ented toward improving national welfare.
Simultaneously, other theorists, such as James D. Morrow (1994), tend to view political activity and policy formation from the perspective of game theory. This suggests that decisions are made in the context of a competitive market and that decisions are designed to either outmaneuver an opponent or achieve parity with an opponent. Political games offer a mixture of zero sum (i.e., one player's loss is the other players gain in equal measure), variable-sum (i.e., multiple wins and losses occur), and positive or negative sum outcomes. As a metaphor for real world conflicts, game theory offers a lens through which policy shifts can be assessed with respect to the notion that policies are always designed to produce the most positive outcome for each player.
As Sodaro (2004) has stated, governments faced with developing foreign policies are not in a position to consider each policy case separately. Rather, in developing its overarching strategic foreign policy thrust, any government must consider all of the other actors with whom it will be involved and adjust specific focused policies to reflect attendant realities and influences. In other words, to put it at its simplest, a country seeking to enhance its relationship with country A must also take into consideration how such policies are likely to impact its relations with countries B, C, and so forth.
In the present study, the central issue is how U.S. foreign policies in three key Middle Eastern states are shaped and a determination of which of a set of specific variables are most directly shaping these policies in the post-September 11th world. There can be no doubt that the United States since 9/11 has dramatically changed many of its foreign policies with respect to the Middle East (Asner & Hall, 2004). What began as a declared War on Terror initially targeting Al-Qaeda has become something entirely different. The United...