ABSTRACT
Change is a neglected aspect of the study of foreign policy. Similar to the field of IR, which famously was not able to account for the rapid events that precipitated the ending of the CW in 1989, FPA tells us little about the sources and conditions that give rise to significant alteration to state foreign policy. This shortcoming is highlighted by Charles Hermann in his call for a greater integration of ‘change and dynamics in theories of foreign policy’, 1 and despite a few theoretical developments since then, this statement, by and large, still holds. This failure to fully address and incorporate change into FPA is important and, amongst other things, undermines the disciplinary claims that FPA enables deeper interpretation of international politics through its focus on the foreign policy process.
