Even in a case where the advancement of an ideology becomes the overriding concern of foreign policy, it might only be realized through a process where the decision-makers; thoroughly realize their context defining the environment, understand constrains determining their limits, appreciate means that are available to them and evaluate opportunities they might benefit from. Therefore, they might come up with a proper, realistic framework of action that would manifest itself as behavior aiming to determine and fulfill their goals and reach foreign policy objectives. Only after such part cognitive, part tangible process is realized a state might start to meaningfully, i.e. with a significant probability of success given the limits imposed, pursue an objective that involves ideational, ideological prerogatives. The term used to define this process is logic of consequences, how actors make rationally generated decisions by calculating and choosing the action that maximizes their interest.

Firstly, media can exert pressure on major agents in foreign policy
to follow a stance on foreign policy problems which have been disregarded at one point. Secondly, as it is explained by the cognitive approaches to foreign policy, one can claim that human mind is limited, and it is impossible to absorb all the relevant knowledge from the social environment.Theses are all related to CNN effect.

States might think that they have the power capability to protect their territorial integrity and other key national interests by isolating themselves from the external environment.

Cognitive Miser is a concept that refers to the tendency of human beings to avoid spending computational effort and resorting to facile ways in solving problems. This phenomena is accepted as a natural tendency that is had regardless of the level of intelligence of the person

The immediate cause of a war

CNN effect is a term used to portray “… circumstances in which news media coverage directly affects foreign policy decision-making, causing policy makers to pursue course of action that, in the absence of media pressure, they would not have embarked upon” (Smith, Hadfield, and Dunne, 2008, p.390).

Bhutan

Decision units are individuals and groups of individuals who are authorized and responsible for foreign policy making of a state.

Thomas Hobbes: One of the most prominent founders of the realist thought Hobbes defines war as “an extension of the state of nature which is the condition of war of all against all”. The state of nature, the natural condition of mankind is also a condition of war of all against all in which human beings constantly seek to destroy each other in an incessant pursuit for power.

When Ottoman Empire’s military might start to wane in comparison to its neighbours, after the reforms initiated by Selim III from 1789 onwards to modernize the state, ad hoc diplomacy gradually gave way to continuous diplomacy and the first Ottoman permanent ambassador, Yusuf Agah Efendi, was appointed in 1793 to the Court of St James’s, London.

Fundamentally the assumption about rationality of the decision-makers is that they act upon objective data and prefer a formal process of analysis to intuition and subjectivity. Ideally, the model also assumes that the decision maker has full or perfect information (a state where all data germane to a particular issue, decision, is known and available) on the circumstances of the situation and about the alternatives available. In his seminal book on decision processes, Graham Allison (1971, p.30) prescribes rationality as “consistent, value-maximizing choice within specific constrains”. The decision-makers are portrayed as individuals with the cognitive ability, and resources to evaluate and compare alternatives in the available time frame with the ultimate aim of maximizing utility and minimizing associated costs. So, rational decision makers on foreign policy are “those who are open to arguments and evidence, free of serious blinkers as they weigh the evidence and think about the likely consequences of options” (Stein, 2008, 131). A litmus test of what constitutes a rationally reached decision is that, ideally, when presented with identical information, all rational decision makers would arrive to the same conclusion for the decision in question. A logical deduction from the foregoing conjecture is that collective decision making processes should be favored as due to the deliberative nature and inherent checks and balances involved they would often tend to generate rational outcomes. What is more, not all decisions are taken under perfect information, and there are psychological and intellectual limits of human beings. These limitations, coupled with the human tendencies like the desire to simplify the world, taking shortcuts, the difficulties of processing complex sets of variables in mind simultaneously, especially when we are faced with a situation that fall beyond our expertise – and at times even on issues that we hold a certain expertise on, creates a decision environment where perfectly rational decision making is not possible. As a result, people tend to consent to “satisfice” themselves by sequentially analyzing the choices available until they find one that “meets their minimum standards of acceptability, one that will “suffice” and “satisfy” (Gerner, 1995, p.25). Policy makers do frequently ‘muddle through’ looking for outcomes that are the best available given the set of parameters they face. This phenomenon is defined as bounded rationality. The concepts of bounded rationality and “satisficing” were first developed by Herbert Simon (1965). Simon’s argument was that the decision-making problems were so complex that the decision-makers were only able to tackle a certain number of aspects at a given time. This makes reaching optimum estimations pretty hard. “It is impossible to consider all alternatives so policy-makers tend to consider the most obvious, most attainable, most reasonable, etc. Of course, as the actual decision process proceeds other alternatives may occur or originally conceived alternatives may disappear” (Evans and Newnham, 1998, p.464).

As also understood from the information given, the assumptions in the option III “Not all decisions are taken under perfect information, and there are psychological and intellectual limits of human beings.”, in the option IV “Psychological and intellectual limits of human beings, coupled with the human tendencies create a decision environment where perfectly rational decision making is not possible.” and in the option V “People tend to consent to “satisfice” themselves by sequentially analyzing the choices available until they find one that “meets their minimum standards of acceptability, one that will “suffice” and “satisfy”.” are related to bounded rationality concept, so the correct answer is D.

The assumptions in the option I “The decision-makers act upon objective data and prefer a formal process of analysis to intuition and subjectivity.” and “ The decision maker has full or perfect information on the circumstances of the situation and about the alternatives available.” are related to rationality.

Compared to the United States, the European Union has been alleged to pursue soft power strategies vis-à-vis the countries that lay outside the EU, particularly those that aspire to join the club one day in future. The correct answer is E.

While I and IV are about the cognitive school of thought, II and III are about the Rational Actor Model. The correct option is B.

Implementation is described as a set of discrete acts or as a process.

Irving Janis and Leon Mann developed the motivational model of decision making in 1977.

Boycott aims to prevent either importing certain goods from the boycotted country or less frequently exporting certain products into that country. Boycott usually applies asa reaction to some policies of a country against which the boycott is launched. Thus, the correct answer is B. 

Active neutrality was the policy that war pursued by Turkey during the Second World War.

The US President decided to place a naval blockade around Cuba to prevent the Soviet Union from delivering military supplies to Cuba and also demanded the removal of the missiles, which were already brought to Cuba covertly. As a result of the threat to use force, as well as the US promise to remove Jupiter missiles from Turkey, the Soviet Union decided to remove its missiles from Cuba. This is a form of coercive diplomacy, so the correct answer is A.

Although four of the options are opposing wars, Asymmetric warfare is one of unconventional warfares. Thus, the correct answer is A.

Absolute war