African Foreign Policies

African Foreign Policies
Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International

Studies
John James Quinn
Print Publication Date: Mar 2010 Subject: Foreign Policy Online Publication Date: Nov 2017
DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.117
Summary and Keywords
Studies on African foreign policies and policymaking have received much less attention
compared to other aspects of African studies. Most foreign policy-related studies have
been in-depth case studies illustrating how foreign policy decisions were limited, shaped,
and constrained by international, regional, and domestic constraints. Forms of these
studies include single case studies, a collection of single case studies within an edited
volume, a comparative study of few regional countries, a study of a subregion, and
discussions of the whole region of Africa. The region has some of the smallest and
weakest states in the world. As such, African foreign policy analysis is often consistent
with earlier analyses of small state foreign policy literature. The primary foreign policy
behavior of small states are the following: (a) low levels of overall participation in world
affairs; (b) high levels of activity in intergovernmental organizations; (c) high levels of
support for international legal norms; (d) avoidance to the use of force as a technique of
statecraft; (e) avoidance of behaviour and policies which tend to alienate the more
powerful states in the system; (f) a narrow functional and geographic range of concern in
foreign policy activities; (g) frequent utilization of moral and normative positions on
international issues. Most of these views are reflected in studies of African foreign
policies.
Keywords: Africa, African studies, African foreign policy, foreign policies, African states
Introduction
Compared to other aspects of African studies, much less has been written directly on
African foreign policy formation or the comparative foreign policy of Africa (Wright 1999:
1). Where the foreign policies of Africa are examined, the focus tends to be more on the
outcomes and the limits constraining it, rather than on the decision making process itself
(Aluko 1977; Shaw and Aluko 1984; Wright 1992; 1999; Clapham 1996; Khadiagala and
Lyons 2001A). Some exceptions did exist that emphasized process within particular
countries (Aluko 1987; Bischoff and Southall 1999; Venter 2001). However, given the
Page 1 of 33
PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

(c) Oxford University Press USA, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Personal use only; commercial use is strictly prohibited (for
details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
date: 25 February 2019

nearly region-wide personalization of power, and given the inability to peek behind
authoritarian curtains (Jackson and Rosberg 1982; Clapham 1996), the leaders and elites
tend to be the logical loci of study (Wright 1992).
Excluding studies written from the perspective of external actors, most studies of African
foreign policies have been deep case studies illustrating how foreign policy decisions
were limited, shaped, and constrained by international, regional, and domestic
constraints. Most studies have taken one of several forms: single case studies, a
collection of single case studies within an edited volume, a comparative study of few
regional countries, a study of a subregion, and discussions of the whole region of Africa –
selecting evidence to make general points about the region (Aluko 1977; Bender 1987;
Reed 1992; Wright 1992; 1999; Clapham 1996; Harbeson and Rothchild 2000; Khadiagala
and Lyons 2001A). However, some works on African foreign policies were cross-national
quantitative studies which isolate one foreign policy behavior (e.g. United Nations [UN]
voting behavior) and look for variances and causes vis-à-vis foreign policy outcomes (e.g.
Newcombe et al. 1970; Clark et al. 1971; East 1973; Moon 1983:85). This essay will only
examine comparative studies, regional studies, or collections of cases written from
African countries’ perspectives.
The region-wide similarities of colonial heritage and economic and political weakness can
lead to appropriate and meaningful generalizations about African foreign policy (Shaw
and Aluko 1984; Shaw and Okolo 1994). Thiam (1965) argued that African countries were
tackling the common problems of nation building, stability, poverty, decolonization, the
problems of the Cold War, and international dominancy of the great powers. This
commonality has also helped create the conditions that lead African countries to turn to
attempts at regional cooperation. Such common foreign policy concerns/approaches
facing the region include Pan-Africanism, anticolonialism and African nationalism, unity
against apartheid era South Africa, struggles with autonomy vis-à-vis the former colonial
power, regional cooperation for economic development and political autonomy,
nonalignment vis-à-vis the Cold War, regional security, and securing national sovereignty
(Aluko 1977; Clapham 1996; Wright 1999; Harbeson and Rothchild 2000).
Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and regional IGOs were among the primary
African venues for the foreign policy decisions (Okolo and Wright 1990; Clapham 1996;
Keller and Rothchild 1996; Bach 1999). African countries were also often in multilateral
treaties, such as the Lomé treaty and later Cotonou (Khadiagala 2000; 2009) along with
other ACP countries. Most of the other important venues were bilateral, especially with
immediate neighbors, or “great powers,” such as France (Chipman 1998; Schraeder
2001), the superpowers or Europe (Schraeder 1994; Clapham 1996; Wright 1999; Taylor
and Williams 2004), or China (Alden 2007).
In terms of the end of the Cold War, democratization and the “Washington consensus”
should have lessened the importance of the personalization of power and ideology in
foreign policy, though most states manifest tendencies toward the personalization of
foreign policy (Clapham 1996; Wright 1999; Khadiagala and Lyons 2001A; Harbeson
Page 2 of 33


2009). With the end of the Cold War, however, we have seen more the emerging analysis
of failing or collapsed states and the “privatization” of state relations (Zartman 1995;
Clapham 1997; Reno 1998; 2000; 2009) and regional responses to such increased
instability (Herbst 2000B; Mortimer 2000; Zartman 2000). Also, various regional attempts
at improving African economic conditions were witnessed in the drafting of the
development of the African Economic Community and the New Partnership for Africa's
Development (NEPAD) (for NEPAD, see Hope 2002; Chabal 2002; Taylor 2005). Finally,
some authors in this period are calling for the reconsideration of the guiding principle in
international relations of sovereignty (Englebert 2000; Deng 2000; 2009; Herbst 2000A).
Another important commonality, past and present, for African foreign policy is that nearly
all African countries are small and weak. In fact, of all the regions in the world, Africa has
among the smallest and weakest states (Jackson and Rosberg 1982; Black 1988; Zartman
1995; Clapham 1996; Reno 2000; van de Walle 2001). As such, African foreign policy
analysis is often consistent with earlier analyses of small state foreign policy literature.
As East (1973) explains, the primary foreign policy behavior of small states are these: “(a)
low levels of overall participation in world affairs; (b) high levels of activity in
intergovernmental organizations; (c) high levels of support for international legal norms;
(d) avoidance to the use of force as a technique of statecraft; (e) avoidance of behaviour
and policies which tend to alienate the more powerful states in the system; (f) a narrow
functional and geographic range of concern in foreign policy activities; (g) frequent
utilization of moral and normative positions on international issues” (1973:557). Most of
these views are echoed in studies of African foreign policies.
Foreign Policy Paradigms in Africa: the Decider

Within Africa, foreign policy formation was normally in the domain of the chief executive,
given the personalization of power common throughout the region (Jackson and Rosberg
1982; Jackson 1990; Clapham 1996; Wright 1999; Khadiagala and Lyons 2001A). Clapham
argues that foreign policy was shaped by the personalization of the African state as
“African leaders characteristically conducted much of their foreign relations
themselves” (1996:58). As such, examining the bureaucracies or legislatures would not
shed much light on the foreign policies of most African governments. Schraeder (1996)
also says that African foreign policy is highly personalized in the office of the president,
though would later suggest that this was overly simplistic in the case of democratic
Senegal (Schraeder 2001). As mentioned above, this does not seem to have changed with
the end of the Cold War. According to Adar and Schraeder (2007), although many found
that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank programs were increasingly
constraining African foreign policy formulation, they also found that the creation of
(noneconomic) policy remained primarily in the hands of leaders.
Many analysts see foreign policy as one of several venues or opportunities for leaders to
engage in the politics of “state survival” (Clapham 1996). As such, the leader and his
circle extract resources for ruling and leading from both domestic and international
Page 3 of 33


sources in order to remain in place. The existence of juridical sovereignty created

opportunities for leaders to obtain resources with which to remain in power and to play
one patron against the other (Callaghy 1983; Clapham 1996; Quinn 2004). As Clark (2001)
points out, the domestic needs of leaders dominate the foreign policy arena. He suggests
that rational actor models are important for understanding the foreign policy choices of
regimes where the interests of the regimes substitute for the interests of the nation. In
fact, those who write about neopatrimonial or personalist rulers would hold this position
either empirically or as a stylized fact of the subcontinent (Jackson and Rosberg 1982;
Bratton and van de Walle 1997).
Adogame (2003) tries to reconcile the decision making approach by integrating it with a
political economy (dependency) approach. Daddieh and Shaw (1986) also merged
dependency and decision making in their comparison of African foreign policies and
alignments on two African issues: the recognition of Biafra and the recognition of the two
competing political parties for power in Angola.
Nonetheless, it appears that most of the foreign policy studies on sub-Saharan Africa –
outside of dependency thinking – have been made within single cases or clusters of cases
examining the central role of the decision maker within a larger context of constrained
choices. Most have preferred a use of mixed paradigms and empirical analysis over
paradigmatic purity (Clapham 1996; Wright 1999; Harbeson and Rothchild 2000; 2009;
Khadiagala and Lyons 2001B; Schraeder 2004). Unlike a pure rational actor model,
studies also examine the ideologies of leaders and the parties, the role of IGOs (e.g. the
UN, the World Bank, and the IMF) in addition to looking at domestic interest groups and
societal forces as additional limits – where appropriate. However, sometimes these
ideologies are seen as other factors which constrain rational actors.
Most analyses see some relative autonomy for African leaders vis-à-vis domestic
institutions and social forces, though they are constrained by the weakness of their
institutions as well – however, some point to real regional variances in this relative
autonomy (Quinn 2000). The number of constraints has increased with the end of the
Cold War, especially in relation to economic foreign policy, though new opportunities may
appear as well. In sum, few authors on African foreign policy are pure realists, liberals,
radicals, or constructivists, though some emphasize one position more than others do.
Most appear to use empirical understandings of international, ideological, and domestic
constraints on leaders’ power as the best approach to understanding African foreign
policy.
Paradigms and Foreign Policy in Africa:

Realism
Few foreign policy or international relations (IR) analyses were written from a strict
realist theoretical viewpoint. In fact, African countries were often considered only quasi-
states, lacking Weberian “stateness” or de facto state power; rather, they were endowed
Page 4 of 33


with de jure external sovereignty from the international community (Jackson and Rosberg
1982; Jackson 1990; Clapham 1996; Reno 1998; Englebert 2000; Herbst 2000A; Rothchild
and Harbeson 2000; Quinn 2001). However, Herbst suggests that African international
relations began with the Congolese war (2000B).
Zartman (1967) also argued that common notions of realist power (e.g. size of army or
population) do not take into account the power countries have through voting in IGOs or
the power of norms governing interstate African relations. In fact, Jackson and Rosberg
argued that “Black Africa challenges more than it supports some of the major postulates
of international relations theory” (1982:24). In fact, rather than increasing domestic state
power, as realists would have it, elites undermine their own state's economies or
structures in order to deprive potential domestic rivals of political power (Jackson and
Rosberg 1982; Clapham 1996; Reno 1998). Dunn (2000) argued that African realities are
not consistent with either neorealism or realism because distinctions between internal
and external sources of power and legitimacy are less important in Africa. He also argues
that hierarchy, and not anarchy, more accurately describes African relations. Similarly,
Dunn and Shaw (2001), Lemke (2003), and Reno (1998) argue that Africa's key realities
occur at the nonstate and substate levels – which can be seen as a challenge to realism.
Despite the views that realism does not appear to explain many of African realities at first
glance, most case studies on African foreign policy still analyze how alignment vis-à-vis
the superpowers and former colonial powers (i.e., great powers) are determinative of
much of African foreign policies (Aluko 1977; Clapham 1996; Wright 1999; Khadiagala
and Lyons 2001A; Taylor and Williams 2004). In addition, some see African countries
perhaps playing the role of regional hegemons (Herbst 2000B). However, where strong
discussions of super or great powers emerge, they tend to be written from the
perspective of these great powers or institutions and their relations with Africa
(Schraeder 1994; Chipman 1998; Taylor and Williams 2004). Nonetheless, very few
analyses of the international constraints of African foreign policy would exclude either the
superpowers or the past colonial powers.
Moreover, some African scholars such as Akinyemi (1982), Akinsaya (1976), and Gambari
(1989) argued that realpolitik was the key to understanding Africa's foreign policies in
the 1960s. In addition, some of the early empirical comparative foreign policy analysis
tested realist variables, such as alignment in the UN and differences between large and
small nations (see below).

Liberalism and Liberal Political Economy
Although many African scholars found realism lacking, traditional liberalism seemed to
fare no better: few scholars have focused upon mostly domestic interest aggregation or
articulation as significant sources of foreign policy. Clapham (1996), Reno (1998), and
Page 5 of 33


Lemke (2003) all stress that elites compete to undermine rivals and deprive them of
political power – resulting in a weakened state and weakened civil society.
The African literature that does examine substate/domestic sources of power for their
impact on foreign policy often looks to rival armed guerrillas, warlords, military factions,
ethnic groups, or companies as important constituents for foreign policy (Clapham 1996;
Reno 1998; Zartman 2000). However, with the increased democratization of Africa
following the end of the Cold War, more and more research should look to domestic
sources of foreign policy, though they continue to be weak (Wright 1999; Lyons and
Khadiagala 2001; Schraeder 2001).
Nonetheless, foreign economic policy may be a more fruitful venue for the liberal
paradigm: this is referred to as endogenous tariff theory (Magee et al. 1989; McGillivray
1997). This approach looks to leaders, sectors, elites, farmers, importers, exporters,
parties, classes, and other economic and political actors to pursue their economic self-
interest through the establishment of trade policy.
Perhaps the best known theory for so many countries following an inward-oriented
(protectionist) development approach in Africa is the urban–rural bias theory (Lipton
1977; Bates 1981). Urban political elites prefer a policy of inward-oriented trade as it
benefits the importers and urban dwellers, while the exporters are mainly politically
powerless rural dwellers. Moreover, the countryside cannot overcome its collective action
problems, but city residents do (Bates 1981). Other scholars have suggested that African
neopatrimonial political structures themselves are the cause of region-wide inward-
oriented policies (Joseph 1983; Lewis 1996; van de Walle 2001). The need for resource
redistribution systems requires more inward-oriented policies. The inward-oriented
policies are therefore necessary to create enough patronage to maintain the political elite
(Chabal and Deloz 1999; Chabal 2002). In a similar vein, Easterly and Levine (1997)
suggest that ethnolinguistic fractionalization moves polities away from growth policy
formation towards protectionist, redistributive policies for similar reasons. They illustrate
that Africa has among the world's most ethnolinguistically fractionalized nations, and the
region is quite protectionist.
For those that see more heterogeneity in economic foreign policy during the Cold War
period, Africa is a region with many countries having inward-oriented policies, but not all.
In fact, as Berg pointed out, six countries had higher than 3 percent growth in agriculture
prior to 1981 (World Bank 1981). Even during the 1980s, the period of worst economic
performance, countries without mineral exporting or majority state ownership, or their
economies (see below), experienced an average annual food export rate of positive 1.28
percent (World Bank 1992, table 5-36, p. 98). Lofchie (1989) compared Kenya to Tanzania
and finds that outward-oriented agricultural policies were the reason for agrarian success
in Kenya in contrast to the agrarian failure of Tanzania. He attributed more outward-
oriented foreign economic policies to the ownership of land by political elites. Widner
(1993) suggests a similar mechanism at work in Côte d'Ivoire. Even Bates (1981) agrees
Page 6 of 33


that the existence of large landowners can lead to the pursuit of more outward-oriented
policies, as in the case of Kenya.
Englebert (2000) suggests that countries with more endogenous “legitimacy” have had
less severe policy distortions. Countries in the region that are “legitimate” are linked to
policy, institution, and governance variables. Englebert finds that good economic foreign
policy is determined by higher levels of endogenous legitimate authority.
Quinn (1999; 2002) argued that countries in sub-Saharan Africa that had majority state
ownership of most capital-intensive industries or a significant mineral or oil exporting
sectors were more likely to pursue more inward-oriented development policies than were
other similar countries. Having no comparative advantage in capital, when African
leaders became the owners of sectors that used scarce factors, they took on the
preference for protectionism as owners of scarce factors. Building on the ideas of
Rogowski (1989), who discussed the ideas of Heckscher-Ohlin and Stolper Samuelson,
Quinn argues that inward-oriented policies protected these sectors from withering
competition from abroad, which then allowed these sectors to be used primarily for
patronage. By contrast, countries without majority state ownership of most capital-
intensive sectors or the largest mineral export sector may or may not have inward-
oriented development policies – depending on the relative power of different social
forces. Nonetheless, on average they had lower levels of inward-oriented policies and
were less inward-oriented in each direct comparative match of eight countries (Quinn
2002).
Others argue that African foreign economic relations were shaped by their search for
development and their relations with IGOs, like the World Bank and the IMF (East 1973;
Callaghy and Ravenhill 1993; Callaghy 2000; 2009). Given the need for developmental
aid, many African countries have lost prior control over the establishment of an
independent economic foreign policy (Callaghy and Ravenhill 1993), especially in the
post–Cold War period over fiscal matters (van de Walle 2001). These countries had to
adopt externally imposed economic policies due to their need for lending from the World
Bank and IMF, which imposed changes in economic policy as a condition of lending
(Gordon 1993; Callaghy 1998; van de Walle 2001). Despite this being under a liberal
perspective (as ideology, not paradigm), many see structural adjustment as externally
imposed and in need of domestic constituent support to be successful (Nelson 1989;
1992; Gordon 1993; Herbst 1998). However, externally imposed economic policies can be
politically destabilizing.
Given, however, the ever-increasing requirement of economic conditionality for

international loans, fewer liberal scholars study endogenous sources of economic foreign
policies and study instead what leads to “good government.” Recently, it is not a question
of whether they will adopt these “liberal” policies, but rather there is an examination of
how these policies are adopted, what their impacts are, or how they are best resisted.
They appear to have become a new external constraint for African countries.
Page 7 of 33



Constructivism
Many scholars include ideas as a variable in shaping African foreign policy, though few
would call themselves constructivists. Few scholars would disagree with the proposition
that ideas helped shape African foreign policies. Pan-Africanism, collective bargaining,
regional integration, regional security, and the sanctity of colonial boundaries have all
been very strong norms vis-à-vis African foreign policies (Aluko 1977; Mazzeo 1984;
Okolo and Wright 1990; Schraeder 1996; 2004; Wright 1999), even if they arose out of
self-interest. At its core, Pan-Africanism extends to the region, while sovereignty does not
– which places it in tension with nationalism (Young 2000). Nonetheless, the regional and
international norm of uti possidetis was enshrined in the OAU, and it allowed African
elites to have armies that did not have to defend against external enemies (Englebert
2000; Herbst 2000A; Young 2000; Quinn 2001), though this is no longer as true about the
AU.
Nonetheless, nationalism and sovereignty have been quite strong norms in African
relations (Jackson 1993). However, for Africa, “sub-nationalism” is strongly opposed
(Englebert and Hummel 2005). For example, few countries recognized Biafra upon its
declaration of independence, and fewer still have recognized either of the Somali
breakaway entities (Schraeder 2004). Nonetheless, nationalism was the driving ideology
behind the decolonization movement of Africa (Gifford and Louis 1982; 1988; Hargreaves
1988).
Africa also has a history of regional, multilateral attempts as crisis resolution (Keller and
Rothchild 1996; Zartman 2000). The OAU was built upon the idea of the sacrosanct
nature of borders, as well as looking to African solutions before going to the UN (Foltz
1991). According to Zartman (2000), several regional organizations are also involved in
conflict negotiation: the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) (see below), the West African
Economic Community (CEAO) [which became the Economic and Monetary Union of West
African States (UEMOA)], and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). In
fact, SADC was the vehicle to justify the involvement of Zimbabwe in the Congolese War
(Lemarchand 2000). For example, when regional conflict emerged, African countries
attempted regional responses (Mortimer 2000; Zartman 2000; 2009). Part of this is
Africa's Pan-African perspective; part of this was partial or full disengagement from
Africa by the super and great powers (Rothchild 2000). For example, ECOWAS sent
troops to Liberia through its wing, the Economic Community Monitoring Groups
(ECOMOG) (Mortimer 2000). America's call for a regional peacekeeping force, called the
African Crisis Response Initiative (Herbst 2000B), is consistent with Pan-African ideals as
well as US interests.
Beyond Pan-Africanism, dependency thinkers, development economists, and economic

nationalism have influenced foreign economic policy decisions. Many early leaders
Page 8 of 33


viewed capitalism as being part of colonialism (Hargreaves 1988; Kennedy 1988; Rapley
2002) which led many to nationalize their economies (Rood 1976; Quinn 2002). Young
(1982) argued that the ideological leanings of leaders/countries could predict such trade
and other economic policies.
Africans have long viewed regional self-reliance as a means to achieve economic and
political development. Through the AU, and the idea of regional development, several
regional economic communities (RECs) have been established. Each one is to become a
free trade zone on the way to creating the African Economic Community. Some see this as
more rhetoric than reality as Africa has so many regional organizations and such low
intrastate trade (Bach 1999). Nonetheless, the new NEPAD initiative backed by South
Africa, Nigeria, Rwanda, and others (Chabal 2002; Hope 2002; Taylor 2005) is another
regional attempt at economic development.
Sovereignty, as a key norm in the area, has been under pressure in Africa (Deng 2000;
Englebert 2000; Herbst 2000A). American involvement in Somalia undermined this norm
somewhat, even though it was justified by the idea that no state existed to defend the
sovereignty of. The World Bank and IMF have imposed economic conditionality upon
African nations, and this has been seen as a challenge to their economic sovereignty.
Given the dreadful misrule in some parts of Africa, some analysts have called for the end
of sovereignty per se and have argued that international actors certify a state as being
sound or not (Deng 2000; Englebert 2000; Herbst 2000A). Genocide and state failure may
become easy assumptions for violating sovereignty in future.

Dependency
Perhaps the most self-consciously concerned paradigms vis-à-vis African foreign policy
include dependency or structuralism (Shaw 1975; Nweke 1980; Kegley and McGowan
1981; Shaw and Aluko 1984; Wendt 1987; Shaw and Okolo 1994). Shaw and Aluko (1984)
refer to it as a “political economy” approach, though many scholars would see it as one of
several subparadigms within (international) political economy. Building on the ideas of
Baran (1957) and Wallerstein (1974), African countries are viewed as similar in their
dependency and weakness vis-à-vis advanced industrial countries; as such, foreign policy
outcomes in Africa are reduced to the effects of the system (Wendt 1987:345).
Most of this literature starts with the theory of underdevelopment, or dependency, and
illustrates how African foreign policies are determined by these realities. Differences in
foreign policy outcomes do not falsify the theory. For example, Shaw (1975) argues that
inequality in power between African countries and “Northern” countries results in either
dependency through trade and attempts to integrate with global state capitalism, or
dependency through “trade, investment, and technology” (1975:370), or in attempts to
reject the system by adopting socialist domestic policies. Scholars in this tradition also
study how African and other third world countries attempt to bargain collectively within
Page 9 of 33


the IGOs on economic and political issues (Nweke 1980). Kegley and McGowan (1981)
examined third world countries’ foreign policies by examining the interconnections
among interdependence, dependence, and other dimensions of core–periphery relations.
Shaw and Aluko edited a volume with an eye to illustrating African foreign policy from a
strict dependency perspective (1984). In 1994, Shaw and Okolo edited a volume on the
political economy of foreign policy in ECOWAS states.
In contrast to the standard neo-Marxist dependency theory, the theory of postimperialism

suggests that third world countries interact with multinational corporations (MNCs), the
latter of which are not negotiating on behalf of the “North” or the core – but rather from
their own transnational class interests (Becker and Sklar 1999). It examines the foreign
policy of states from a nationalist perspective in the third world, but a transnational
perspective from MNCs. This approach leaves the question of exploitation to be answered
empirically, as opposed to theoretically. Postimperialist thinkers would not limit their
thinking to Africa, but would extend its analysis to the whole third world. Quinn (1999)
showed how the postimperialism paradigm was more consistent with the developmental
policies chosen by African elites than was a strict dependency view.
Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis: Africa in

the Third World
Many works on the comparative study of foreign policy on Africa are in the context of
third world foreign policies and tend to use data from the early 1960s. In fact, a brief
flurry of studies emerged which were quantitative as well as based upon a Rosenau
(1966) or Holsti (1970; 1982) approach to comparative foreign policies. Many tended to
explain voting trends in the UN (Newcombe et al. 1970; Clark et al. 1971; Moon 1983;
1985; Holloway 1990; Holloway and Tomlinson 1995). Other work tested variances on this
theme. For example, Meyers (1966) tested for the continuation of early UN, Pan-African
voting blocks. Many other studies examined third world countries’ alignment with pro-
West or pro-Soviet camps, or non-alignment, and others showed how differences in UN
voting could be attributed to differences in levels of development, and even differences
between North and South voting (Kim and Russett 1996). Similarly, Imai and James
(1996) examined the role of superpower rivalry on trade and arms transfers as well as
voting in the UN. Other studies looked for links between aid from powerful nations and
UN voting (Wittkopf 1973; Rai 1980; Wang 1999). Ties with important US votes and aid
were the most consistent finding for these studies, though Kegley and Hook (1991)
suggested that this link disappeared during the second half of the Reagan administration.
Also, some found that weaker countries aligned, but due to “consensus” or “constrained
consensus” rather than “compliance” (Moon 1983; 1985). Similar comparative studies of
third world foreign policies using a few cases or a single African case include Richardson
and Kegley (1980), Armstrong (1981), and Richardson (1976).
Page 10 of 33


Looking at ideological sources of foreign policy, Hagan (1989) examined how political
revolutions or regime changes affected foreign policy orientations in the third world. He
found that regime changes did result in variances in the amount of support or alignment
with US positions; major shifts in voting patterns are associated with regime changes, but
“nonrevolutionary changes accounted for 80 percent of regime-induced voting
changes” (1989:540). Within just Africa, Vengroff (1976) found no relationship between
individual-level instability in Black African countries and a change (or instability) in UN
voting, implying continuity over change.
Many studies on comparative foreign policy centered only on Africa, and they have
emphasized voting patterns in the UN (Ellis and Salzberg 1966; Meyers 1966; Vengroff
1976) or general African foreign policy behavior, such as levels of diplomatic activity or
alignment. McGowan (1968) analyzed alignment patterns to find that more developed and
densely populated countries, as well as countries that received more aid, were higher
“interactors” than other similar countries. In addition, monoproduct-exporters were more
likely to be low interactors. McGowan (1969) examined 30 African countries to determine
if levels of economic development were correlated with foreign policy outcomes. He
found that the most developed countries followed an “active-independent” path, whereas
mid-level developing African nations followed a “transitional” foreign policy path. Finally,
the least developed countries tended to be “inactive-dependent.” Similarly, Weigert and
Riggs (1969) found that African nations with the most economic and military capabilities
were more likely to hold major offices at the IGO, such as the UN. Johns (1972) examined
the level of official diplomatic activity among African countries. He categorized African
diplomatic activity, or normalization, into three levels: minimal, intermediate, and
complete. He examined different regional, ex-colonial, linguistic, border, and ideological
factors to see their effects on bilateral diplomatic ties. Ex-Belgian, militant, North African,
Maghreb (ex-French), Coastal, and contiguous countries had the highest levels of
diplomatic activities. Ironically, countries that housed established regional organizations
had lower levels of “diplomatic” normalization.
Johns (1975) looked to see if relative power could predict levels of diplomatic activity. He
found that with the exception of GDP per capita, all of his indices of power were
significantly and strongly associated with diplomatic activity. He also examined the links
between diplomatic activity and integration, finding that membership in some regional
organizations, such as the East African Community, seemed to replace (or lower)
diplomatic activity. He also found that integration was higher in some regions (the former
Belgian colonies, North African countries and the Maghreb) than for the overall OAU
average.
McGowan and Gottwald (1975) attempted to see if African countries fit within predictions
about the foreign behavior of other small states. Using Rosenau's model of adaptation,
they tried to predict which countries would be “promotive” or “acquiescent.” They found
that country size, level of development, and inner-directed leaders were the main
Page 11 of 33


predictors of foreign policy orientation. Also, countries that were more modern and other-
directed were more dependent in foreign policy.
Shifting questions, Khapoya (1975) sought to explain the foreign policy of “support for
liberation.” This was measured on a ten point scale (from 0 to 9) based on the following
various diplomatic acts supporting liberation groups. The variables which were
significantly and positively associated with supporting liberation movements were
ideology, size, wealth, and power measured as size of territory, population, GNP, armed
forces, size of armed forces, military expenditures, weighted military expenditures, the
number of African embassies, missions in communist/socialist states, and boundaries with
target areas. Many of these variables were collinear along lines of wealth, size, power,
and military capacity. The one variable negatively and significantly associated with
supporting liberation movements was imports from ex-colonial powers. The strongest
correlates were missions with communist/socialist countries, and embassies in African
states, but both were highly correlated.
McGowan and Johnson (1979) outlined the goals of comparative foreign policy in Africa
and described the African Foreign Relations and International Conflict Analysis (AFRICA)
database. This collection of event data includes 32 African countries and their foreign
policy actions or utterances from 1964 to 1966. The data are dyadic, and include 14,669
foreign policy actions (see also DeLancey 1979).
In a large-N study of culture, McGowan and Purkitt (1979) used factor analysis to develop
several dependent variables indices that are common to Black African foreign policy (i.e.,
participation, conflict, political independence, economic dependence, state building,
formal diplomacy, and centralized decision making) and tested them against several
independent variables indices (i.e., size, modernization, cultural pluralism, ethnic
pluralism, religion, and language pluralism). They found that their variable of capacity as
well as cultural variables explain foreign policy outcomes for these 32 African countries.
Dolan et al. (1980) conducted a large-N study of the bilateral relations of African
countries with other countries with which there are great asymmetries of economic
power using the AFRICA database. They examined the level of economic interchange and
the relative domestic power of each African country to make predictions about foreign
policy alignment vis-à-vis the superordinate power (the more powerful of the dyad and
any country with more than 20 percent of foreign direct investment (FDI) (1980:428).
They find that as economic power of the weaker countries increases, they had policies
that are more restrictive towards the superordinate country – unless their trade
concentration ties were above average, in which case they became more expansive.
In 1985, Bienen examined military regimes to see if they had unique foreign policies
within the African context. Instead of a large-N study, he overviewed previous literature
as well as engaging in African foreign policy analysis and found that military regimes
were not distinctive in foreign policy formation or goals.
Page 12 of 33


Focusing primarily on West Africa, Anda (2000) compared foreign policy behaviors with
national attributes, focusing on three paradigms (systems, power, and decision making)
as well as two levels of analysis (national and systemic). He found that francophone
countries were more integrated into regional organizations than were anglophone
countries, that elite perception and state attributes such as size, development, contiguity,
and capabilities affected foreign policy outcomes.
Not only were voting patterns and international alignments studied, but a few scholars
also conducted large-N conflict studies in Africa. Boyd (1979) looked at the causes of
boundary conflict in sub-Saharan Africa, viewed as a reflection of foreign policy. Using
AFRICA data, he tested the effects of ethnic overhang, ethnic heterogeneity, salience of
ethnic politics, non-boundary conflicts, size/influence disparity, elite instability, and
domestic instability on boundary conflicts in Africa. He found three variables that were
most explanatory: elite instability, size/influence disparity, and salience of ethnicity in
domestic politics. He also found that the effects of colonialism on conflicts are indirect at
best.
In 2002, Kornprobst compared the management of border disputes in the Horn of Africa
and in West Africa. His primary predictive variable was the strength of norms in the two
regions regarding borders and their inviolability. He asserted, and illustrated, that these
norms were stronger in West Africa than in the Horn. He also discounted several other
rival explanations for the differences. He concluded that the differences in primary and
secondary norms could explain the peaceful resolution of conflicts in West Africa and the
wars in the Horn.
A Chronology of Major Works Directly on

African (Comparative) Foreign Policy
This section includes a chronology of often-cited, or traditional, works directly on foreign
policy or African international relations from an African perspective; however, we only
include works that are comparative or collections of cases. We do not include single case
studies. The large-N, statistical studies were discussed directly above. Thiam (1965)
wrote one of the earliest works on African foreign policy outlining how emergent
nationalism and socialism in the region impacted policies. He also examined relations
among the African states as well as between African states and foreign powers. He
concluded by speculating on the future of African unity and African relations with major
foreign powers.
Other early works directly on general African foreign policy included McKay's edited
volume on diplomacy (1966). The volume examined foreign policy formation based upon
various themes: international conflict patterns, national interest and ideologies, economic
determinants, military influences, cultural and psychological factors, political
determinants, external political determinants, and future research needs. The analysis
Page 13 of 33


from the various authors explored regional commonalities for each theme, though it was
clearly an early work.
Zartman published a 1966 book on the international relations of Africa that draws cases
from mostly North and Western African states. It also highlights the challenges for new
nations in the formation of foreign policy and how such policies are tied to nation
building. Zartman also shows how inter-African relations are more interactions of leaders
of parties than they are of heads of states (1966:144): African foreign policy is therefore
based upon institutional weakness. This results in ideology playing a key role in foreign
policy formation. In an article from the year before, Zartman (1965) suggests that
countries that are internally weak (in Africa) are less likely to be involved in border wars.
Wallensteen (1971) analyzed the foreign policies of five southern African states and their
relations with South Africa. His cases included Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland, Malawi,
and Zambia. He suggests that the sample space for interactions with South Africa and its
opposition are these: “1. Relations with government but not opposition, 2. Relations with
government and with opposition, 3. No relations with government, but relations with
opposition, [and] 4. No relations with government, no relations with
opposition” (1971:86). He found these countries preferred: “Malawi no 1, Sesotho leaning
towards no 1, Swaziland leaning towards no 4, Botswana largely no 4 and Zambia no
3” (1971:87). The article examines the reasons for these policy outcomes in the Southern
African military, diplomatic, and economic regional contexts.
One book which surveys the field of comparative foreign policies, but which was not
limited to Africa was by McGowan and Shapiro (1973). In their overview of more than 200
studies, they find that there is no overarching or “systematic foreign policy
theory” (1973:214), though they did identify over 100 tested propositions concerning
foreign policy formation (e.g. elite, establishment, political, economic, governmental,
societal, systemic). They argued that “[s]elected aspects of foreign policy behavior may
be open to analysis via deductive theories” (1973:215), but they would tend to be narrow
level, or micro theories. The book includes an extensive bibliography. A few years earlier,
McGowan (1970) compiled a guide to African research, including references to foreign
policy. It is arranged as a bibliography.
In 1973, the proceedings of a symposium at the University of Bristol were published as

The Foreign Relations of African States (Ingham 1973). The papers outlined diverse
aspects of African foreign policies: diplomacy in Western Sudan, Fante diplomacy in the
eighteenth century, Iramba foreign policy, East African external relations, anti-slave
issues of East Africa in the nineteenth century, the role of boundaries in Africa, the
partitioning of Africa, foreign relations of Western Uganda, foreign policies of Uganda,
those of Tanzania, contradictory ideologies of nationalism in Africa (in French), the
international relations of Guinea (in French), the description of foreign service cadres in
Tanzania, Nigeria, Uganda, and Kenya, and, finally, major policy shifts of the OAU, 1963–
73. Each paper has a commentary section summarizing discussions of the symposium
after the delivery of each paper.
Page 14 of 33


Akindele (1976) examined the role of the OAU to understand African diplomacy and
collective foreign relations as a supplement to traditional bilateral examinations.
Examining its resolutions, he finds most were concerned with apartheid, anti-colonialism,
and racism. Other issues included African relations with the UN, the Middle East, Afro-
Asian solidarity and non-alignment, and a few other miscellaneous questions (1976:560).
The rest of the article develops these ideas.
Aluko's (1977) edited book fits the more recent prototype of deep analysis of African
cases one at a time, though it does have an opening chapter summarizing similarities.
The introductory chapter outlines the common problems and constraints on the relatively
young African states. Aluko argued that foreign policy is driven by the nature of domestic
constraints and considerations as well as international constraints and considerations.
Then in the case studies of Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Kenya,
Nigeria, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zaire, these issues and others are explored in detail.
Although it is not specifically on comparative foreign policy, Mazrui (1977) writes of

African countries’ position historically, geographically, economically, militarily and
politically and how this has regional and worldwide consequences. He also writes on the
role of ideas and ideology driving African policy decisions. General themes are illustrative
with wide African and world examples.
In 1979, Clapham edited a volume on foreign policy in developing countries. Instead of

using a large-N study, he suggests that all the studies in the book (and any on foreign
policy) must start “from the assumption that it will be useful to say something about
foreign policy making under each of a handful of headings: the historical and
geographical settings of states concerned; the nature of the external environment in
which they operate, and the constraints which it places on policy makers; the form of the
domestic society and political structure, and the pressure which this too creates for
external policy, together with the linkages which inevitably arise between internal and
external factors; the decision making apparatus, with the composition, perception and the
goals of the groups or individuals who control it” (1979:165). His chapter on Africa offers
such a deep description and overview of these for Africa, as well as including a “critical”
bibliography.
DeLancey edited an annotated bibliography on African international relations in 1981.

The sections include: African international relations: General works; African states’
foreign policies; Inter-African conflicts; Borders and refugees; Sub-continental
regionalism; The OAU, Pan-Africanism, and African unity; The UN and international law;
Southern Africa; The USSR, the PRC, the UK, and France: relations with Africa; The USA:
relations with Africa; Other states: relations with Africa; and Economic factors in African
international relations.
Shaw and Aluko edited a volume with an eye to illustrating African foreign policy from a
strict dependency perspective (1984). The authors were to address “historical
incorporation and inheritance; contemporary dependence and underdevelopment;
national political economy in the world system; nature of response through development
Page 15 of 33


strategy; relationship between political economy and foreign policy; overview of regional,
continental, global and transnational interactions; and future of foreign policy” (1984:17).
Woodward (1984) discusses the limits of a dependency-only approach to foreign relations

in the Horn of Africa, and illustrates that the issues of boundaries can be the source of
conflict. Economic cooperation, shared political instability, and refugees can also shape
South–South interactions and cooperation. Southern coordination or conflict can also be
complicated by great power involvement in the region.
In 1985, Doctors Ojo, Orwa, and Utete co-wrote a book also on African international
relations. They addressed theories of international relations, the international actors,
foreign policy and the developing state, Africa and the global economy, the search for
African unity, African states and the superpowers, Africa and the former colonial powers,
Africa and the UN, causes of conflict in the relations of the African states, and regional
cooperation and integration. Each chapter includes a brief bibliography. The book has a
nice mix of international relations theory, paradigms, and empirical application to Africa.
The third chapter is directly written on foreign policy in developing African nations.
In 1986, Korany edited a volume on the comparative analysis of third world foreign policy
decisions. He argues that African foreign policies can be attributed to the African
president or leader. Therefore, the “big man” source of foreign policy had much to do
with the comparative weakness of alternative sources of power in the region. Examining
bureaucracies or legislatures, he held, would not shed much light on African foreign
policies.
In The Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science, Bender (1987) edited
a special issue on the international affairs in Africa. It included an introductory chapter,
as well as in-depth case studies on Angola, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and South Africa. There
were also comparative chapters: Kenya and Tanzania, the Eastern Triangle (Libya, Egypt,
and Sudan), and the Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya). There is also a
chapter looking at common economic foreign relations of sub-Saharan African countries
vis-à-vis the international financial institutions.
In 1990, a volume on Southern African foreign policies emerged (Chan 1990), which
examined the foreign policies in Southern Africa from 1978 to 1988. The sections of the
book covered the following areas: foreign policies in Southern Africa, the regional policy
of South Africa, and then the Western Alliance, superpowers, and Southern Africa.
Section 1 is written by Chan; the other sections have several chapters each, with authors
associated with each chapter. Although the title indicates a regional foreign policy book,
most of the chapters are squarely on South Africa as a case.
First in 1991, then with later editions in 1995, 2000, and 2009, Harbeson and Rothchild
edited volumes on issues regarding African international relations. Although these edited
volumes do not have specific chapters on foreign relations, per se, they do go into great
detail concerning the limits of domestic power, the personalization of the leadership, the
regional concerns or foreign policies of leaders, the influence of international financial
Page 16 of 33


institutions (IFIs) on leaders, regional conflict resolution, as well as how other major
international actors influence domestic decision making, such as the EU and UN. These
often-cited books create a context in which to study foreign policy, and several editions
were used as textbooks in courses on African international relations.
In 1992, DeLancey edited the Handbook of Political Science Research on Sub-Saharan

Africa: Trends from the 1960s to the 1990s. Specifically on research in international
relations, a nice review article by William Cyrus Reed overviews directions in African
international relations and concludes with a bibliography. The book also includes African
regional surveys (i.e., lusophone Africa, Southern Africa, East Africa, Horn of Africa,
Cameroon and Equatorial Africa) as well as country studies (i.e., South Africa, Côte
d'Ivoire, Ghana, and Nigeria). The book has two appendices relevant to this essay: one on
Social science research centers of sub-Saharan Africa; and a Selected bibliography on
African politics.
Also in 1992, Wright wrote a nice review on African foreign policies. In this review he
suggested that most African foreign policies shared certain objectives: equality in the
international system (due to legacies of colonialism, opposition to racism, Cold War
tensions, and issues of foreign troops), opposition to South Africa and apartheid, a
dominant strain for pro-Arab and anti-Israel positions, and concerns for modernization
and economic development (Wright 1992:338). The arenas for foreign policy were these:
regional (e.g. OAU, ECOWAS), Continental (i.e., OAU), Eurafrica (i.e., former colonial
powers, great powers, the EC), and superpowers (i.e., USA, USSR). Each venue was
discussed and prospects for the future centered on possible democratization and
economic development.
In 1994, Shaw and Okolo edited a volume on the political economy of foreign policy in
ECOWAS states. In this work, an author was to “employ political economy variables to
explain (i) the structural nature of African country relations with other countries and the
world economy, (ii) major African foreign policies and state behaviour, and (iii) the options
and constraints in foreign policy” (1994:257).
In 1995, Zartman edited a book that suggests the unique problems for comparative
politics and international relations posed by collapsing African states. The book opens
with an introductory chapter arguing the merits of the study and overviews theories.
Then it contains chapters on collapsed and reconstituted states (i.e., Chad, Uganda,
Ghana), current collapse and future restoration (i.e., Somalia, Liberia, Mozambique,
Ethiopia), states in danger (Angola, Zaire, Algeria, South Africa), potential agents of
reconstruction (i.e., United Nations, foreign intervention, democratization, and
strongmen), and a concluding chapter.
Keller and Rothchild (1996) edited a book which contributed to African international
relations and overviewed evolving regional foreign policy perspectives and practices.
After introductions by Keller and Obasanjo, placing African international and regional
interactions in a post–Cold War context, the book has three parts: Perspectives on
regional and global security issues, Regional security and the end of the Cold War, and
Page 17 of 33


Extracontinental actors and regional security. The introduction, first section, and
conclusion have the most information concerning regional comparative foreign policy,
though the other chapters have a lot of information about specific country interests. The
chapter on ECOMOG is especially informative.
Schraeder, in 1996, wrote a book chapter on African international relations that explains
the primary trends of foreign policy formation and concerns. He discusses a dependency/
post-colonial divide in research on African foreign relations, and he suggests some key
areas of study or consensus. First, African foreign policy was highly personalized within
the office of the president. Second, countries had strong cultural, political, and economic
ties that oriented their foreign policies towards the former colonizing country. So foreign
policy was aligned with (or sometimes opposed to) the wishes of the metropole or to new
external patrons. With the end of the Cold War, some of this has changed. The foreign
policies of these countries are experiencing more democratization. Finally, religion is
playing more of a role. He also discusses the role of Pan-Africanism, regional integration,
relations with great powers, and the relations of African states with multilateral
institutions such as the UN, the IMF, and the World Bank.
Also in 1996, a very well regarded, and often-cited, book on African international
relations was written by Clapham. This book is often used in classes on African
international relations. Although it does not have a specific chapter on foreign relations,
discussions of foreign policy are explored within the larger international relations
context. He discusses how weak African states are maintained by international norms,
but not in a way that allows them to flourish. The “negative sovereignty” of these
“monopoly states” allows them to proceed without strong threat of invasion of
international overthrow, but they do not prosper economically nor do they have much
domestic capacity.
In 1997, a bibliography on African international relations was released (DeLancey et al.).

This work divided the topics as follows: an introduction; general works on African
international relations; African foreign policies; Inter-African conflicts, borders, and
refugees; sub-continental regionalism; the OAU, Pan-Africanism, and African unity; the
UN and international law; RSA and Southern Africa; major powers (Russia, the PRC, the
UK, and France) and their relations with Africa; the US and African relations; other states
and their relations with Africa; and economic factors in African international relations.
In 1998, Reno wrote a “new classic” book about “weak” states and argued that one needs
to look beneath state-level activities to understand the international relations of failed or
weak states. Within the African state, competing poles of power often internationally
weaken state structures to deny would-be competitors access to state power, while
competing for international recognition, aid, and foreign direct investment. The book
contains two theoretical and historical chapters outlining the argument, the cases of
Liberia, Sierra Leone, the DRC, and Nigeria, as well as a concluding chapter on warlords
in the global system of states.
Page 18 of 33


In 1999, Wright edited an often-cited volume on African foreign policies designed for
classroom use as well as to promote a research agenda. In his introductory chapter, he
argues that the traditional concerns of African foreign policies must include the following:
the impact of colonialism, the role of resources, coordination within IGOs, non-alignment,
security and sovereignty, unity against apartheid South Africa, economic development,
and decision making in foreign policy (1999:3–6). The book also discusses the end of the
Cold War, one comparative case, and country-specific foreign policy studies (i.e., Angola,
Benin, Botswana, Ethiopia and Eritrea, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania,
and Zimbabwe). It also has a chapter on regionalism and a concluding chapter
speculating on the future of foreign policies in the region.
In 1999, Nel and McGowan produced an African international relations textbook that
discusses the basic paradigms of international relations in the African context, with
emphasis on South Africa and its region. Also included are chapters on the study of
international relations, the evolution of the global political economy, theories of
international relations, states and the interstate system, analyzing and evaluating foreign
policy, international institutions, nonstate actors in international relations, Africa in the
global system, 1600 to decolonization, Africa in the contemporary world, Africa's
international relations, the postcolonial African state and its problems, making foreign
policy in South Africa, Southern Africa in South–South relations, the regional subsystem
of Southern Africa, dimensions of sustainable development in Southern Africa.
In 2001, Pinkney wrote on the comparative foreign policy of East Africa. He compared the
pre– and post–Cold War politics of the three countries of East Africa, pitting rival theories
against each other for the best explanation. Pinkney examines changes in international
ideas, norms, and power and how they have influenced East Africa and its interactions
within the region, with IFIs, and with the larger world.
In 2001, a work directly on African foreign policies was edited by Khadiagala and Lyons
(2001B) and will probably be popular in courses on African foreign policies. Here, aside
from introductory and concluding chapters, the book discusses foreign policy within
regions: anglophone West Africa, francophone West Africa, Central Africa, the Great
Lakes, the Horn, Southern Africa, as well as the external relations of weak states and
stateless regions. The exception to the regional orientation is a chapter on South Africa,
though in a Southern African context. This sets this volume apart – instead of an edited
volume consisting of single case studies, each chapter represents regions, save for South
Africa.
Also in 2001, Serapião and colleagues edited a book on African foreign policies that
examines foreign policies primarily from a Southern Africa perspective. The first two
theoretical chapters have overviews on African foreign policies and African unity, and
challenges and solutions in the struggle for independent African foreign policies. The next
several chapters are cases: foreign policy towards Africa: the case of India, South Africa's
foreign policy toward the rest of Africa, South Africa's regional foreign policy (1944–99),
Page 19 of 33


and the future of South Africa in Africa. It is between a book and a pamphlet, with
augments and overviews of selective literature.
A collection on regional foreign policies was edited by Adar and Ajulu (2002), which had a
mix of case studies (i.e., Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique,
Namibia, South Africa (2 chapters), Swaziland, Zambia, and Zimbabwe) as well as
regional and global case studies (i.e., regional policies of SADC, British policies toward
the region, and the US policy toward the region).
In a book chapter, Adogame (2003) argued that one could fuse a dependency approach
with a decision making approach to understand African foreign policy formation. He used
the creation of the AU as his case. His argument is a nuanced dependency approach,
giving more credence to domestic volition and influences.
A volume focusing on African foreign policy in the context of East Africa, globalization,
and the end of the Cold War was edited by Adar and Schraeder (2007). It contains a
mixture of single case studies (i.e., Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania,
and Uganda) as well as regional and global case studies (e.g. East African Community
(EAC), the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), British relations in the
region, Russian relations in the region, and American relations in the region). It also
includes introductory and concluding chapters. They find that although rising IMF and
World Bank programs may constrain African foreign policy formation, the creation of
policy remains primarily in the hands of particular leaders.
References
Adar, K.G., and Ajulu, R. (2002) Globalization and Emerging Trends in African Foreign
Policy: A Comparative Perspective of Southern Africa. London: Ashgate.
Adar, K.G., and Schraeder, P.J. (2007) Globalization and Emerging Trends in African
Foreign Policy. Vol. 2: A Comparative Perspective of Eastern Africa. New York: University
Press of America.
Adogame, P.G. (2003) African Foreign Policy: Integrating Political Economy and
Decisionmaking Perspectives. In J.A. Braveboy-Wagner (ed.) The Foreign Policies of the
Global South. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 79–98.
Akindele, R.A. (1976) Reflections on the Preoccupation and Conduct of African Diplomacy.
Journal of Modern African Studies 14 (4), 557–76.
Akinsaya, A. (1976) Afro-Arab Alliance: Dream or Reality? African Affairs 75 (301), 511–
29.
Akinyemi, A.B. (1982) Africa: Challenges and Responses: A Foreign Policy Perspective.
Daedalus 3, 243–54.
Alden, C. (2007) China in Africa. New York: Zed Books.
Page 20 of 33


Aluko, O. (ed.) (1977) The Foreign Policy of African States. London: Hodder and
Stoughton.
Aluko, O. (1987) Oil at Concessionary Prices for Africa: A Case Study in Nigerian Decision
Making. African Affairs 75 (301), 425–43.
Anda, M.O. (2000) International Relations in Contemporary Africa. New York: University
Press of America.
Armstrong, A. (1981) The Political Consequences of Economic Dependence. Journal of

Conflict Resolution 25 (3), 401–28.
Bach, D. (ed.) (1999) Regionalisation in Africa: Integration and Disintegration.

Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Baran, P.A. (1957) Political Economy of Growth. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Bates, R.H. (1981) Market and States in Tropical Africa: The Political Basis of Agricultural
Policies. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Becker, D.G., and Sklar, R.L. (eds.) (1999) Postimperialism and World Politics. Westport:
Praeger.
Bender, G.J. (1987) Preface. “International Affairs in Africa.” Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science 489 (Jan. 9–12).
Bienen, H.S. (1985) African Militaries as Foreign Policy Actors. In W.J. Foltz and H.S.
Bienen (eds.) Arms and the African: Military Influences on Africa’s International
Relations. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 153–70.
Bischoff, P.-H., and Southall, R. (1999) The Early Foreign Policy of the Democratic South
Africa. In S. Wright (ed.) African Foreign Policies. Boulder: Westview, pp. 154–81.
Black, D.R. (1988) Foreign Policy in Small States: Botswana, Lesotho, Swaziland, and
Southern Africa. Halifax, NS: Centre for Foreign Policy Studies, Dalhousie University.
Boyd, J.B., Jr (1979) African Boundary Conflict: An Empirical Study. African Studies
Review 22 (3), 1–14.
Bratton, M., and van de Walle, N. (1997) Democratic Experiments in Africa: Regime
Transitions in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Callaghy, T. (1983) External Actors and the Relative Autonomy of the Political Aristocracy
in Zaire. Journal of Commonwealth and Comparative Politics 21 (3), 61–83.
Callaghy, T. (1998) Between Scylla and Charybdis: The Foreign Economic Relations of
Sub-Saharan African States. In P. Lewis (ed.) Africa: Dilemmas of Development and
Change. Boulder: Westview, pp. 382–99.
Page 21 of 33


Callaghy, T. (2000) Africa and the World Political Economy: More Caught between a Rock
and a Hard Place. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: The
African State System in Flux, 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview, pp. 43–82.
Callaghy, T. (2009) Africa and the World Political Economy: Still Caught between a Rock
and a Hard Place. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics:
Reforming Political Order. Boulder: Westview, pp. 39–71.
Callaghy, T.M., and Ravenhill, J. (1993) Hemmed In: Responses to Africa’s Economic
Decline. New York: Columbia University Press.
Chabal, P. (2002) The Quest for Good Government and the Development in Africa: Is
NEPAD the Answer? African Affairs 78 (3), 447–62.
Chabal, P., and Deloz, J.-P. (1999) Africa Works: Disorder as Political Instrument. Oxford:
James Curry.
Chan, S. (ed.) (1990) Exporting Apartheid: Foreign Policies in Southern Africa 1978–1988.
London: Macmillan.
Chipman, J. (1998) French Power in Africa. Oxford: Blackwell.
Clapham, C. (ed.) (1979) Foreign Policy Making in Developing States: A Comparative

Approach. Westport: Praeger.
Clapham, C. (1996) Africa and the International System: The Politics of State Survival.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clapham, C. (1997) International Relations in Africa after the Cold War. In W. Hale and E.
Kienle (eds.) After the Cold War: Security and Democracy in Africa and Asia. New York:
Tauris Academic Studies, pp. 99–113.
Clark, J.F. (2001) Foreign Policy Making in Central Africa: The Imperative of Regime
Security in a New Context. In G. Khadiagala and T. Lyons (eds.) African Foreign Policies:
Power and Process. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 67–86.
Clark, J.F., O’Leary, M.K., and Wittkopf, E.R. (1971) National Attributes Associated with
Dimension of Support for the United Nations. International Organization 25, 1–25.
Daddieh, C.K., and Shaw, T.M. (1986) The Political Economy of Decision Making in African
Foreign Policy: Recognition of Biafra and the Popular Movement for the Liberation of
Angola. In B. Korany (ed.) How Foreign Policy Decisions are Made in the Third World: A
Comparative Analysis. Boulder: Westview, pp. 61–86.
DeLancey, M.W. (ed.) (1979) Aspects of International Relations in Africa. Bloomington;

African Studies Program.
DeLancey, M.W. (ed.) (1981) African International Relations: An Annotated Bibliography.

Boulder: Westview.
Page 22 of 33


DeLancey, M.W. (ed.) (1992) Handbook of Political Science Research on Sub-Saharan

Africa: Trends from the 1960s to the 1990s. Westport: Greenwood.
DeLancey, M.W., Reed, W.C., Spyke, R., and Steen, P. (1997) African International
Relations: An Annotated Bibliography, 2nd edn. Boulder: Westview.
Deng, F. (2000) Reconciling Sovereignty with Responsibility: A Basis for International

Humanitarian Action. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics:
The African State System in Flux, 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview, pp. 353–78.
Deng, F.M. (2009) Reconciling Sovereignty with Responsibility: A Basis for International
Humanitarian Action. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics:
Reforming Political Order. Boulder: Westview, pp. 345–84.
Dolan, M.B., Tomlin, B.W., Molot, M.A., and Reikhoff, H. von (1980) Foreign Policies of
African States in Asymmetric Dyads. International Studies Quarterly 24 (3), 415–49.
Dunn, K. (2000) Tales from the Dark Side: Africa’s Challenge to International Relations
Theory. Journal of Third World Studies 17, 61–90.
Dunn, K.C., and Shaw, T.M. (eds.) (2001) Africa’s Challenge to International Relations
Theory. New York: Palgrave.
East, M.A. (1973) Size and Foreign Policy Behavior: A Test of Two Models. World Politics
25 (4), 556–76.
Easterly, W., and Levine, R. (1997) Africa’s Growth Tragedy: Policies and Ethnic Divisions.
Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 (4), 1203–50.
Ellis, W., and Salzberg, J. (1966) Africa in the UN: A Statistical Note. American Behavioral
Scientist 8 (8), 30–2.
Englebert, P. (2000) State Legitimacy and Development in Africa. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Englebert, P., and Hummel, R. (2005) Let’s Stick Together: Understanding Africa’s
Secessionist Deficit. African Affairs 104 (116), 399–427.
Foltz, W.J. (1991) The Organization of African Unity and the Resolution of Africa’s
Conflicts. In F.M. Deng and I.W. Zartman (eds.) Conflict Resolution in Africa. Washington:
Brookings Institution, pp. 347–66.
Gambari, I.A. (1989) Theory and Reality in Foreign Policy Making. Atlantic Highlands:
Humanities Press International.
Gifford, P., and Louis, W.R. (eds.) (1982) The Transfer of Power in Africa: Decolonization
1940–1960. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Gifford, P., and Louis, W.R. (eds.) (1988) Decolonization and African Independence: The
Transfer of Power, 1960–1980. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Page 23 of 33


Gordon, D.F. (1993) Debt, Conditionality, and Reform: The International Relations of
Economic Policy Restructuring in Sub-Saharan Africa. In T.M. Callaghy and J. Ravenhill
(eds.) Hemmed In: Responses to Africa’s Economic Decline. New York: Columbia
University Press, pp. 90–129.
Hagan, J.D. (1989) Domestic Political Regime Changes and Third World Voting
Realignments in the United Nation, 1946–84. International Organizations 43 (3), 505–41.
Harbeson, J.W. (2009) Promising Democratization Trajectories in Africa’s Weak States. In

J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: Reforming Political Order.
Boulder: Westview, pp. 109–39.
Harbeson, J.W., and Rothchild, D. (eds.) (2000) Africa in World Politics: The African State
System in Flux, 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview.
Harbeson, J.W., and Rothchild, D. (eds.) (2009) Africa in World Politics: Reforming Political
Order. Boulder: Westview.
Hargreaves, J.D. (1988) Decolonization in Africa. New York: Longman.
Herbst, J. (1999) The Structural Adjustment of Politics in Africa. In P. Lewis (ed.) Africa:
Dilemmas of Development and Change. Boulder: Westview, pp. 431–49.
Herbst, J. (2000a) States and Power in Africa: Comparative Lessons in Authority and
Control. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Herbst, J. (2000b) Western and African Peacekeepers: Motives and Opportunities. In J.W.
Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: The African State System in
Flux, 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview, pp. 308–23.
Hey, J.A.K. (ed.) (2003) Small States in World Politics: Explaining Foreign Policy Behavior.
Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Holloway, S. (1990) Forty Years of United Nations General Assembly Voting. Canadian
Journal of Political Science 23, 279–96.
Holloway, S., and Tomlinson, R. (1995) The New World Order and the General Assembly:
Bloc Realignment at the U.N. in the Post Cold War Period. Canadian Journal of Political
Science 28, 227–54.
Holsti, K.J. (1970) National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy. International
Studies Quarterly 14 (3), 233–309.
Holsti, K.J. (1982) Why Nations Realign: Foreign Policy Restructuring in the Postwar
World. Boston: George Allen and Unwin.
Hope, K.R. (2002) From Crisis to Renewal: Towards a Successful Implementation of the
New Partnership for Africa’s Development. African Affairs 101 (404), 387–402.
Page 24 of 33


Imai, K., and James, P.A. (1996) Dynamics of a Trilateral Game of Influence: Interactions
between Major Powers’ Foreign Policy Instruments and the Behavior of Weaker States.
International Interactions 22 (2), 165–95.
Ingham, K. (1973) The Foreign Relations of African States. Proceedings of the Twenty-
fifth Symposium of the Colston Research Society held in the University of Bristol, April 4–
7. London: Butterworth.
Jackson, R.H. (1990) Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third
World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, R.H. (1993) The Weight of Ideas in Decolonization: Normative Change in

International Relations. In J. Goldstein and R.O. Keohane (eds.) Ideas and Foreign Policy:
Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Change. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 111–38.
Jackson, R.H., and Rosberg, C.G. (1982) Why Africa’s Weak States Persist: The Empirical
and the Juridical in Statehood. World Politics 35 (1), 1–24.
Johns, D.H. (1972) The “Normalization” of Intra-African Diplomatic Activity. Journal of

Modern African Studies 10 (4), 597–610.
Johns, D.H. (1975) Diplomatic Activity, Power, and Integration in Africa. In P.J. McGowan
(ed.) Sage International Yearbook of Foreign Policy Studies. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Joseph, R. (1983) Class, State, and Prebendal Politics in Nigeria. Journal of

Commonwealth and Comparative Politics 21 (3), 21–38.
Kegley, C.W., Jr, and Hook, S.W. (1991) US Foreign Aid and UN Voting: Did Reagan’s
Linkage Strategy buy Deference or Defiance? International Studies Quarterly 35 (3), 295–
312.
Kegley, C.W., Jr, and McGowan, P. (eds.) (1981) The Political Economy of Foreign Policy.
Beverly Hills: Sage (International Yearbook of Foreign Policy Studies, vol. 6).
Keller, E.J., and Rothchild, D. (eds.) (1996) Africa in the New International Order:
Rethinking State Sovereignty and Regional Security. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Kennedy, P. (1988) African Capitalism: The Struggle for Ascendancy. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.
Khadiagala, G. (2000) Europe in Africa’s Renewal: Beyond Postcolonialism? In J.W.

Khadiagala, G. (2009) Euro–African Relations in the Age of Maturity. In J.W. Harbeson and
D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: Reforming Political Order. Boulder: Westview,
pp. 305–22.
Page 25 of 33


Khadiagala, G., and Lyons, T. (2001a) Foreign Policy Making in Africa: An Introduction. In
G. Khadiagala and T. Lyons (eds.) African Foreign Policies: Power and Process. Boulder:
Lynne Rienner, pp. 1–13.
Khadiagala, G., and Lyons, T. (2001b) African Foreign Policies: Power and Process.
Khapoya, V.B. (1975) The Politics of Decision: A Comparative Study of African Policy
Toward the Liberation Movements. Denver: University of Denver Press.
Kim, S.Y., and Russett, B. (1996) The Politics of Voting Alignments in the United Nations
General Assembly. International Organizations 50 (4), 629–52.
Korany, B. (ed.) (1986) How Foreign Policy Decisions Are Made in the Third World: A
Comparative Analysis. Boulder: Westview.
Kornprobst, M. (2002) The Management of Border Disputes in African Regional Sub-

Systems: Comparing West Africa and the Horn of Africa. Journal of Modern African
Studies 40 (3), 369–93.
Lemarchand, R. (2000) The Crisis in the Great Lakes. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild
(eds.) Africa in World Politics: The African State System in Flux. Boulder: Westview, pp.
324–52.
Lemke, D. (2003) African Lessons for International Relations Research. World Politics 56
(1), 114–38.
Lewis, P.M. (1996) Economic Reform and Political Transition in Africa: The Quest for a
Politics of Development. World Politics 49 (1), 92–129.
Lipton, M. (1977) Why Poor People Stay Poor: Urban Bias in World Development.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Lofchie, M.F. (1989) The Policy Factor: Agricultural Performance in Kenya and Tanzania.
Lyons, T., and Khadiagala, G. (2001) Conclusions. In G. Khadiagala and T. Lyons (eds.)
African Foreign Policies: Power and Process. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 207–16.
McGillivray, F. (1997) Party Discipline as a Determinant of the Endogenous Formation of

Tariffs. American Journal of Political Science 41 (2), 584–607.
McGowan, P.J. (1968) Africa and Non-Alignment: A Comparative Study of Foreign Policy.
International Studies Quarterly 12, 262–95.
McGowan, P.J. (1969) The Patterns of African Diplomacy: A Quantitative Comparison.

Journal of Asian and African Studies 4, 202–21.
Page 26 of 33


McGowan, P.J. (1970) African Politics: A Guide to Research Resources, Methods and
Literature, Occasional Paper 55, Program of Eastern African Studies. Syracuse University.
McGowan, P., and Gottwald, K.-P. (1975) Small State Foreign Policies: A Comparative
Study of Participation, Conflict, and Political and Economic Dependence in Black Africa.
International Studies Quarterly 19 (4), 469–500.
McGowan, P., and Johnson, T.H. (1979) The AFRICA Project and the Comparative Study of
African Foreign Policy. In M.W. DeLancey (ed.) Aspects of International Relations in
Africa. Bloomington; African Studies Program, pp. 190–241.
McGowan, P.J., and Purkitt, H.E. (1979) Demystifying “National Character” in Black
Africa: A Comparative Study of Culture and Foreign Policy Behavior, vol. 17, bk. 1.
Monograph Series in World Affairs. Denver: Graduate School of International Studies,
University of Denver.
McGowan, P.J., and Shapiro, H.B. (eds.) (1973) The Comparative Study of Foreign Policy:
A Survey of Scientific Findings. Beverly Hills: Sage.
McKay, V. (ed.) (1966) African Diplomacy: Studies in the Determinants of Foreign Policy.
New York: Praeger.
Magee, S.P., Brock, W.A., and Young, L. (1989) Black Hole Tariffs and Endogenous Policy
Theory: Political Economy in General Equilibrium. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Mazrui, A.A. (1977) Africa’s International Relations: The Diplomacy of Dependency and
Change. Boulder: Westview.
Mazzeo, D. (ed.) (1984) African Regional Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.
Meyers, B.D. (1966) African Voting in the United Nations General Assembly. Journal of
Moon, B.E. (1983) The Foreign Policy of Dependent States. International Studies
Quarterly 27 (3), 315–40.
Moon, B.E. (1985) Consensus or Compliance? Foreign-Policy Change and External

Dependence. International Organization 39 (2), 297–329.
Mortimer, R. (2000) From ECOMOG to ECOMOG II: Intervention in Sierra Leone. In J.W.
Nel, P., and McGowan, P.J. (1999) Power, Wealth and Global Order: An International
Relations Textbook for Africa. Rondebosch: University of Cape Town Press.
Page 27 of 33


Nelson, J. (ed.) (1989) Fragile Coalitions: The Politics of Economic Adjustment. New
Brunswick: Transaction Books.
Nelson, J. (ed.) (1992) The Politics of Economic Adjustment. Princeton: Princeton

University Press.
Newcombe, H., Ross, M., and Newcombe, A.G. (1970) United Nations Voting Patterns.
International Organization 24 (1), 100–21.
Nweke, G.A. (1980) Harmonization of African Foreign Policies, 1955–1975: The Political
Economy of African Diplomacy. Boston: African Research Studies Center.
Ojo, J.C.B., Orwa, D.K., and Utete, C.M.B. (1985) African International Relations. New
York: Longman.
Okolo, J.E., and Wright, S. (eds.) (1990) West African Regional Cooperation and
Development. Boulder: Westview.
Pinkney, R. (2001) The International Politics of East Africa. Manchester: Manchester

University Press.
Quinn, J.J. (1999) The Managerial Bourgeoisie: Capital Accumulation, Development and
Democracy. In D.G. Becker and R.L. Sklar (eds.) Postimperialism and World Politics.
Westport: Praeger, pp. 219–52.
Quinn, J.J. (2000) Economic Accountability: Are Constraints on Economic Decision Making
a Blessing or a Curse? Scandinavian Journal of Development Alternatives and Area
Studies 19 (4), 131–69.
Quinn, J.J. (2001) W(h)ither the African State (System)? International Politics 38 (3), 437–
46.
Quinn, J.J. (2002) The Road Oft Traveled: Development Policies and Majority State
Ownership of Industries in Africa. Westport: Praeger.
Quinn, J.J. (2004) Diffusion and Escalation in the Great Lakes Region: The Rwandan
Genocide, the Rebellion in Zaire, and Mobutu’s Overthrow. In S.E. Lobell and P. Mauceri
(eds.) The Internationalization of Ethnic Conflict: Explaining Diffusion and Escalation.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 111–32.
Rai, K.B. (1980) Foreign Aid and Voting in the UN General Assembly, 1967–1976. Journal
of Peace Research 17 (3), 269–77.
Rapley, J. (2002) Understanding Development: Theory and Practice in the Third World,
2nd edn. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Reed, W.C. (1992) Directions in African International Relations. In M.W. DeLancey (ed.)
Handbook of Political Science Research on Sub-Saharan Africa: Trends from the 1960s to
the 1990s. Westport: Greenwood, pp. 73–106.
Page 28 of 33


Reno, W. (1998) Warlord Politics and African States. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Reno, W. (2000) Africa’s Weak States, Non-state Actors, and the Privatization of Interstate
Relations. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: The African
State System in Flux, 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview, pp. 263–85.
Reno, W. (2009) The Privatization of Africa’s International Relations. In J.W. Harbeson and
D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: Reforming Political Order. Boulder: Westview,
pp. 190–212.
Richardson, N.R. (1976) Political Compliance and US Trade Dominance. American

Political Science Review 70, 1098–109.
Richardson, N.R., and Kegley, C.W., Jr (1980) Trade Dependence and Foreign Policy
Compliance: A Longitudinal Analysis. International Studies Quarterly 24 (2), 191–222.
Rogowski, R. (1989) Commerce and Coalitions: How Trade Affects Domestic Political
Alignments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rood, L.L. (1976) Nationalisation and Indigenisation in Africa. Journal of Modern African
Studies 14 (2), 427–47.
Rosenau, J.N. (1966) Pre-theories and Theories of Foreign Policy. In R.B. Farrell (ed.)
Approaches to Comparative and International Politics. Evanston: Northwestern University
Press, pp. 115–69.
Rothchild, D. (2000) The Impact of US Disengagement on African Interstate Conflict

Resolution. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: The African
State System in Flux, 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview, pp. 160–87.
Rothchild, D., and Harbeson, J.W. (2000) The African State and State System in Flux. In
J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: The African State System in
Flux. Boulder: Westview, pp. 3–22.
Schraeder, P.J. (1994) United States Foreign Policy toward Africa: Incrementalism, Crisis
and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schraeder, P.J. (1996) African International Relations. In A.A. Gordon and D.L. Gordon
(eds.) Understanding Contemporary Africa, 2nd edn. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, pp. 129–66.
Schraeder, P.J. (2001) New Directions in Francophone West African Foreign Policies. In G.
Khadiagala and T. Lyons (eds.) African Foreign Policies: Power and Process. Boulder:
Schraeder, P.J. (2004) African Politics and Society: A Mosaic in Transformation, 2nd edn.
Belmont: Wadsworth.
Page 29 of 33


Serapião, L., Makgetlaneng, S., Sheth, V.S., Makoa, F., Ralinala, M., Saunders, C., and
Ndongko, W. (2001) African Foreign Policies in the 21st Century, Working Papers.
Pretoria: Africa Institute of South Africa.
Shaw, T.M. (1975) Discontinuities and Inequalities in African International Politics.

International Journal 30 (3), 369–90.
Shaw, T.M., and Aluko, O. (eds.) (1984) The Political Economy of African Foreign Policy.
New York: St. Martin’s.
Shaw, T.M., and Okolo, J.E. (eds.) (1994) The Political Economy of Foreign Policy in
ECOWAS. New York: St. Martin’s.
Taylor, I. (2005) NEPAD: Towards Africa’s Development or Another False Start? Boulder:
Lynne Rienner.
Taylor, I., and Williams, P. (2004) Africa in International Politics: External Involvement on
the Continent. New York: Routledge.
Thiam, D. (1965) The Foreign Policy of African States: Ideological Bases, Present
Realities, Future Prospects. London: Phoenix House.
van de Walle, N. (2001) African Economies and the Politics of Permanent Crisis: 1979–
1999. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vengroff, R. (1976) Instability and Foreign Policy Behavior: Black Africa in the UN.
American Journal of Political Science 20 (3), 425–38.
Venter, D. (2001) South African Foreign Policy Decisionmaking in the African Context. In
G. Khadiagala and T. Lyons (eds.) African Foreign Policies: Power and Process. Boulder:
Wallensteen, P. (1971) Dealing with the Devil: Five African States and South Africa.
Instant Research on Peace and Violence 3, 85–99.
Wallerstein, I. (1974) The Modern World System. New York: Academic Press.
Wang, T.Y. (1999) US Foreign Aid and UN Voting: An Analysis of Important Issues.
International Studies Quarterly 43 (1), 199–210.
Weigert, K.M., and Riggs, R.E. (1969) Africa and United Nations Elections: An Aggregate
Data Analysis. International Organizations 23, 1–19.
Wendt, A.E. (1987) The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory.

Widner, J.A. (1993) The Origins of Agricultural Policy in Ivory Coast 1960–86. In A.
Varshney (ed.) Beyond Urban Bias. Portland: Frank Cass, pp. 25–59.
Page 30 of 33


Wittkopf, E.R. (1973) Foreign Aid and United Nations Votes: A Comparative Study.
American Political Science Review 67 (3), 868–88.
Woodward, P. (1984) Relations between Neighbouring States in North-East Africa. Journal

of Modern African Studies 22 (2), 273–85.
World Bank (1981) Accelerated Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Agenda for

Action. Washington: World Bank.
World Bank (1992) African Development Indicators, 1992. Washington: World Bank.
Wright, S. (1992) The Foreign Policy of Africa. In R.C. Macridis (ed.) Foreign Policy in
World Politics. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, pp. 330–56.
Wright, S. (ed.) (1999) African Foreign Policies. Boulder: Westview.
Young, C. (1982) Ideology and Development in Africa. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Young, C. (1991) Self-Determination, Territorial Integrity, and the African State System.
In F.M. Deng and I.W. Zartman (eds.) Conflict Resolution in Africa. Washington: Brookings
Institution, pp. 320–46.
Young, C. (2000) The Heritage of Colonialism. In J.W. Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.)
Africa in World Politics: The African State System in Flux, 3rd edn. Boulder: Westview, pp.
23–42.
Zartman, I.W. (1965) The Politics of Boundaries in North and West Africa. Journal of
Zartman, I.W. (1966) International Relations in the New Africa. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall.
Zartman, I.W. (1967) Africa as a Subordinate State System in International Relations.

Zartman, I.W. (ed.) (1995) Collapsed States: The Disintegration and Restoration of
Legitimate Authority. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Zartman, I.W. (2000) Inter-African Negotiations and State Renewal. In J.W. Harbeson and
D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: The African State System in Flux, 3rd edn.
Zartman, I.W. (2009) Inter-African Negotiations and Reforming Political Order. In J.W.
Harbeson and D. Rothchild (eds.) Africa in World Politics: Reforming Political Order.
Page 31 of 33


Links to Digital Materials

The African Studies Association. At http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/∼callasa/index.html,
accessed Jul. 2009. The leading North American interdisciplinary academic organization
to promote the study of African affairs. Holds annual conferences and has several
publications on Africa.
The African Union. At www.africa-union.org/, accessed Jul. 2009. This link is to the main
intergovernmental body incorporating Pan-African idealism. It includes descriptions of
governance structures, member countries, programs, as well as other resources for
African societies. Here more information on the African Economic Community, RECs, and
other regional organizations can be explored.
The Council on Foreign Relations: Africa. At www.cfr.org/region/143/africa.html,

accessed Jul. 2009. The Council of Foreign Relations is a non-partisan think tank
concerned with America's role in foreign relations. It publishes Foreign Affairs. The
African site has links to publications, editorials, regions, countries and a list of their
council experts.
The United Nations. At www.un.org/, accessed Jul. 2009. The UN is one of the main
international (as opposed to continental or regional) IGOs where international
cooperation can occur. The site also contains links to governance structures, members,
programs, conferences, and other resources.
United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. At www.uneca.org/, accessed Jul. 2009.
The UNECA website contains an overview of the IGO, regional contact information, links
to publications, press announcements, and a list of current programs. Established to help
with regional economic development.
The United States Agency for International Development: Africa. At www.usaid.gov/

locations/sub-saharan_africa/, accessed Jul. 2009. The USAID is the agency which
promotes US bilateral assistance to developing countries. Lists countries, programs,
opportunities, and other resources.
The US State Department: Africa. At www.state.gov/p/af/, accessed Jul. 2009. Webpage

for the Bureau of African Affairs. The official source for American foreign policy towards
Africa. Contains press releases, lists of embassies, lists of programs, and links to other
related agencies.
Data on Development: World Bank African Development Indicators 2008. At http://

siteresources.worldbank.org/INTSTATINAFR/Resources/adi2007_final.pdf,
accessed Jul. 2009. Macro economic and development indicators/data on Africa.
Data: Minorities at Risk. At www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar/, accessed Jul. 2009. Contains

data on 284 politically active ethnic groups from 1945 on. Data include, but are not
limited to, Africa. Tracks political, cultural, and economic dimensions.
Page 32 of 33


Data: Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development: International

Development Statistics. At www.oecd.org/dataoecd/50/17/5037721.htm, accessed Jul.
2009. Source for DAC Development flows from advanced to less advanced countries,
including Africa. Shows flows of developmental aid by several categories.
John James Quinn
Department of Political Science, Truman State University
Page 33 of 33


African Foreign Policies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

African Foreign Policies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

African Foreign Policies

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International

Summary and Keywords

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Foreign Policy Paradigms in Africa: the Decider

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

sources in order to remain in place. The existence of juridical sovereignty created

Paradigms and Foreign Policy in Africa:

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Paradigms and Foreign Policy in Africa:

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Given, however, the ever-increasing requirement of economic conditionality for

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Paradigms and Foreign Policy in Africa:

Beyond Pan-Africanism, dependency thinkers, development economists, and economic

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Paradigms and Foreign Policy in Africa:

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

In contrast to the standard neo-Marxist dependency theory, the theory of postimperialism

Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis: Africa in

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

A Chronology of Major Works Directly on

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

In 1973, the proceedings of a symposium at the University of Bristol were published as

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Although it is not specifically on comparative foreign policy, Mazrui (1977) writes of

In 1979, Clapham edited a volume on foreign policy in developing countries. Instead of

DeLancey edited an annotated bibliography on African international relations in 1981.

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Woodward (1984) discusses the limits of a dependency-only approach to foreign relations

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

In 1992, DeLancey edited the Handbook of Political Science Research on Sub-Saharan

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

In 1997, a bibliography on African international relations was released (DeLancey et al.).

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Alden, C. (2007) China in Africa. New York: Zed Books.

PRINTED FROM the OXFORD RESEARCH ENCYCLOPEDIA, INTERNATIONAL STUDIES (oxfordre.com/internationalstudies).

date: 25 February 2019

Armstrong, A. (1981) The Political Consequences of Economic Dependence. Journal of

Bach, D. (ed.) (1999) Regionalisation in Africa: Integration and Disintegration.