How can different foreign policy strategies and instruments in international politics be explained? Using role theory and the ideal-type concept of civilian power, the study initially develops a promising method for analysis and evaluation. Empirically, the approach is tested against the rhetoric and foreign policy behavior of the USA and the Federal Republic from 1985 to 1997. Case studies analyze the two actors in the Gulf conflict of 1990-91, in the '2+4 negotiations', in bilateral trade relations, and in the Yugoslav crisis. The book highlights the civilian power character of both actors, assesses the shaping ability of the different strategies, and explains the specific patterns of action with individual role perceptions. Measured against the ideal type, the Federal Republic qualifies more as a civilian power, while the USA shows clear characteristics of the opposite type of a classical great power alongside elements of civilian power.