Do great leaders make history? Or are they compelled to act by historical circumstance? This debate has remained unresolved since Thomas Carlyle and Karl Marx framed it in the mid-nineteenth century, yet implicit answers inform our policies and our views of history. In this book, Professor Bear F. Braumoeller argues persuasively that both perspectives are correct: leaders shape the main material and ideological forces of history that subsequently constrain and compel them. His studies of the Congress of Vienna, the interwar period, and the end of the Cold War illustrate this dynamic, and the data he marshals provide systematic evidence that leaders both shape and are constrained by the structure of the international system.

This timely book provides a general overview of Great Power politics and world order from 1500 to the present. Jeremy Black provides several historical case-studies, each of which throws light on both the power in question and the international system of the period, and how it had developed from the preceding period. The point of departure for this

Hierarchical relationships—rules that structure both international and domestic politics—are pervasive. Yet we know little about how these relationships are constructed, maintained, and dismantled. This book fills this lacuna through a two-pronged research approach: first, it discusses how great power negotiations over international political settlements both respond to domestic politics within weak states and structure the specific forms that hierarchy takes. Second, it deduces three sets of hypotheses about hierarchy maintenance, construction, and collapse during the post-war era. By offering a coherent theoretical model of hierarchical politics within weaker states, the author is able to answer a number of important questions, including: Why does the United States often ally with autocratic states even though its most enduring relationships are with democracies? Why do autocratic hierarchical relationships require interstate coercion? Why do some hierarchies end violently and others peacefully? Why does hierarchical competition sometimes lead to interstate conflict and sometimes to civil conflict?

Drawing on Iran’s history and its relations with great powers and regional neighbours, this book addresses the question of how much continuity and/or change there is in Iranian international relations since the Iranian revolution. Iran has often been at the centre of the political debate on both the Gulf region and the transatlantic relations. Following the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the Viennese nuclear agreement in May 2018 signed by the five permanent members of the UN-Security Council, the relationship between Iran and the world entered a new phase. With high expectations within Iran for improved relations with Europe, the this book calls for a new and innovative approach to be undertaken by the Iranian leadership towards the US, Europe and Asia if Iran is to find a role for itself within regional and international structures. Exploring power relations, negotiations, the role of international institutions and international law, the contributors consider the relations among central powers that influence Iran’s internal and external affairs; and examine Iran’s domestic motives and role in the local and regional context. This book will be of interest to scholars and students of Politics, International Relations, Iranian Politics, Iranian Foreign Policy. It may also provide insights for policymakers, journalists, and the military.

Illuminates the interplay between regional concerns and the international context, which together define the hierarchy of states. Building on case studies, this book demonstrates that this status cannot be attained solely by building a military or economic power base.

When and why do powerful countries seek to enact major changes to international order, the broad set of rules that guide behavior in world politics? This question is particularly important today given the Trump administration's clear disregard for the reigning liberal international order in the United States. Across the globe, there is also uncertainty over what China might seek to replace that order with as it continues to amass power and influence. Together, these developments mean that what motivates great powers to shape and change order will remain at the forefront of debates over the future of world politics. Prior studies have focused on how the origins of international orders have been consensus-driven and inclusive. By contrast, Kyle M. Lascurettes argues in Orders of Exclusion that the propelling motivation for great power order building has typically been exclusionary. Dominant powers pursue fundamental changes to order when they perceive a major new threat on the horizon. Moreover, they do so for the purpose of targeting this perceived threat, be it another powerful state or a foreboding ideological movement. The goal of foundational rule writing in international relations, then, is blocking that threatening entity from amassing further influence, a motive Lascurettes illustrates at work across more than three hundred years of history. Far from falling outside of the bounds of traditional statecraft, order building is the continuation of power politics by other means.