Thread by @ProfPaulPoast

In light of Ambassador Bill Taylor's testimony, it's time we had a frank conversation about a key tool of international politics: the "quid pro quo"

[THREAD]

cbsnews.com/news/bill-tayl…

International relations scholars typically refer to these as "side-payments" or "issue linkages".

They are usually "trades" in foreign policy concessions: I'll give you an alliance commitment if you give me a trade deal.

This is a VERY COMMON practice.

In @IAJournal_CH, William Wallace famously labeled issue linkage “an ancient and accepted aspect of diplomacy"

jstor.org/stable/2616001…

Do they work? That's exactly what I explored in this @IntOrgJournal piece

cambridge.org/core/journals/…

If you're curious, the answer is "yes": issue linkage offers can increase the probability of reaching agreement by as much as 30 percent

Issue linkage also makes it more likely that states will stay committed to agreements, which I showed in this Journal of Conflict Resolution piece

journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.117…

Issue linkages can be used to connect all sorts of issues to make a host of deals. Consider the deal I describe at the beginning of this CMPS piece

journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.117…

President Obama was trying to resettle detainees in Guantánamo Bay prison (so he could, as promised, close the prison). To induce other countries to accept the prisoners, the State department had to offer "incentives"

The source for that account was this @nytimes article that contains even more examples (via @wikileaks)

nytimes.com/2010/11/29/wor…

Another famous example is actually a matter of debate: the euro 💶!

As I detail in this piece, scholars debate whether 🇫🇷 demanded creation of the euro (to check 🇩🇪 economic dominance) in exchange for allowing east-west German reunification

tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.108…

And the US has long loved dolling out goodies for the purpose of finding states willing to support its military adventures. @mephenke details this in her new @CornellPress book:

books.google.com/books?id=97ytD…

So does that mean @realDonaldTrump's "request" to Ukraine was "just politics as normal"?

No.

To be clear, being "politically" motivated is not a bad reason to pursue a policy. It's safe to assume that EVERY policy that EVERY leader pursues is done with the goal of staying in office

google.com/books/edition/…

It's also, sadly, not unusual for a powerful state to take advantage of a small state

https://twitter.com/ProfPaulPoast/status/1177177111817273345

What's different here is that the request is being done to target a domestic political opponent.

More precisely, he's pressuring a foreign government to investigate a political rival in order to disrupt a U.S. presidential election.

That, shall we say, is "highly problematic"

So "quid pro quo"/"issue linkage"/"side payment" is just how the states conduct international politics. Heck, one could say "trading favors" is synonymous with "politics".

But when those "favors" are aimed at disrupting US *domestic* politics, then you have problems.

[END]

ADDENDUM: While many of the above examples (except for the euro) dealt with security issues, issue linkages are also very common in economic negotiations, especially trade.

See, for example...

...Fatoumata Jawar & Aileen Kwa on the WTO

google.com/books/edition/…

...and Christina Davis on trade negotiations more generally

cambridge.org/core/journals/…

...and I should add that Christina Davis ALSO explores the role of issue linkages in securing alliance agreements, such as this @Journal_IS piece (which greatly inspired my work)

mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.116…

@Journal_IS ADDENDUM 2: To be clear, Trump/US are not the only ones employing issue linkage at the moment 👇(h/t @JimGoldgeier)

https://mobile.twitter.com/RobbieGramer/status/1187368525704376323