IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/intare/v12y2009i1p45-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The European Public's Decision on the War in Iraq: Differences among the EU Member States

Author

Listed:
  • Hae-Won Jun

Abstract

Military intervention in foreign countries tends to put people in the situation where they mainly rely on their values and world views to form their opinions. Because the consequences of the military action are unknown, the public finds it difficult to form opinions based on clear sense of costs and benefits. Why does public opinion on military intervention in certain country vary across national borders? This paper attempts to answer this question in the case of the formation of European public views on the war in Iraq in 2003. It finds that the public conceptualize the given policy issue differently leading to national differences on foreign affairs.

Suggested Citation

  • Hae-Won Jun, 2009. "The European Public's Decision on the War in Iraq: Differences among the EU Member States," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 12(1), pages 45-63, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:12:y:2009:i:1:p:45-63
    DOI: 10.1177/223386590901200104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/223386590901200104
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/223386590901200104?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hartley, Thomas & Russett, Bruce, 1992. "Public Opinion and the Common Defense: Who Governs Military Spending in the United States?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 86(4), pages 905-915, December.
    2. Clifford J. Carrubba & Anand Singh, 2004. "A Decision Theoretic Model of Public Opinion: Guns, Butter, and European Common Defense," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(2), pages 218-231, April.
    3. Benjamin E. Goldsmith & Yusaku Horiuchi & Takashi Inoguchi, 2005. "American Foreign Policy and Global Opinion," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(3), pages 408-429, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Harald Schoen, 2008. "Identity, Instrumental Self-Interest and Institutional Evaluations," European Union Politics, , vol. 9(1), pages 5-29, March.
    2. Florin ŞUHAN, 2019. "Study On Defense Expenditure And Its Financing," EURINT, Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, vol. 6, pages 256-268.
    3. Hessami, Zohal, 2014. "Political corruption, public procurement, and budget composition: Theory and evidence from OECD countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 372-389.
    4. Li, Yuanpeng & Shi, Haina & Zhou, Yi, 2021. "The influence of the media on government decisions: Evidence from IPOs in China," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Joshua C Fjelstul, 2022. "Explaining public opinion on the enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact during the European sovereign debt crisis," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 192-211, June.
    6. Karl DeRouen Jr & Uk Heo, 2001. "Presidents and Defense Contracting, 1953-1992," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 18(2), pages 251-267, February.
    7. L. Lambertini, 2006. "Is America Unrivaled? A Repeated Game Analysis," Working Papers 563, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    8. Terrence L. Chapman & Dan Reiter, 2004. "The United Nations Security Council and the Rally ’Round the Flag Effect," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(6), pages 886-909, December.
    9. Andranik Tangian, 2017. "Policy Representation of a Parliament: The Case of the German Bundestag 2013 Elections," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 151-179, January.
    10. Juan Felipe Riano-Rodríguez, 2014. "More than Words and Good Intentions: The Political Agenda-Setting Power," Documentos CEDE 11011, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    11. Bernhard Klingen, 2011. "A Public Choice Perspective on Defense and Alliance Policy," Chapters, in: Christopher J. Coyne & Rachel L. Mathers (ed.), The Handbook on the Political Economy of War, chapter 17, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Amanda Murdie & Dursun Peksen, 2013. "The impact of human rights INGO activities on economic sanctions," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, March.
    13. Tangian, Andranik S., 2017. "Policy representation by German parties at the 2017 federal election," Working Paper Series in Economics 107, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    14. Zohal Hessami, 2013. "Corruption, Public Procurement, and the Budget Composition: Theory and Evidence from OECD Countries," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2013-27, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    15. Sencer Ecer & Nicholas J. Veasey, 2015. "The Shifting Determinants of Defense Spending Preferences Between 1980 and 2008," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 75-88, February.
    16. Justin Conrad & Hong-Cheol Kim & Mark Souva, 2013. "Narrow interests and military resource allocation in autocratic regimes," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 50(6), pages 737-750, November.
    17. Mai'a K. Davis Cross & Ireneusz Pawel Karolewski & Kaija Schilde, 2017. "European Military Capabilities: Enablers and Constraints on EU Power?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 37-53, January.
    18. Bruce Linster & Richard Fullerton & Michael Mckee & Stephen Slate, 2001. "Rent-seeking models of international competition: An experimental investigation," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 285-302.
    19. Richard C. Eichenberg & Richard Stoll, 2003. "Representing Defense," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(4), pages 399-422, August.
    20. Tangian, Andranik S., 2017. "Policy representation by the 2017 Bundestag," Working Paper Series in Economics 108, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:12:y:2009:i:1:p:45-63. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.hufs.ac.kr/user/hufsenglish/re_1.jsp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.