2026/04/04 by Tobias Risse, Christoph Steinert · 2 voices
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Social Sciences · #Economic Sanctions and International Relations #Estimation #Human rights #International Relations and Foreign Policy #Politics #Social and Intergroup Psychology #Survey data collection #Yield (engineering)
paper · doi:10.1177/00220027261439065
published in Journal of Conflict Resolution (SAGE Publishing)
openalex publication_date 2026/04/04 · openalex created_date 2026/04/05 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Foreign policy making involves balancing ethical values and instrumental concerns. Do politicians and citizens differ in how they weigh these factors when directly confronted with this trade-off? Focusing on attitudes toward arms exports, we argue that citizens, but not politicians, tend to prioritize human rights concerns over the political and economic benefits for their own states. We tested these arguments in four survey experiments among citizens and parliamentarians in the United Kingdom and Germany. We presented participants with fictitious arms deals and varied the human rights records of recipient regimes as well as the benefits of arms deals to assess how these factors influence attitudes toward arms exports. While we find substantial effects of both human rights violations and benefits on support for arms exports, their interaction remains insignificant across all samples. Hence, our findings yield no evidence for an elite-public gap in weighing ethical and instrumental concerns in foreign policy attitudes.