics.

NB. Renata-Marilena MUSTA is a PhD candidate at the European Paradigm Doctoral School, Faculty of European Studies, Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca. E-mail: renata.musta@yahoo.com

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ciot, Melania-Gabriela (ed.), Searching for decision-making models in international politics, Cluj-Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană, 2020.