To what extent are U.S. elected officials polarized on foreign policy? And how do patterns of polarization and bipartisanship differ across policy areas? Using an original data set of nearly 3000 important congressional votes since the end of the Cold War, we find that severe polarization remains the exception rather than the norm in U.S. foreign policy debates and that the U.S. Congress is still less polarized on international than on domestic issues. We also show that foreign policy bipartisanship regularly takes several forms, including bipartisan agreement in support of the president’s policies, cross-partisan coalitions, and even bipartisan opposition to the president’s policies. Collectively, our findings provide a more nuanced portrait of the politics of U.S. foreign policy than many recent accounts, point to persistent differences in the political alignments associated with different policy areas, and highlight the importance of conceiving of polarization and bipartisanship as more than binary categories.

美国民选官员在外交政策上的两极分化程度如何？不同政策领域的两极分化和两党合作模式有何不同？使用冷战结束以来近 3000 张重要国会选票的原始数据集，我们发现严重两极分化仍然是美国外交政策辩论中的例外而不是常态，美国国会在国际上的两极分化仍然少于国内。问题。我们还表明，外交政策的两党合作经常采取多种形式，包括支持总统政策的两党协议、跨党派联盟，甚至两党反对总统的政策。总的来说，我们的发现比最近的许多报道更细致地描述了美国外交政策的政治，