Elite Opinion Analysis


На русском

“The rationale for including élite images among the inputs of a foreign policy system is a simple truth: decision makers act in accordance with their perception of reality, not in response to reality itself. […] In any event, all decision-makers may be said to possess a set of images and to be governed by them in their response to foreign policy problems. Indeed, élite images are no less “real” than the reality of their environment and are much more relevant to an analysis of the foreign policy flow.” [7]

Presenting on elites perceptions in Israel
Presenting on elites perceptions in Palestine








Elite perceptions and attitudes of foreign counterparts (including the EU) are believed to one of the key inputs into a foreign policy system. Correspondingly, the identification of the patterns of foreign actors’ perceptions at the ‘elite’ level was to enhance the understanding of the conduct of foreign policy towards the EU by the the countries of Eastern and Southern Neighbourhoods, as well as the EU’s reactions (on an policy-making level) to the external images of the Union identified in the external regions in the course of this project.

In search for convergences and divergences of Ukrainian and EU elites’ perceptions
During the workshop in Leuven








Sampling strategy for the elite interviews included a random selection of the key informants across the country and across the various cohorts. The interviews take place in political and economic centers of each individual location.  The analysis involved comparison between perceptions of the EU expressed by elites in business, political, civil society and media sectors:

  • ‘Political elites’ are identified as primary political actors, with a primary focus on current members of national parliaments representing different parties and a secondary focus on government officials and servants.
  • ‘Business elites’ were identified as members of national business round tables, Chambers of Commerce, and other official business networks, and leading exporters to the EU.
  • ‘Civil society elite’ were identified as representatives of various non-government organizations and non-state-actors (both of international and local status)
  • ‘Media elites’ were identified as international, political and business editors, editors-in-chief, television news broadcast producers and both key locally- and Europe-based correspondents of the media outlets that were established as the national leaders in the EU coverage
  • ‘Culture elites’ were identified as writers, singers, artists, musicians, sportsmen and celebrities whose creative output influences debates in the public sphere and public perceptions of political actors.

C3EU team interviewed:

  • 50 elite representatives in Ukraine
  • 25 in Israel
  • 17 in Palestine
  • 23 in Brussels (EU practitioners dealing with Ukraine and the Middle East)
  • Total: 115 interviews
Presenting on EU elites opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Presenting on EU elites opinion regarding Russia-Ukraine conflict








The size and profile of the sample and the kind of data contemplated reinforced the choice of a data collection strategy, namely individual in-depth face-to-face semi-structured on-record interviews. This technique was argued to be a more personal, flexible, and respective of respondents’ privacy and status approach. Each interview lasted 60 minutes on average.


[7] Brecher, Michael (1968) India and World Politics: Krishna Menon’s View of the World. New York and Washington: Frederick A. Praeger, Publishers, p.298.

Questions? We'd love to hear from you!