Foreign Policy and the Six-Party Talks: The Effects of Regime Type and State Vulnerability

The effects of regime type and level of vulnerability on state foreign policy remain open questions in international politics. Contending international relations theories assume incompatible outcomes. Realists posit that differences on these variables should not matter while many liberal theories, including the Democratic Peace and the Diversionary Theory of War, argue that variations affect state policy. The Six-Party Talks are an attempt to solve the North Korean nuclear weapons crisis and provide a great opportunity to test these effects during extended regional security negotiations. The participants include China, Japan, North Korea, Russia, South Korea and the United States. There are three democracies and three non-democracies as well as an even division between states which experience high vulnerability and low vulnerability. The hypotheses examine whether differences in regime type or level of vulnerability consistently privilege domestic or international politics to shape state foreign policy approaches. The longevity of the talks, consistency of state leaders, shared long-term goal and stable negotiation structure justify the exclusion of other influences. If there are robust findings then policymakers, mediators and analysts may better understand the dynamics of these sensitive negotiations in order to select the optimal conditions under which to solve them. Democratic structures and low vulnerability should have privileged domestic actors while non-democratic structures and high vulnerability should have privileged international actors. The results provide mild confirmation for the expectations. In support, non-democratic structures privileged international politics but less clearly if such a state experiences high vulnerability. The next findings provide less support for expectations. Democratic structures do not privilege domestic or international politics in any consistent way. Low vulnerability weakens domestic influences and produces more "stubborn" governments. High vulnerability creates more foreign policy fluctuation regardless of regime type which randomizes the influence of domestic or international politics. The findings provide some guidance as to where resources should be put in finding solutions, demand attention to both domestic and international influences on governments and problematize the expectations flowing from major theories.