This book adds a new dimension to the discussion of the relationship between the great powers and the weaker states that align with them—or not. Previous studies have focused on the role of the larger (or super) power and how it manages its relationships with other states, or on how great or major powers challenge or balance the hegemonic state. Beyond Great Powers and Hegemons seeks to explain why weaker states follow more powerful global or regional states or tacitly or openly resist their goals, and how they navigate their relationships with the hegemon. The authors explore the interests, motivations, objectives, and strategies of these 'followers'—including whether they can and do challenge the policies and strategies or the core position of the hegemon. Through the analysis of both historical and contemporary cases that feature global and regional hegemons in Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and South Asia, and that address a range of interest areas—from political, to economic and military—the book reveals the domestic and international factors that account for the motivations and actions of weaker states.

The bitter U.S. experience in Vietnam and the pain inflicted on theSoviet Union by its Afghanistan adventure have caused Washington andMoscow to rethink the costs and benefits of unilateral military interventionon behalf of threatened clients, especially in the third world. Also, asthe Cold War winds down, the crusading spirit that has driven superpowercompetition since the end of World War II appears increasingly anachronistic.Expenditures by the superpowers in pursuit of military superiority,or even to ensure parity, are now criticized for the security theydo not provide or for detracting from economic growth. The lattercriticism has grown in importance as the U.S. economy has confrontednew challenges from Japan and Germany and as the Soviet economystruggles to avoid collapse. Thus when Saddam Hussein's August 1990invasion of Kuwait challenged the political and economic status quo inthe oil-rich Middle East, neither the United States nor the Soviet Unionresponded unilaterally. Cooperatively they crafted an international consensusto confront the challenge.

The bitter U.S. experience in Vietnam and the pain inflicted on theSoviet Union by its Afghanistan adventure have caused Washington andMoscow to rethink the costs and benefits of unilateral military interventionon behalf of threatened clients, especially in the third world. Also, asthe Cold War winds down, the crusading spirit that has driven superpowercompetition since the end of World War II appears increasingly anachronistic.Expenditures by the superpowers in pursuit of military superiority, or even to ensure parity, are now criticized for the security theydo not provide or for detracting from economic growth. The lattercriticism has grown in importance as the U.S. economy has confrontednew challenges from Japan and Germany and as the Soviet economystruggles to avoid collapse. Thus when Saddam Hussein's August 1990invasion of Kuwait challenged the political and economic status quo inthe oil-rich Middle East, neither the United States nor the Soviet Unionresponded unilaterally. Cooperatively they crafted an international consensusto confront the challenge

The relationship between established powers and emerging powers is one of the most important topics in world politics. Nevertheless, few studies have investigated how the leading state in the international system responds to rising powers in peripheral regions—actors that are not yet and might never become great powers but that are still increasing their strength, extending their influence, and trying to reorder their corner of the world. In the Hegemon's Shadow fills this gap. Evan Braden Montgomery draws on different strands of realist theory to develop a novel framework that explains why leading states have accommodated some rising regional powers but opposed others. Montgomery examines the interaction between two factors: the type of local order that a leading state prefers and the type of local power shift that appears to be taking place. The first captures a leading state's main interest in a peripheral region and serves as the baseline for its evaluation of any changes in the status quo. Would the leading state like to see a balance of power rather than a preponderance of power, does it favor primacy over parity instead, or is it impartial between these alternatives? The second indicates how a local power shift is likely to unfold. In particular, which regional order is an emerging power trying to create and does a leading state expect it to succeed? Montgomery tests his arguments by analyzing Great Britain’s efforts to manage the rise of Egypt, the Confederacy, and Japan during the nineteenth century and the United States’ efforts to manage the emergence of India and Iraq during the twentieth century.

In this book, Feliciano de Sá Guimarães offers an original application of Role Theory. He proposes a theory of master role transitions to explain how small powers can change regional powers’ master roles without changing the regional material power distribution. Master role transition is the replacement of an active dominant master role by a dormant or inactive role located within one’s role repertoire. Guimarães argues that only a combination of four necessary conditions can produce a full master role transition: asymmetrical material interdependence, altercasting, domestic contestation and regional contestation. In each one of these conditions, a small power uses material and ideational tools to promote a master role transition within the regional power role repertoire. To test his model, Guimarães turns to five case studies in Latin America, Southern Africa and South Asia: the 2006–2007 Bolivia–Brazil gas crisis, the 2008–2009 Paraguay–Brazil Itaipú Dam crisis, the 2008–2009 Ecuador–Brazil Odebrecht crisis, the 1998 South Africa–Lesotho military intervention crisis and the 1996India–Bangladesh Ganges water crisis. A Theory of Master Role Transition is an excellent resource for those studying both theory and method in International Relations and foreign policy analysis.

"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.

In this book, Arturo Santa-Cruz advances an understanding of power as a social relationship and applies it consistently to the economic realm in United States relations with other countries of the Western Hemisphere. Following the academic and popular debate on the ebb and flow of US hegemony, this work centers the analysis in a critical case for the exercise of US power through its economic statecraft: the Americas—its historical zone of influence. The rationale for the regional focus is methodological: if it can be shown that Washington's sway has decreased in the area since the early 1970s, when the discussion about this matter started, it can be safely assumed that the same has occurred in other latitudes. The analysis focuses on three regions: North America, Central America and South America. Since each region contains countries that have at times maintained very different relationships with the United States, the findings contribute to a better understanding of the practice of US power in the sub-region in question, adding greater variability to the overall results. US Hegemony and the Americas: Power and Economic Statecraft in International Relations is an invaluable resource for students and scholars interested in Latin American History and Politics, North American Regional Integration, International Relations, Economic Statecraft, Political Economy and Comparative Politics.