Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Mumford, Andrew (2015)
Publisher: Springer
Journal: International Politics
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Political Science and International Relations, Geography, Planning and Development
Analogical reasoning has held a perpetual appeal to policymakers who have often drafted in historical metaphor as a mode of informing decision-making. However, this article contends that since the beginning of the ‘War on Terror’ we have arguably seen the rise of a more potent form of analogy, namely ones that are selected because they fulfil an ideological function. Analogical reasoning as a tool of rational decision-making has increasingly become replaced by analogical reasoning as a tool of trenchant ideologically-informed policy justification. This article addresses three key areas which map out the importance of analogical reasoning to an understanding of developments in contemporary international politics: the relationship between history and politics, in intellectual and policy terms; a critical assessment of the appeal that analogical reasoning holds for policymakers; and the development of a rationale for a more effective use of history in international public policymaking.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Andrew, C. (2010) Defence of the Realm: The Authorised History of MI5. London: Penguin.
    • Biddle, S. (2006) Seeing Baghdad, thinking Saigon. Foreign Affairs 85(2): 2-14.
    • Blair, T. (2010) A Journey. London: Hutchinson.
    • Brigham, R.K. (2006) Is Iraq Another Vietnam? New York: Public Affairs.
    • Bush, G.W. (2001) Remarks by the president on the USS enterprise on pearl Harbor Day, 7 December. http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011207.html, accessed 31 July 2012.
    • Bush, G.W. (2007) Discusses war on terror at veterans of foreign wars national convention, 22 August. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/release/2007/08/print/20070822-3.html, accessed 31 July 2012.
    • Campbell, K.J. (2007) A Tale of Two Quagmires: Iraq, Vietnam and the Hard Lessons of War. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
    • Carr, E.H. (1987) What is History? 2nd edn. London: Penguin.
    • Coleridge, S.T. (1884) Table Talk and Omniana. London: George Bell and Sons.
    • Cowper-Coles, S. (2011) Cables from Kabul: The Inside Story of the West's Afghanistan Campaign. London: Harper Press.
    • Dalacoura, K. (2012) The 2011 uprisings in the arab middle East: Political change and geopolitical implications. International Affairs 88(1): 63-79.
    • Duffy, G. (2001) Give structure its due: Political agency and the Vietnam commitment decisions. Japanese Journal of Political Science 2(2): 161-175.
    • Dumbrell, J. and Ryan, D (eds.) (2007) Vietnam in Iraq: Tactics, Lessons, Legacies and Ghosts. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
    • Eden, A. (1960) Full Circle: The Memoirs of Sir Anthony Eden. London: Cassell.
    • Evans, R.J. (2014) Altered Pasts: Counterfactuals in History. London: Little, Brown.
    • Fallows, J. (2002) The fifty-first state? Atlantic Monthly November.
    • Freedman, L. (2007) The Official History of the Falklands Campaign (2 volumes). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
    • Freeland, C. (2011) Lessons from Central Europe for the Arab Spring. New York Times 16 June.
    • Fukuyama, F. (2001) Their target: The modern world. Newsweek ('Issues 2002' Special Issue): pp. 62-63.
    • Gaddis, J.L. (1997a) History, theory and common ground. International Security 22(1): 75-85.
    • Gaddis, J.L. (1997b) We Now Know: Rethinking Cold War History. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    • Gardner, L.C. and Young, M.B. (eds.) (2007) Iraq and the Lessons of Vietnam. New York: The New Press.
    • Goodman, M.S. (2014) The Official History of the Joint Intelligence Committee, Volume I: From the Approach of the Second World War to the Suez Crisis. Abingdon: Routledge.
    • Griffin, J. (2003) It's all Greek! The New York Review of Books 18 December.
    • Haber, S. H., Kennedy, D.M. and Krasner, S.D. (1997) Brothers under the skin: Diplomatic history and international relations. International Security 22(1): 34-43.
    • Harvey, F.P. (2012) Explaining the Iraq War: Counterfactual Theory, Logic and Evidence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Hehir, A. (2006) The impact of analogical reasoning on US foreign policy towards Kosovo. Journal of Peace Research 43(1): 67-81.
    • Hitchens, C. (2005) Beating a dead parrot: Why Iraq and Vietnam have nothing whatsoever in common. The Slate 31 January. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2005/ 01/beating_a_dead_parrot.single.html, accessed 10 January 2012.
    • Houghton, D.P. (1996) The role of analogical reasoning in novel foreign policy situations. British Journal of Political Science 26(4): 523-552.
    • Jeffrey, K. (2011) MI6: The History of the Secret Intelligence Service, 1909-1949. London: Bloomsbury.
    • Jervis, R. (1976) Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    • Kaldor, M. (2011) Human security. Society and Economy 33(3): 441-448.
    • Kennedy-Pipe, C. (2000) International history and international relations theory: A dialogue beyond the cold war. International Affairs 76(4): 741-754.
    • Khong, Y.F. (1992) Analogies at War: Korean, Munich, Dien Bien Phu and the Vietnam Decisions of 1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    • Kissinger, H. (1994) Diplomacy. New York: Simon and Schuster.
    • Lawson, G. (2012) The eternal divide? History and international relations. European Journal of International Relations 18(2): 203-226.
    • Layne, C. (2008) Security studies and the use of history: Neville chamberlain's grand strategy revisited. Security Studies 17(3): 397-437.
    • Lebow, R.N. (2010) Forbidden Fruit: Counterfactuals and International Relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    • Levy, J. (1997) Too important to leave to the other: History and political science in their study of international relations. International Security 22(1): 22-33.
    • Lomperis, T.J. (2006) Dispelling the ghost: Iraq as the Vietnam war we cannot afford to lose. Journal of Conflict Studies 26(2): 5-24.
    • May, E.R. (1973) 'Lessons' of the Past: The Use and Misuse of History in American Foreign Policy. New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Meierhenrich, J. (2006) Analogies at War. Journal of Conflict and Security Law 11(1): 1-40.
    • Noon, D.H. (2004) Operation enduring analogy: World war two, the war on terror, and the uses of historical memory. Rhetoric and Public Affairs 7(3): 339-366.
    • Private Eye (2012) Diary. No.1319, 27 July-9 August, p. 26.
    • Purdum, T.S. (2005) Flashback to the 60's: A sinking sensation of parallels between Iraq and Vietnam. New York Times 29 January.
    • Record, J. (2007) The use and abuse of history: Munich, Vietnam and Iraq. Survival 49(1): 163-180.
    • Record, J. and Terrill, W.A. (2004) Iraq and Vietnam: Differences, Similarities and Insights. Honolulu, HA: University Press of the Pacific.
    • Reiter, D. (1994) Learning, realism and alliances: The weight of the shadow of the past. World Politics 46(4): 490-526.
    • Ricks, T.E. (2006) Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq. London: Penguin.
    • Roberts, G. (2006) History, theory and the narrative turn in IR. Review of International Studies 32(4): 703-714.
    • Rose, R. (1991) Comparing forms of comparative analysis. Political Studies 39(3): 446-462.
    • Schlesinger, A.M. (2005) War and the American Presidency, revised edn. New York: W.W. Norton.
    • Sheffield, G. (2008) Military past, military present, military future: The usefulness of military history. RUSI Journal 153(3): 102-107.
    • Springborg, R. (2011) Whither the Arab spring? 1989 or 1848? International Spectator: Italian Journal of International Affairs 46(3): 5-12.
    • Steiner, Z. (1997) On writing international history: Chaps, maps and much more. International Affairs 73(3): 531-546.
    • Tierney, D. (2007) 'Pearl harbor in reverse': Moral analogies in the Cuban missile crisis. Journal of Cold War Studies 9(3): 49-77.
    • Ulrichsen, K.C., Held, D. and Brahimi, A. (2011) The Arab 1989?, openDemocracy, 11 February. http://www.opendemocracy.net/kristian-coates-ulrichsen-david-held-alia-brahimi/arab-1989, accessed 31 July 2012.
    • Vertzberger, Y.Y.I. (1986) Foreign policy decisionmakers as practical-intuitive historians: Applied history and its shortcomings. International Studies Quarterly 30(2): 223-247.
    • Way, L. (2011) The lessons of 1989. Journal of Democracy 22(4): 17-27.
    • Woods, N. (ed.) (1996) Explaining International Relations Since 1945. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    • Woodward, B. (2002) Bush at War. New York: Simon & Schuster.
    • Zantovsky, M. (2011) 1989 and 2011: Compare and contrast. World Affairs Journal July/August. http:// worldaffairsjournal.org/print/3431, accessed 31 July 2012.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article