Importance and limits of the influence of ethnic lobbies on US Foreign Policy: The case of the Armenian-Americans' impact on US relations with Azerbaijan

Résumé du document

The US is a nation of immigrants and the diversity of the constituencies is represented in the functioning of its political institutions. Indeed, not only is it considered legitimate for the interest groups to interfere with the decision making process, but the foreign policy does not constitute an exception and is not beyond their reach.

The legitimacy of organized public interest groups is not obvious. In theory, the national interest is one for all in the country, and therefore the same in all parts of it; in practice, a congressman campaigning in his district does not see it identically to the President, as the former has to consider the specific interests of a very narrow constituency . The dangers of factions in government were perceived by the Founding Fathers who also acknowledged their inevitability in a republic: "Liberty is to faction what air is to fire", wrote James Madison. Later, in the XIX century John Calhoun gave the theoretical justification of their role: policies do not affect everyone equally; there is an imbalance between the few who are organized and the many who are inattentive. Special interests are therefore a means for the citizens to get involved and be represented, thereby reducing the risk of a tyrannical majority abusing its power over a minority. Public interest groups act as a counter power in the political system and have their place in the checks and balances. Moreover, such groups are themselves balanced by the creation of competing ones who oppose their claims. Thus, clashes of interests occur and the government's mission is indeed to reconcile them and make the best decision for the nation.

Extraits

[...] Contrary to the intuitive expectation, small communities seem to be more powerful. The limited size permits better organization and gathering of resources, which impacts positively the group's mobilization. Moreover, small groups tend to focus on one narrow issue: the larger the group, the wider the range of interests and the less effective the concentration on one policy in order to obtain sufficient support for political influence. Eventually, the defining issue is likely to be irrelevant to the overwhelming majority of the population, therefore reducing drastically the opposition to the special interest's agenda. [...]

[...] This is the responsibility of US policymakers, not of special interest groups who are playing their role; nor is the US political system to blame, as it permits lobbies to balance each other. Ethnic interests do not stand in the way of the national interest, leadership weakness in front of hard choices does. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books: Tony Smith, Foreign Attachments, the Power of Ethnic Groups in the Making of American Foreign Policy Yossi Shain, Marketing the American Creed Abroad, Diasporas in the US and their Homelands Mark P. [...]

[...] After ethnic cleansing and atrocities committed from both sides, a ceasefire was concluded in 1994: Armenians occupied the entire secessionist region, as well as neighboring zones that would be returned to Azerbaijan after a final settlement of the conflict. One fifth of Azeri territory is thus occupied and Nagorno-Karabakh enjoys a de facto independence (even without any international recognition). The United States maintains to this day an ambiguous position on this conflict and on the self proclaimed “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic”. The clash is between two notions of international law: territorial integrity and self- determination. [...]

[...] Saideman, The Power of the Small: the Impact of Ethnic Minorities on Foreign Policy, World Politics, SAIS Review Volume 22, Summer- Fall 2002 Thomas Ambrosio, Congressional Perceptions of Ethnic Cleansing: Reactions to the Nagorno-Karabakh War and Influence of Ethnic Interest Groups, The Review of International Affairs, Autumn 2002 Patrick J. Haney and Walt Vanderbush, The Role of Ethnic Interest Groups in US Foreign Policy: The Case of the Cuban American National Foundation, International Studies Quarterly Peter H. Stone, Caspian Wells come in for K Street, the National Journal, March David McKeeby, Caspian Dreams: A Case Study in Modern US Foreign Policy Making, CSIS, Summer 1999, http://www.csis.org/intern/forum991h.html S. [...]

[...] Peterson, Interest Mobilization and the Presidency, from Petracca, The Politics of Interests The Washington Times, The Importance of Armenia and Azerbaijan, Dec Armenian National Committee of America, Position Papers: Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act, Jan 31st BBC Monitoring International Reports, US Proposal to break traditional Armenian-Azeri Military Aid Parity, Feb. 5th Armenian Assembly of America, Congress Votes to Restore Armenia- Azerbaijan Military Aid Parity, Armenia This Week, July 19th States News Service, Rep. Crowley Says US Should Not Reward Violence, Repression in Azerbaijan, Jan. 27th Yahoo News, USA plans to extend military presence in Azerbaijan to strike Iran, April Mohammed E. Ahrari, Ethnic Groups and US Foreign Policy, Conclusion, p. [...]