An empirically based critique of realism

Academics, NGOs, the United Nations, and individual nations are focused on the prevention and intervention of genocide. Traditionally, missions to prevent or intervene in genocide have been sporadic and under-resourced. The contributors to this volume consider some of the major stumbling blocks to the avoidance of genocide. Bartrop and Totten argue that realpolitik is the major impediment to the elimination of genocide. Campbell examines the lack of political will to confront genocide, and Theriault describes how denial becomes an obstacle to intervention against genocide. Loyle and Davenport discuss how intervention is impeded by a lack of reliable data on genocide violence, and Macgregor presents an overview of the influence of the media. Totten examines how the UN Convention on Genocide actually impedes anti-genocide efforts; and how the institutional configuration of the UN is itself often a stumbling block. Addressing an issue that is often overlooked, Travis examines the impact of global arms trade on genocide. Finally, Hiebert examines how international criminal prosecution of atrocities can impede preventive efforts, and Hirsch provides an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, and effectiveness of major international and national prescriptions developed over the last decade. The result is a distinguished addition to Transaction's prestigious Genocide Studies series.

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 1800, Europeans governed about one-third of the world's land surface; by the start of World War I in 1914, Europeans had imposed some form of political or economic ascendancy on over 80 percent of the globe. The basic structure of global and European politics in the twentieth century was fashioned in the previous century out of the clash of competing imperial interests and the effects, both beneficial and harmful, of the imperial powers on the societies they dominated. This encyclopedia offers current, detailed information on the major world powers and their global empires, as well as on the people, events, ideas, and movements, both European and non-European, that shaped the Age of Imperialism.

A formal theory of why some crises end in war

The realist theory of international relations is based on a particularly gloomy set of assumptions about universal human motives. Believing people to be essentially asocial, selfish, and untrustworthy, realism counsels a politics of distrust and competition in the international arena. What Moves Man subjects realism to a broad and deep critique. Freyberg-Inan argues, first, that realist psychology is incomplete and suffers from a pessimistic bias. Second, she explains how this bias systematically undermines both realist scholarship and efforts to promote international cooperation and peace. Third, she argues that realism's bias has a tendency to function as a self-fulfilling prophecy: it nurtures and promotes the very behaviors it assumes predominate human nature. Freyberg-Inan concludes by suggesting how a broader and more complex view of human motivation would deliver more complete explanations of international behavior, reduce the risk of bias, and better promote practical progress in the conduct of international affairs.