Suchergebnisse

This essay identifies a difference of opinion over the role of nuclear weapons as an absolute deterrent as the basis for the theoretical disagreement between Kenneth Waltz & John Mearsheimer regarding whether security is attained through the maintenance of the status quo or through the aggressive elimination of potential rivals. The essay traces the writings of both scholars over a period of decades to demonstrate how Waltz has come to regard nuclear weapons as making conquest so unprofitable that possessing them provides absolute security. It also shows how Mearsheimer holds a more ambiguous position on the deterrent strength of nuclear weapons, which helps to explain why he believes that states still seek security through offensive action. The essay offers a guide to show how these important theories influence & shape current policy debates over the proliferation of nuclear weapons to both state & nonstate actors. Adapted from the source document.

Abstract
Why do states overestimate threats and, as a result, mount disproportionately strong and therefore costly balancing responses? To answer this question, we build a neoclassical realist theory of overbalancing to argue that unit-level intervening variables help generate a counterforce greater than what a structurally induced ideal response would call for. We identify the factors and conditions that steer states to deviate from realist, optimal policies, pinpoint the consequences of such suboptimal behavior, and provide policymakers with recommendations more suited to an interest-driven foreign policy in line with power considerations. We apply our theory to two distinct case studies: Egypt's costly intervention in Yemen in the 1960s and the American overreaction to the real, but very limited, threat posed by terrorism since 2001.

AbstractSome of the essential points of applying emergent realist theory to practice are sketched in this chapter. First a running conversation is offered to explain emergent realist evaluation; then an example pre‐proposal highlights important aspects of practice.

Neoclassical realism is a major theoretical approach to the study of foreign policy. In Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Relations, Norrin M. Ripsman, Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, and Steven E. Lobell argue that it can explain and predict a far broader range of political phenomena in international politics. Neoclassical realism challenges other approaches, including structural realism, liberalism, and constructivism.

This essay offers a programmatic statement for a realist theory of law. Although I have been influenced by (and written about) the work of earlier American, Scandinavian, Italian and other legal realists, this is not an essay about what others have thought. This is an essay about what I take realism about law to mean and what its theoretical commitments are; I shall use other realists to sometimes illustrate the distinctive positions of a realist theory of law, but will make clear where I depart from them. A realist theory of law involves both a "realist" and a "naturalistic" perspective on law. Let me explain how I understand these perspectives.

AbstractA theory of evaluation use must be contextualized within the venue in which use is expected. Use in policy‐making and social programming is analyzed with particular emphasis on shaping realist practice to increase the potential for utilization.