السياسة الخارجية في بيئات عدم اليقين: مقاربة التعقيد في تفسير سلوك الدول (دراسة نظرية)
Abstract
This study focuses on analyzing state behavior in foreign policy within international environments characterized by high levels of uncertainty and structural complexity, by employing the complexity approach as an interpretive framework that goes beyond traditional linear models. The study proceeds from the assumption that contemporary international interactions operate through interconnected networks of actors and variables, where strategic outcomes emerge from nonlinear interactions and continuous feedback processes rather than from isolated, single decisions.
The study adopts a theoretical analytical approach supported by a critical review of recent literature on complexity theory and complex adaptive systems, applying their core concepts to patterns of state external behavior in evolving international contexts. The findings indicate that foreign policy outputs in complex environments are dynamic and adaptively phased, and that explanatory power increases when analytical models incorporate emergence, multi-level interaction, and sensitivity to small changes
The study concludes that the complexity approach provides a more suitable analytical framework for understanding contemporary international behavior and contributes to developing a flexible strategic conception of foreign policy decision-making based on adaptation and uncertainty management, rather than on assumptions of stability and linear predictability of outcomes.
References
- Simon, H. A. (1955). A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1).
- Allison, G. (1969). Conceptual Models and the Cuban Missile Crisis. American Political Science Review, 63(3).
- Waltz, K. N. (1988). The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 18(4). https://doi.org/10.2307/204817
- Legro, J., & Moravcsik, A. (1999). Is Anybody Still a Realist? International Security, 24(2).
- Keohane, R. O., & Martin, L. L. (1995). The Promise of Institutionalist Theory. International Security, 20(1).
- Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking Preferences Seriously. International Organization, 51(4). https://doi.o rg/10.1162/002081897550447
- Rosenau, J. N. (1990). Turbulence in World Politics : A Theory of Change and Continuity, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Tetlock, P. E. (1994). Cognitive Biases and Organizational Correctives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3).
- Jervis, R. (1997). Complexity and the Analysis of Political and Social Life. Political Science Quarterly, 112(4).
- Cederman, L.-E. (1997). Emergent Actors in world politics: How states and nations develop and dissolve. Princeton University press, New jersey.
- https://books.google.com.qa/books?id=watkJbI1bs0C&printsec=copyright&hl=ar#v=onepage&q&f=false
- Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Addison-Wesley.
- Kavalski, E. (2007). The fifth debate and the emergence of complex international relations theory: Notes on the application of complexity theory to the study of international life. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/09557570701574154
- Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. Simon & Schuster.
- March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York: The Free Press.
