In an age dominated by escalating geopolitical competition, particularly between the United States and China, the foreign policy strategies of U.S. allied democracies have begun to reveal an intricate web of domestic and international pressures. These democracies, many of which rely heavily on U.S. military protection, simultaneously engage economically with China in ways that complicate clear-cut alignment choices. The conundrum facing these nations is captivating: how do they navigate allegiance when economic interests and security necessities pull in opposing directions?
A pioneering study led by Assistant Professor Kyung Suk Lee of Incheon National University delves deeply into this dilemma. Through a nuanced exploration of "audience costs"—the political repercussions leaders incur when reneging on public commitments—the research sheds light on how domestic political landscapes shape foreign policy alignment amid power rivalries. Published in Contemporary Security Policy on March 20, 2025, the study employs rigorous empirical methods to decipher the interplay between public sentiment and international strategy.
At the heart of the investigation lies the concept of audience costs, a political science theory positing that democratic leaders are bound by their public statements because deviation invites domestic backlash. This mechanism is especially salient in foreign policy, where shifts in commitments can either bolster credibility or erode trust at home and abroad. The study operationalizes this theory by assessing South Korea’s public opinion regarding its potential inclusion in the Quad, a strategic coalition led by the United States aimed at balancing China’s regional influence.
Leveraging a national survey experiment, the researchers exposed participants to hypothetical scenarios involving foreign policy reversals. Their findings were unequivocal: leaders who backtracked on alignment declarations faced significant political penalties, particularly among respondents who held strong pro-U.S. attitudes. This domestic intolerance for flip-flopping translates into powerful incentives for political leaders to maintain consistent foreign policy stances, especially vis-à-vis strategic alliances with the United States.
Over 90% of South Korean respondents viewed the alliance with the United States as indispensable—not merely for military security but also for economic prosperity and international stature. Such overwhelming consensus amplifies the audience costs associated with policy reversals, reinforcing the stability of alignment decisions. This dynamic illustrates how domestic public opinion functions as a de facto enforcer of foreign policy credibility, enhancing predictability within the broader system of international relations.
Interestingly, the research unearths heterogeneity within public preferences. While pro-U.S. citizens vehemently oppose shifts away from alignment, those with leanings toward China show a greater tolerance—or even support—for reversals in policy commitments. This nuanced domestic environment compels leaders to perform a delicate balancing act, weighing divergent views before committing unequivocally. These internal divisions complicate straightforward alignment and contribute to the strategic ambiguity often observed in allied states’ foreign policies.
Dr. Lee emphasizes the practical implications of these findings for U.S. policymakers. Recognizing that public opinion in allied democracies plays a pivotal role suggests that diplomatic efforts targeting publics, rather than elites alone, may yield dividends in securing durable alliances. Engagement strategies that nurture favorable views of the United States could thus serve as indirect mechanisms for stabilizing geopolitical coalitions.
The study transcends simplistic assumptions that foreign policy alignment is exclusively dictated by raw strategic calculus or elite decision-making. Instead, it integrates the active role of mass publics as critical agents influencing international politics. This conceptual advancement offers a richer understanding of alliance dynamics amid the shifting sands of great power competition.
Methodologically, the team’s use of experimental survey research provides robust causal insights often elusive in observational studies. By simulating real-world policy reversal scenarios, the design captures genuine attitudinal responses, thereby advancing the rigor of political psychology within the international relations domain.
Moreover, the South Korean context offers a compelling case study due to its dual dependence on the United States for security and China for economic growth. The findings, however, carry broader relevance for other allied democracies facing analogous dilemmas, such as Japan, Australia, and members of the European Union engaged in strategic hedging under multipolar pressures.
As global power configurations evolve, particularly in the Indo-Pacific, this research underscores the indispensable role of domestic politics in shaping foreign policy trajectories. Democracies do not operate in a vacuum; their leaders answer to electorates whose views color national strategies. Thus, public opinion is not merely a reflection of external threats but an active force molding the commitments and credibility of alliances.
In sum, this study by Kyung Suk Lee and colleagues injects a fresh analytical perspective into the study of international alignments, highlighting the intricate connections between domestic political costs and foreign policy consistency. Such insights are invaluable for understanding the resilience and fragility of alliances in an era of great power rivalry, offering theoretical and practical pathways for managing the complex interplay between public sentiment and international strategy.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: US allies’ foreign policy alignment in an era of great power competition: An analysis of domestic politics
News Publication Date: 20-Mar-2025
References:
Authors: Kyung Suk Lee¹, Hankyeul Yang², and Daekwon Son³
Journal: Contemporary Security Policy
DOI: 10.1080/13523260.2025.2474872
¹Department of Political Science and International Studies, Incheon National University, South Korea
²Department of Political Science, Texas A&M University, USA
³Graduate School of International Studies, Sogang University, South Korea
Image Credits: USEmbassyPhnomPenh from Openverse
Keywords: Political science, international relations, alliance politics, public opinion, audience costs, US-China strategic competition, strategic hedging, foreign policy alignment, democratic politics
