Levels of Analysis

In order to understand the things that affect our world, we often look at however much we see affected. If we are talking, in fact, about the world, we tend to look at how actors at the systemic level interact in order to make a difference. If we are talking about the internal politics of a country, we tend to see the situation in terms of leaders, constituencies, groups, or other such intranational units.

While it is funny to think of Prof. Huck's example of a systems-level analyst having a brain freeze when asked to consider the effects that an internal political constituency within a nation-state has had on international realities, this is something from which a greal deal of us suffer. Our brains may not explode, but we do have a tendency to ignore the non-systemic aspects of international relations.

Observing international relations in terms of levels of analysis may differentiate what may be, in practice, indifferentiable aspects of policy-making. Nevertheless, it forces us to think about non-systemic situations that may obtain international reprecussions. It is useful because it gives equal importance to both the theocratic make-up of a country's government and the insanity of a local warlord in the effectuation of international politics.

P.S. The Miami Cubans may serve less to explain why the U.S. can adopt a hard-line policy against Cuba and more to explain why it does. I believe the distinction to be important. ^_~