The United States maintains defense ties with as many as 60 countries, which not only enables its armed forces to maintain command globally and to project its force widely, but also enables its government to exert leverage over allies' foreign policies and military strategies. In Defending Frenemies, Jeffrey W. Taliaferro presents a historical and comparative analysis of how successive US presidential administrations have employed inducements and coercive diplomacy toward Israel, Pakistan, South Korea, and Taiwan over nuclear proliferation. Taliaferro shows that the ultimate goals in each administration, from John F. Kennedy to George H. W. Bush, have been to contain the Soviet Union's influence in the Middle East and South Asia and to enlist China as an ally of convenience against the Soviets in East Asia. Policymakers' inclinations to pursue either accommodative strategies or coercive nonproliferation strategies toward allies have therefore been directly linked to these primary objectives. Defending Frenemies is sharp examination of how regional power dynamics and US domestic politics have shaped the nonproliferation strategies the US has pursued toward vulnerable and often obstreperous allies.

The United States maintains defense ties with as many as 60 countries, which not only enables its armed forces to maintain command globally and to project its force widely, but also enables its government to exert leverage over allies' foreign policies and military strategies. In Defending Frenemies, Jeffrey W. Taliaferro presents a historical and comparative analysis of how successive US presidential administrations have employed inducements and coercive diplomacy toward Israel, Pakistan, South Korea, and Taiwan over nuclear proliferation. Taliaferro shows that the ultimate goals in each administration, from John F. Kennedy to George H. W. Bush, have been to contain the Soviet Union's influence in the Middle East and South Asia and to enlist China as an ally of convenience against the Soviets in East Asia. Policymakers' inclinations to pursue either accommodative strategies or coercive nonproliferation strategies toward allies have therefore been directly linked to these primary objectives. Defending Frenemies is sharp examination of how regional power dynamics and US domestic politics have shaped the nonproliferation strategies the US has pursued toward vulnerable and often obstreperous allies.

The contributors to this book explore approaches to building a framework for nuclear governance in the Asia-Pacific – encompassing nuclear safety, security, and safeguards/non-proliferation. Nuclear governance collaboration offers an avenue for states in the Asia-Pacific to tackle the emerging opportunities for and challenges to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and the civilian applications of nuclear and radioactive materials. The nature of national actions, bilateral initiatives and regional cooperation in capacity building taking place in East Asia provides a good foundation to pursue a more robust collaborative framework for nuclear governance in the wider Asia-Pacific region. The contributors to this book explore the most critical nuclear safety, security and non-proliferation issues faced by states in the Asia-Pacific and the growing cooperation spearheaded by Southeast Asian countries, China, Japan, South Korea and the United States. This book is a valuable read for academics working on security and strategic studies, international relations, non-traditional security issues as well as nuclear-related issues.

Alliance politics is a regular headline grabber. When a possible military crisis involving Russia, North Korea, or China rears its head, leaders and citizens alike raise concerns over the willingness of US allies to stand together. As rival powers have tightened their security cooperation, the United States has stepped up demands that its allies increase their defense spending and contribute more to military operations in the Middle East and elsewhere. The prospect of former President Donald Trump unilaterally ending alliances alarmed longstanding partners, even as NATO was welcoming new members into its ranks. Military Alliances in the Twenty-First Century is the first book to explore fully the politics that shape these security arrangements – from their initial formation through the various challenges that test them and, sometimes, lead to their demise. Across six thematic chapters, Alexander Lanoszka challenges conventional wisdom that has dominated our understanding of how military alliances have operated historically and into the present. Although military alliances today may seem uniquely hobbled by their internal difficulties, Lanoszka argues that they are in fact, by their very nature, prone to dysfunction.

Good addition to handbooks programme, no direct competitiors HIST section of ISA is growing each year Faced with an uncertain future, an increasing number of scholars have looked to the past for guidance, patterns and ideas. This tendency has been clear, despite theoretical and methodological difference, this book will fill a lacuna.

Realism is one of the core theories within the field of international relations, and it generally posits a state system characterized by anarchy where states act in what they perceive to be their own self interests. It is a controversial theory, and it has many opponents. Yet effective debate among realists and those who identify with other schools of thought has diminished dramatically over time. As Patrick James argues in Realism and International Relations, scholars in the field have become dissatisfied with results from exchanges in words alone. He contends that translation of the vast amount of information in the field into knowledge requires a greater emphasis on communication beyond the use of text. Given the challenges posed by existing and intensifying information overload, he develops a new model that relies on the graphic representation of analytical arguments. As James explains, realist scholarship in the post-World War II era is the natural domain for the application of systemism, a graphic form of expression with straightforward rules for portrayal of analytical arguments, notably cause and effect within theories. Systemism goes beyond prior iterations of systems theory to offer a visualization technique borrowed and adapted from the philosophy of science. Systemist graphics reveal the shortcomings, contributions and potential of realism. These visualizations, which focus on realist theories about war, are intended to bring order out of what critics tend to describe, with some justification, as chaos. In sum, a graphic turn for realism in particular and international relations in general is essential in order to achieve the scientific progress that otherwise is likely to remain elusive. A major theoretical work by an eminent scholar, this will be of interest to all theorists focusing how the international system of states actually functions.

"In 1940 Edmund Wilson was the undisputed big dog of American letters. Vladimir Nabokov was a near-penniless Russian exile seeking asylum in the States. Wilson became a mentor to Nabokov, introducing him to every editor of note, assigning reviews for The New Republic, engineering a Guggenheim. Their intimate friendship blossomed over a shared interest in all things Russian, ruffled a bit by political disagreements. But then came Lolita, and suddenly Nabokov was the big (and very rich) dog. Finally the feud erupted in full when Nabokov published his hugely footnoted and virtually unreadable literal translation of Pushkin's famously untranslatable verse novel Eugene Onegin. Wilson attacked his friend's translation with hammer and tong in the New York Review of Books. Nabokov counterattacked in the same publication. Back and forth the increasingly aggressive letters volleyed until their friendship was reduced to ashes by the narcissism of small differences"--