19. Bartow, O.: A View from Below: Survival, Cohesion, and Brutality on the Eastern Front. Part IV: Soviet Politics and War Strategy, 1941. 20. Gorodetsky, G.: Stalin and Hitler's Attack on the Soviet Union. 21. Hoffmann, J.: The Soviet Union's Offensive Preparations in 1941. 22. Kirshin, Y.Y.: The Soviet Armed Forces on the Eve of the Great Patriotic War. 23. Bonwetsch, B.: The Purge of the Military and the Red Army's Operational Capability during the "Great Patriotic War". 24. Chor'kov, A, G.: The Red Army during the Initial Phase of the Great Patriotic War. 25. Harrison, M.: "Barbarossa": The Soviet Response, 1941. 26. Pinkus, B.: The Deportation of the German Minority in the Soviet Union, 1941-1945. 27. Volkogonow, D.A.: Stalin as Supreme Commander. Part V: Germany and the Soviet Union in International Politics. 28. Schönherr, K.: Neutrality, "Non-belligerence", or War: Turkey and the European Powers' Conflict of Interests, 1939-1941. 29. Petracchi, G.: Pinocchio, the Cat, and the Fox: Italy between Germany and the Soviet Union, 1939-1941. 30. Menger, M.: Germany and the Finnish "Separate War" against the Soviet Union. 31. Krebs, G.: Japan and the German-Soviet War, 1941. 32. Kimball, W.F.: "They don't come out where you expect": Roosevelt Reacts to the German-Soviet War. 33. Kettenacker, L.: Great Britain and the German Attack on the Soviet Union. 34. Bourgeois, D: Operation "Barbarossa" and Switzerland. 35. Wegner, B.: Facing the Global War: Germany's strategic Dilemma after the Failure of "Blitzkrieg".

Once the Pentecostal peace witness extended throughout the movement and around the world-but was eventually muted and almost completely lost in the American Assemblies of God. This book, which is "gripping, powerful, and prophetic," says Amos Yong, tells the story of that shift. "The antiwar, Christian, pacifist sentiments of the Assemblies of God that Alexander describes . . . juxtaposed in close proximity to their pro-war and anti-pacifist passion and identification with America . . . is simply striking," comments J. Denny Weaver, in the C. Henry Smith Series Editor's Foreword. The implications, observes Cheryl Bridges Johns, Professor of Christian Formation and Discipleship, Church of God, "are worth examining by all traditions asking, 'Will our children have faith?' At the same time, mentions Harvey Cox, Hollis Professor of Religion, Harvard Divinity School, Alexander's narrative "suggests that Pentecostals may yet reclaim this invaluable element of their heritage."

Peace is a universal ideal, but its political life is a great paradox: "peace" is the opposite of war, but it also enables war. If peace is the elimination of war, then what does it mean to wage war for the sake of peace? What does peace mean when some say that they are committed to it but that their enemies do not value it? Why is it that associating peace with other ideals, like justice, friendship, security, and law, does little to distance peace from war? Although political theory has dealt extensively with most major concepts that today define "the political" it has paid relatively scant critical attention to peace, the very concept that is often said to be the major aim and ideal of humanity. In War for Peace, Murad Idris looks at the ways that peace has been treated across the writings of ten thinkers from ancient and modern political thought, from Plato to Immanuel Kant and Sayyid Qutb, to produce an original and striking account of what peace means and how it works. Idris argues that peace is parasitical in that the addition of other ideals into peace, such as law, security, and friendship, reduces it to consensus and actually facilitates war; it is provincial in that its universalized content reflects particularistic desires and fears, constructions of difference, and hierarchies within humanity; and it is polemical, in that its idealization is not only the product of antagonisms, but also enables hostility. War for Peace uncovers the basis of peace's moralities and the political functions of its idealizations, historically and into the present. This bold and ambitious book confronts readers with the impurity of peace as an ideal, and the pressing need to think beyond universal peace.

The book is about the peace implementation process in Bosnia-Herzegovina viewed, or interpreted reasonably, as a continuation of war by other means. Twenty years after the beginning of the Dayton peace accords, we need to summarize the results: the author shares the general agreement in public opinion, according to which the process is a failure. Pehar presents a broad, yet sufficiently detailed, view of the entire peace agreement implementation that preserves 'the state of war,' and thus encourages the war-prone attitudes in the parties to the agreement. He examines the political and narratological underpinnings to the process of the imposed international (predominantly USA) interpretation of the Dayton constitution and peace treaty as a whole. The key issue is the – perhaps only semi-consciously applied – divide ut imperes strategy. After nearly twenty years, the peace in document was not translated into a peace on the ground because, with regard to the key political and constitutional issues and attitudes, Bosnia remains a deeply divided society. The book concludes that the international supervision served a counter-purpose: instead of correcting the aberration and guarding the meaning that was originally accepted in the Dayton peace treaty, the supervision approved the aberration and imposed it as a new norm under the clout of 'the power of ultimate interpretation.'

US foreign policy is undergoing a dire transformation, forever changing America’s place in the world. Institutions of diplomacy and development are bleeding out after deep budget cuts; the diplomats who make America’s deals and protect its citizens around the world are walking out in droves. Offices across the State Department sit empty, while abroad the military-industrial complex has assumed the work once undertaken by peacemakers. We’re becoming a nation that shoots first and asks questions later. In an astonishing journey from the corridors of power in Washington, DC, to some of the most remote and dangerous places on earth—Afghanistan, Somalia, and North Korea among them—acclaimed investigative journalist Ronan Farrow illuminates one of the most consequential and poorly understood changes in American history. His firsthand experience as a former State Department official affords a personal look at some of the last standard bearers of traditional statecraft, including Richard Holbrooke, who made peace in Bosnia and died while trying to do so in Afghanistan. Drawing on recently unearthed documents, and richly informed by rare interviews with whistle-blowers, a warlord, and policymakers—including every living former secretary of state from Henry Kissinger to Hillary Clinton to Rex Tillerson—and now updated with revealing firsthand accounts from inside Donald Trump’s confrontations with diplomats during his impeachment and candid testimonials from officials in Joe Biden’s inner circle, War on Peace makes a powerful case for an endangered profession. Diplomacy, Farrow argues, has declined after decades of political cowardice, shortsightedness, and outright malice—but it may just offer America a way out of a world at war.

The Mumbai blasts of 1993, the attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001, Mumbai 26/11—cross-border terrorism has continued unabated. What can India do to motivate Pakistan to do more to prevent such attacks? In the nuclear times that we live in, where a military counter-attack could escalate to destruction beyond imagination, overt warfare is clearly not an option. But since outright peace-making seems similarly infeasible, what combination of coercive pressure and bargaining could lead to peace? The authors provide, for the first time, a comprehensive assessment of the violent and non-violent options available to India for compelling Pakistan to take concrete steps towards curbing terrorism originating in its homeland. They draw on extensive interviews with senior Indian and Pakistani officials, in service and retired, to explore the challenges involved in compellence and to show how non-violent coercion combined with clarity on the economic, social and reputational costs of terrorism can better motivate Pakistan to pacify groups involved in cross-border terrorism. Not War, Not Peace? goes beyond the much discussed theories of nuclear deterrence and counterterrorism strategy to explore a new approach to resolving old conflicts.

"The memoir of a prominent member of the Manhattan Project, and an intimate friend of J. Robert Oppenheimer."--Jacket.