Military aid, military intervention, and sanctions, oh my!

• Department of Political and Social Sciences

This session of the Political Behaviour Colloquium features a paper presentation by Sienna Maria Nordquist (PhD Researcher, Bocconi University).

Does the public have systematic preferences on specific foreign policy instruments, and do such preferences vary by conflict scenario? While previous research finds that support for military interventions is highly sensitive to casualties, support for military aid is driven by the public’s assessment of the foreign threat, and sanctions produce a backlash effect in target states, there is a lack of understanding about how the public compares the desirability of various foreign policy instruments writ large and across conflict scenarios. I investigate these preferences in vignette survey experiments implemented in the US and Italy in 2023. I find that sanctions universally increase, and military intervention universally decreases approval of the leader (Biden or Meloni). The effects of aid are heterogeneous by conflict scenario. Each of these main outcomes is moderated by the public’s estimation of a foreign policy tool’s effectiveness, relative strength, and backlash and escalation risks, as proposed by the theory. Moreover, I find a behavioral effect of foreign policy instrument selection on vote choice for the leader’s political party. A decision to intervene militarily or apply sanctions in an interstate conflict raises intended votes for Meloni’s Fratelli d’Italia (FdI) party.

The Zoom link will be sent upon registration. If you would like to receive the paper, please contact PoliticalBehaviour.Colloquium@eui.eu.