As each power vies for its national interests on the world stage, how do its own citizens' democratic interests fare at home? Alan Gilbert speaks to an issue at the heart of current international-relations debate. He contends that, in spite of neo-realists' assumptions, a vocal citizen democracy can and must have a role in global politics. Further, he shows that all the major versions of realism and neo-realism, if properly stated with a view of the national interest as a common good, surprisingly lead to democracy. His most striking example focuses on realist criticisms of the Vietnam War. Democratic internationalism, as Gilbert terms it, is really the linking of citizens' interests across national boundaries to overcome the antidemocratic actions of their own governments. Realist misinterpretations have overlooked Thucydides' theme about how a democracy corrupts itself through imperial expansion as well as Karl Marx's observations about the positive effects of democratic movements in one country on events in others. Gilbert also explodes the democratic peace myth that democratic states do not wage war on one another. He suggests instead policies to accord with the interests of ordinary citizens whose shared bond is a desire for peace. Gilbert shows, through such successes as recent treaties on land mines and policies to slow global warming that citizen movements can have salutary effects. His theory of "deliberative democracy" proposes institutional changes that would give the voice of ordinary citizens a greater influence on the international actions of their own government.

This essay examines four contending schools of American foreign policy.

"A superb book.…Mearsheimer has made a significant contribution to our understanding of the behavior of great powers."—Barry R. Posen, The National Interest The updated edition of this classic treatise on the behavior of great powers takes a penetrating look at the question likely to dominate international relations in the twenty-first century: Can China rise peacefully? In clear, eloquent prose, John Mearsheimer explains why the answer is no: a rising China will seek to dominate Asia, while the United States, determined to remain the world's sole regional hegemon, will go to great lengths to prevent that from happening. The tragedy of great power politics is inescapable.

History and International Relations examines, from a historian's perspective, the evolution of international relations as a discipline and charts its engagement with the history of war, peace, and foreign relations from the ancient world to the present day. In three parts, it looks at the field's development, its contribution to historical narrative, and its contemporary practice: Part I: 'The History of a Discipline' locates the development of IR scholarship in its own historical contexts, examining the origin of dominant IR theories, their use of historical evidence, and their relation to other social science disciplines. Part II: 'IR and International History' explores key moments in the history of war and peace, from the Peloponnesian War to the Cold War and beyond, and the role they played in constructing the discipline. Part III: 'Contemporary IR and the Uses of History' reflects on the current ferment in IR over its Eurocentric theory and practice, its key concepts of state and sovereignty, the impact of non-state actors and human rights, and 'the return of history.'

Forfatterens mål med denne bog er: 1) Analyse af de gældende teorier for international politik og hvad der heri er lagt størst vægt på. 2) Konstruktion af en teori for international politik som kan kan råde bod på de mangler, der er i de nu gældende. 3) Afprøvning af den rekonstruerede teori på faktiske hændelsesforløb.

Student-friendly and professor-endorsed, Dynamics of International Relations is an innovative, introductory level core text. It compares realist and idealist theories and the paradigm of interdependence against case studies of recurrent problems--why wage war, how to make peace, how to transcend conflict, when and where to mediate, how to increase GDP but also quality of life, and how to organize for peace and promote human rights. Against a backdrop of the threat of terrorism, Clemens clearly demonstrates both the danger and opportunities inherent in a growing global interdependence.

Henderson (political science, Wayne State U.) uses the same basic research design of the democratic peace proposition (DPP)--which contends that democracies rarely fight each other, are generally more peaceful than nondemocracies, and rarely experience civil war--to challenge the validity of the DPP. His results indicate that democracy is not significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of international war, militarized disputes, or civil wars in postcolonial states. He finds that in war between states and nonstate actors, such as colonial and imperial wars, democracies in general are less likely but Western states, specifically, are more likely to become involved in this type of "extrastate" war. He argues that global peace will require more than a worldwide spread of democracy. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR