Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Preface -- Contents -- Figures and Tables -- Summary -- Acknowledgments -- Abbreviations -- CHAPTER ONE: The Role of International Order in U.S. Strategy -- Risks to the Current Order -- Roadmap and Methodology -- CHAPTER TWO: Defining the International Order -- The Post-World War II, Rules-Based Liberal Order -- The Order's Purposes and Its Effects -- Conclusion and Policy Implications -- CHAPTER THREE: Engines of International Order -- Rational Pursuit of Common Interests -- Interests of a Hegemonic Power -- Domestic Politics -- Socialization and Constructed Identities -- Systemic Effects -- Conclusion and Policy Implications -- CHAPTER FOUR: U.S. Approach to the International Order -- U.S. Visions of the International Order -- The International Order in U.S. National Security Strategy Documents -- U.S. Interests and Approaches to the International Order -- Conclusion and Policy Implications -- CHAPTER FIVE: Implications for a Research Agenda -- References

In October the third report to the Club of Rome was published under the title Reshaping the International Order (RIO).1 It was formulated by a group of about twenty experts from developing as well as developed countries, including one from Romania. The initiative to undertake this study of the international order was taken by the Club of Rome Board, especially by its chairman Dr Aurelio Peccei and the study was financed by the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the initiative of the Minister for Development Cooperation, Jan Pronk. The report was presented to the Club of Rome in a meeting at Algiers, hosted by the Algerian Government, 25–28 October 1976. ; Summary of the RIO Report of the Club of Rome

Empire and International Order presents a critical examination of how useful the concept of empire is for understanding varieties of international order across time and place. Original contributions from an international team of upcoming and distinguished scholars analyse a wealth of theoretical approaches alongside contemporary themes enabling the reader to understand the desire to shift the ground of analysis away from the current literature of immediate issue of the US towards the disciplines of international relations, politics, and political/sociological theory.

"International Order in Theory and Practice" published on by Oxford University Press.

A review article on books by (1) Michael Ignatieff, Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond (London: Chatto & Windus, 2000); (2) Christopher Coker, Humane Warfare: The New Ethics of Postmodern War (London: Routledge, 2001); (3) Colin McInnes, Spectator Sport War: The West and Contemporary Conflict (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2002 [forthcoming]); & (4) Mary Kaldor, New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era (Cambridge: Polity, 1999). The Western world is confused by the nature of war & conflict in the contemporary world. It is confused by the trends in conflict that are at once both encouraging & alarming; & it is confused by the position in which Western powers find themselves, having manifest military superiority, but an equally manifest uncertainty over whether, & how, to use it. The books under discussion here represent different ways of tackling these problems & form a representative spectrum of the arguments currently circulating in the literature on conflict & war. There is general agreement that Western military power is somehow "out of sync" with the key trends in world politics, representing twentieth-century military power in a very literal sense. It is potentially omnipotent, but it will not risk losses: it confirms the power of the strong, yet the conflicts that matter take place among the weak; & its very omnipotence encourages the weak to search for new political weapons. As a discipline, international relations is only now getting to grips with what all this might imply for the future of conflict, human behavior, statehood, & institutions, & for the circumstances that dictate life (& death) for the majority of humanity. Adapted from the source document.

Frequent instances of intervention in current world affairs have threatened the status of nonintervention as a rule of international relations. Gathering evidence from history, law, sociology, and political science, R.J. Vincent concludes that the principle of nonintervention can and must remain viable. The author approaches the question from several angles, seeking to discover why the principle of nonintervention has been asserted as part of the law of nations; whether states in the past and present have conducted their foreign relations according to the principle of nonintervention; and w.