US National Security Elites' Attitudes towards Naming and Shaming

• In Event: Foreign Policy Decision-Making

Abstract

Are state national security bureaucracies receptive to naming and shaming strategies? Under what conditions do they experience shame as a result of their actions or of their association with the country they represent? This paper presents the results of a survey experiment of US national security elites conducted between October 2022 and January 2023. It introduces a theory of the micro-foundations of group-based shame for national security bureaucracies. The paper argues that elites indeed experience the emotion of shame, and this at both personal and group levels. The paper empirically examines elite responses to the case of a hypothetical violation of the Convention against Torture. The paper finds that while affective responses differ, government officials feel shame as a result of the violation of the international norm (torture prohibition), whilst naming and shaming campaigns are counterproductive in eliciting the desired effect (reparative action and/or pro-social behavior). The analysis is carried out via structural equation modeling, highlighting the effects of ideational and structural (utilitarian) drivers on the targeted actors’ responses to naming and shaming.

Authors

• Carlotta Maria Minnella, European University Institute

• Angela Andreella