More Bark than Bite: Explaining RIght-wing Populist Foreign Policy in Comparative Perspective

Conventional wisdom dictates that extreme-right populist parties (ERPs), leaders, and ideology pose a dire threat to multilateral cooperation among advanced democracies within the existing “liberal international order.” Such "demand-side" views stress their distinctive radical ideology, persuasive rhetoric, intense support, ruthless tactics, and international networks. This project challenges this view theoretically. A “supply-side” theory of policy, backed with examples, traces how and why the moderate domestic and international “political opportunity structure” surrounding such parties tightly constrains what concrete policies they can pursue—though that impact varies and, in rare circumstances, might even threaten major change. ERPs can only rarely change foreign policy without the acquiescence of centrist voters, parties, socioeconomic elites, and foreign governments—a sequential set of constraints that makes any foreign policy changes that threaten existing patterns of international policy coordination impossible except in rare circumstances. Such a theory can more accurately explain variation in the influence of such parties and movements on foreign policy. ERPs adapt by “barking than biting,” a performative strategy of giving extremists rhetoric and moderates policy.