Immediate causes are proximate while underlying causes are more fundamental. Immediate causes can be defined as causes that trigger the outbreak of war. US government would inevitably invade Iraq and secure the natural oil sources for its future use whether Saddam Huseyin was a cruel leader or not. So the authoritarian and unjust ruling in Iraq was just an immediate cause US manipulated to start the inevitable invasion based on underlying causes--natural oil sources. Thus, the correct answer is B.  

The United Nations Security Council

The first category will be called as constructive power. This is the kind of power a country has when it does have determinative power on the outcome of an issue. In this case, the actor could decisively affect and shape the outcomes according to its desired objectives and goals

A famous quote generally attributed to American politician Thomas P. “Tip” O’Neill states that “All politics is local”. Undoubtedly the domestic political landscape does have a profound effect in shaping foreign policy. The strength of the government, the domestic political climate, the relations amongst political parties and between them and civil society have an important bearing on the decision making environment on foreign policy. After all, usually the most important element of decision-making process in foreign policy is the “political struggle and bargaining between groups” (Dougherty & Pfaltzgraff, 1990, p. 477) within a given polity. The aim for all actors involved in this process is, “to maximize its interests, agendas, and goals”

Apart from the impact of intertwined networks of relations between disparate groups with differing priorities, what complicates foreign policy decision making environment more is the impact of transnational actors on different elements of the society. Rosenau called this phenomenon “linkage politics”. Linkage politics is defined as “a recurrent sequence of behaviour that originates in one state and is reacted in another” (Rosenau, 1969, 45). Growing linkages between the international system and domestic environment, where foreign policy decisions are made, forces foreign policy analysts to re-examine the role of the state as the exclusive sentinel governing the relations of their own society with the rest of the world.

As also understood from the information given, all factors in the options have an important bearing on the decision making environment on foreign policy, so the correct answer is E.

The first image finds the major cause of war in the first level of analysis, or the individual level. Thus, the correct answer is D. 

Democratic peace theory holds that democratic states do not fight each other. The correct answer is E. 

Propaganda will obviously be more successful among groups that already share part of the ideas that are being disseminated. In other words, propaganda would be more successful in strengthening the coherence of similar thinking states or allies, rather than weakening resolve of opposite states or enemies. Propaganda would be more successful if the disseminated messages do not appear as propaganda (direct messaging) but part of the general news or believable reality. Similarly, propaganda would be more successful if it targets uninformed public, who is not closely interested in international affairs or do not already have form an opinion about them. the correct answer is D.

Carl Von Clausewitz: War is merely an extension of diplomacy by other means. It is an an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to fulfill our will, directed by political motives and morality.

The statements in B, C, D and E reflect characteristics of realist internationalism. 

Foreign policy preferences of states are not the same as foreign policy behaviors of states. While the former mainly refers to foreign policy predispositions and interests of states defined in a general and long-term perspective, the latter
denotes the implementation of those preferences by dint of particular policy behaviors on the ground. While the former are more abstract and long-term
oriented, the latter are more concrete and reflect short-term calculations.

Coercive powers are those that try to get what they want from others by coercing them to meet their choices.

There are some internal factors that influence foreign policy decisions, such as bureaucracy, interest groups, pressure groups, media and public opinion. Attentive public is a concept used to provide a framework for researches on public opinion. One can define attentive public as the “proportion of the people in mass society who hold articulate, informed and coherent attitudes about public policy issues” (Evans and Newnham, 1998, p. 38). As also understood from the information given, the concept defined as the “proportion of the people in mass society who hold articulate, informed and coherent attitudes about public policy issues, so the correct answer is E.

The definitions for the other concepts in the options are as follows:

Bureaucracy is any wide-reaching group of assigned officials in order to execute foreign policy decisions of the decision makers. The first usage of bureaucracy was when Max Weber (1864-1920) described the term as the most affective way to establish an organization and administration. Besides, its complex structure of offices, tasks, and rules shape bureaucracy as a large scale institution in order to coordinate the work of employees. In that vein, bureaucracy has a significant impact on foreign policy of which has become an important element of foreign policy literature by the 1960s. The role of the administrative structures of government on foreign policy decision making has become a key topic for the studies in that field. Within the scope of foreign policy, bureaucracy is viewed as a sort of synonym for governments which means a group of official individuals with different policy preferences.

An interest group is a group of people who share out a common interest. Putting it differently, these are organized groups of individuals that have an attraction on governments when it comes to foreign policy decisions. Labor unions, lobby groups, important figures in business, religious groups might be viewed as interest groups and each of them has distinctive characteristic when it comes to their impacts on foreign policies in their countries. Most interest groups have a participation system in which they can easily get in touch with each other in order to fulfill their goals whatever these goals are. When they interact with governments, interest groups mostly do two main things. First, interest groups attempt to shape policies by mobilizing the voters or through the way of putting direct pressure on officials. Second, they sometimes prefer to gather information for officials when the need arises. Within this framework, it may be said that well-funded interest groups can provide too costly information to governments when bureaucrats are not enable to reach them.

Pluralism is a term used to describe a political system which includes several different cultures, belief systems and lifestyles while working together by sharing common political aims within the framework of politics and tolerating each other in order to live together peacefully. As interest groups do, pressure groups also aim to influence governments, not take power themselves. For affecting governments, pressure groups are able to work in different environments with multiple variety of people through different ways like lobbying, media campaigning, and demonstrations. Within the scope of its multiple social environment of pressure groups, it may be said that the existence of pressure groups enhances pluralism in a society.

It should be said from the start that the concept of public opinion may be defined in many ways within the framework of foreign policy. In other words, in the literature on public opinion there exists a variety of definitions. For example, Pierre Bourdieu has approached to public opinion as if there is no such a thing like that by saying that “public opinion does not exist” (1979:124)”. Apart from the discussion about its ontology, one can define the concept of public opinion as “the attitudes and opinions of the population of a society. It is often often measured by through the the use of surveys” (Breuning, 2007, p.183). What is the most arguable point on this subject is what is the best way of measuring public opinion and the jury is still out there. Though public opinion surveys conducted perpetually, as claimed by Morin and Paquin (2018, p.167), “the press only reports a tiny selection of polls” and decision makers in foreign policy kept constantly be informed with these poll results as if these are important elements of public opinion.

Carl Von Clausewitz defines war as a continuation of politics by other means. The correct answer is A. 

Countries that pursue isolationism abroad would not put claims to regional or international leadership at the center of their foreign policy thinking, so the correct option is C.

Another country that has adopted an isolationist foreign policy is North Korea. Here, the logic of fragility is more prevailing than the logic of self-sufficiency even though the Pyongyang regime has put the logic of self-sufficiency at the center of its national interests since the end of the Korean War in 1953. The correct asnwer is C.

NATO a typical example of hard-balancing in that members bring their material power capabilities together with a view to resist common external threats.

Think-tanks are also one of those sub-state actors that create an impact on foreign policy. With respect to its meaning, one can state that “a think tank is an independently financed research institute concerned with the study of international relations and foreign policy issue areas” (Evans and Newnham, 1998, p.531-2).

There are rare occasions where the diplomats or their family members violate laws. In those situations, the host country informs the country of origin about the violation and the diplomat may be announced as persona non grata. 

Absolute war is a type of warfare which is unrestricted in terms of the weapons used, the territory or combatants involved, the objectives pursued and resources that are allocated. In an absolute war the whole society is seen as combatant and the land of the country is seen as a battlefield as a whole. In other words, the differentiation between combatants and non-combatants become indistinct and sometimes it even
vanishes entirely because nearly every human resource can be considered to be a part of the war in absolute wars.

A treaty alliance is not a domestic actor that influences foreign policy.