Can States Be Interviewed?

Abstract

While states are not human beings, they are institutionalized social groups. It is humans who constitute and run them. Consequently, it is argued that countries can be interviewed. This claim is based on in-depth interviews with seventy Israeli and British officials, which “captured” states’ anxiety. In ontological security studies, countries’ anxieties are typically inferred from historical and narrative analysis. The article lays another path to establish that states are anxious. Despite the increasing acknowledgement of the “emotional turn” in international relations, there is a notable lack of methodological focus on how emotions impact statecraft. This study bridges the gap by showing how interviewing can investigate the internal lives of states. The research also addresses critiques of ontological security studies, namely the challenge of applying an individual-level concept to state behavior and empirically validating its relevance in statecraft. It traced how officials’ anxiety about their country’s policies “scales up” to the state level. The rich evidence—coming from country officials themselves—affirmed ontological security’s capacity to explain state behavior and underscored the importance of integrating political psychology into international relations research. Moreover, it is the first study to use elite interviews to investigate whether countries experience ontological insecurity.