Polarization, Political Turnover, and the Stability of Democratic Foreign Policy

Abstract Numerous recent studies find that democratic institutions moderate the impact of domestic political turnover on foreign policy. As such, for many foreign policy outcomes, domestic turnover has little or no impact in democracies. I consider whether this finding holds as political polarization increases. Polarization might lead voters to place less value on compromise with other political actors, freeing leaders to advance policy interests that would be considered riskier in less polarized environments. I test this expectation using the Change in Source of Leader Support database, measures of party and affective polarization, and data on states’ voting positions in the United Nations. Across a range of statistical models, I find only weak suggestive evidence that party polarization reduces the constraining impact of democracy. The findings speak to ongoing debates over the role played by democratic institutions in conditioning how and when political competition within countries translates into foreign policy change.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Foreign Policy Analysis
Published
2026-01-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/fpa/orag006
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Polarization, Political Turnover, and the Stability of Democratic Foreign Policy

Matthew DiLorenzo
Foreign Policy Analysis
International Relations and Foreign Policy
article

Polarization, Political Turnover, and the Stability of Democratic Foreign Policy

Matthew DiLorenzo
article en

Abstract

Abstract Numerous recent studies find that democratic institutions moderate the impact of domestic political turnover on foreign policy. As such, for many foreign policy outcomes, domestic turnover has little or no impact in democracies. I consider whether this finding holds as political polarization increases. Polarization might lead voters to place less value on compromise with other political actors, freeing leaders to advance policy interests that would be considered riskier in less polarized environments. I test this expectation using the Change in Source of Leader Support database, measures of party and affective polarization, and data on states’ voting positions in the United Nations. Across a range of statistical models, I find only weak suggestive evidence that party polarization reduces the constraining impact of democracy. The findings speak to ongoing debates over the role played by democratic institutions in conditioning how and when political competition within countries translates into foreign policy change.

Foreign Policy AnalysisVol. 22(2)
Old Dominion University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.