Apply the system-level, state-level and individual-level of analysis to the 2003 decision to go to war with Iraq. Which do you believe is the best level for analyzing why the US went to war with Iraq?
Systems analysts believe that any system operates in predictable ways--that there are behaviors that the countries usually follow. Although each of us has free will, each of us is also part of many overlapping systems that influence our behavior and make it reasonably, although far from perfectly, predictable. State-level analysis emphasizes the national states and their internal processes as the primary determinants of the course of world affairs. Individual-level of analysis focuses on human actors on the world stage. This approach begins by identifying the characteristics of decision making. (Rourke 47). It focuses on people. The level that is best for analyzing why the Us went to war with Iraq is the state-level. We as a whole in the US believe that everyone should be like us. We like to dominate in world affairs. In the war with Iraq justice had to be won and the bad guys needed to be taken down and taught a lesson. State level analysis examines foreign policy behavior. The state-level analysis would be the most appropriate because it covers the wide area of American politics, which influence our foreign policy, from "legislators, the media, public opinion, and opposition parties, as well as those foreign policy--making actors that influence authoritarian government policy"(Rourke 57). "No one suggested that Iran is a potential threat to the United States, any more than Iraq could ever have been a threat to the US. It's a threat to our ally, and those in the Likud Party, and AIPAC, who agree pretty consistently with Likud, feel that the best way to eliminate a threat is to destroy it, and they want America to use its military might to eliminate the threat" (Lerner). Such statements by active politicians prove that our foreign policy is influenced by...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document