The bipartisanship of appointments to the foreign policy bureaucracy is more affected by domestic factors than international

Many academics and commentators on American foreign policy have maintained that since the end of the Vietnam and Cold Wars, foreign policy-making has become subject to the kind of partisan political battles that have long afflicted domestic politics. By using data on over 1,000 individual appointees to the U.S. foreign policy bureaucracy Michael Flynn tests this view, and finds that there is no evidence to support the idea that bipartisanship in appointments has undergone a structural shift. He argues that domestic political conditions play an important part in promoting bipartisanship, and that as Congress has become more polarized, bipartisan appointments have become increasingly scarce. He warns that we should expect to see less bipartisan cooperation through presidential appointments in the future.