This book is a systematic effort by leading international scholars to map the trends in major-power warfare and explore whether it is waxing or waning. The main point of departure is that major-power war as a historical institution is in decline. This does not mean, though, that wars between states are in general disappearing. While there is some convergence in the conclusions by individual authors, they are by no means unanimous about the trend. The articles explore different causes and correlates of the declining trend in major-power warfare, including the impact of the international structure, nuclear weapons, international law, multilateral institutions, sovereignty and value changes.

This book is a systematic effort by leading international scholars to map the trends in major-power warfare and explore whether it is waxing or waning. The main point of departure is that major-power war as a historical institution is in decline. This does not mean, though, that wars between states are in general disappearing. While there is some convergence in the conclusions by individual authors, they are by no means unanimous about the trend. The articles explore different causes and correlates of the declining trend in major-power warfare, including the impact of the international structure, nuclear weapons, international law, multilateral institutions, sovereignty and value changes.

Throughout history, innovations in military technology have transformed warfare, which, in turn, affected state formation. This interplay between warfare, military technology, and state formation is the focus of this text. Theoretically grounded in the bellicist approach to the study of war and state, which posits that war is a normal part of human experience, the book argues that the threat of war by powerful, predatory neighbors has been, until relatively recently, the prime mover of state formation. Using a historical approach, it explains how advances in military technology have transformed war, and how new modes of war in turn have transformed forms of politico-military rule, especially with regard to the relationship between the state, armed force, and the people.

This book comprises contributions by leading experts in the field of international humanitarian law on the subject of the categorisation or classification of armed conflict. It is divided into two sections: the first aims to provide the reader with a sound understanding of the legal questions surrounding the classification of hostilities and its consequences; the second includes ten case studies that examine practice in respect of classification. Understanding how classification operates in theory and practice is a precursor to identifying the relevant rules that govern parties to hostilities. With changing forms of armed conflict which may involve multi-national operations, transnational armed groups and organized criminal gangs, the need for clarity of the law is all-important. The case studies selected for analysis are Northern Ireland, DRC, Colombia, Afghanistan (from 2001), Gaza, South Ossetia, Iraq (from 2003), Lebanon (2006), the so-called war against Al-Qaeda, and future trends. The studies explore the legal consequences of classification particularly in respect of the use of force, detention in armed conflict, and the relationship between human rights law and international humanitarian law. The practice identified in the case studies allows the final chapter to draw conclusions as to the state of the law on classification.

This book critically examines elements of America-First nationalism, neo-conservatism, neo-realism, neo-liberalism, environmental theories, and social constructionism by way of developing an “alternative realist” approach to the study of the origins of major power war. The author critiques concepts of “polarity” and “sovereign” decision making and diplomacy before developing the concept of “highly uneven polycentrism.” The book then develops a unique comparative historical approach that seeks to compare and contrast the pre-World War I, pre-World War II, and Cold War eras with the contemporary post-Cold War period. It is argued that the US, as it remains the leading global hegemon, must fully engage in multilateral diplomacy with major friends and rivals alike in the establishment of differing forms of power sharing and joint sovereignty accords—in order to prevent the global system from polarizing into two contending alliances more reminiscent of both the pre-World War I and pre-World War II periods than the “new Cold War.”

This book presents a collection of new and updated essays on what has come to be known as the territorial explanation of war. The book argues that a key both to peace and to war lies in understanding the role territory plays as a source of conflict and inter-group violence. Of all the issues that spark conflict, territorial disputes have the highest probability of escalating to war. War, however, is hardly inevitable; much depends on how territorial issues are handled. More importantly, settling territorial disputes and establishing mutually recognized boundaries can produce long periods of peace between neighbors, even if other salient issues arise. While territory is not the only cause of war and wars arise from other issues, territory is one of the main causes of war, and learning how to manage it, can, in principle, eliminate an entire class of wars. This book will be of great interest to all students of war and conflict studies, causes of war and peace, international security and strategic studies. John A. Vasquez is Thomas B. Mackie Scholar in International Relations at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. He is author of The Steps to War (2008) (with Paul Senese) and The War Puzzle Revisited (2009). He has been president of the Peace Science Society (International) and the International Studies Association. Marie T. Henehan is Director of Internships and Lecturer, Department of Political Science at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. She is author of Foreign Policy and Congress: An International Relations Perspective and co-editor of The Scientific Study of Peace and War.

Written by leading scholars in the field, Causes of War provides the first comprehensive analysis of the leading theories relating to the origins of both interstate and civil wars. Utilizes historical examples to illustrate individual theories throughout Includes an analysis of theories of civil wars as well as interstate wars -- one of the only texts to do both Written by two former International Studies Association Presidents

This book collects the key essays, together with updating notes and commentary, of Professor John Mueller on war and the role of ideas and opinions. Mueller has maintained that war (and peace) are, in essence, merely ideas, and that war has waned as the notion that 'peace' is a decidedly good idea has gained currency. The first part of the book extends this argument, noting that as ideas have spread, war is losing out not only in the developed world, but now in the developing one, and that even civil war is in marked decline. It also assesses and critiques theories arguing that this phenomenon is caused by the rising acceptance of democracy and/or capitalism. The second part argues that the Cold War was at base a clash of ideas that were seen to be threatening, not of arms balances, domestic systems, geography, or international structure. It also maintains that there has been a considerable tendency to exaggerate security threats—currently, in particular, the one presented by international terrorism—and to see them in excessively military terms. The third section deals with the role public opinion plays in foreign policy, and argues that many earlier conclusions about opinion during the Korean and Vietnam Wars, including especially ones concerning the importance of casualties in determining popular support for war, apply to more recent military ventures in the Persian Gulf, Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. It also assesses the difficulties leaders and idea entrepreneurs often encounter when they try to manage or manipulate public opinion. This book will be of much interest to students of international relations, security studies, foreign policy and international history.

Azar Gat sets out to resolve one of the age-old questions of human existence: why people fight and can they stop. Spanning warfare from prehistory to the 21st century, the book shows that, neither an irresistible drive nor a cultural invention, deadly violence and warfare have figured prominently in our behavioural toolkit since the dawn of our species. People have always alternated between cooperation, peaceful competition, and violence to attain evolution-shaped human desires. A marked shift in the balance between these options has occurred since the onset of the industrial age. Rather than modern war becoming more costly (it hasn't), it is peace that has become more rewarding. Scrutinizing existing theories concerning the decline of war - such as the 'democratic peace' and 'capitalist peace' - Gat shows that they in fact partake of a broader Modernization Peace that has been growing since 1815. By now, war has disappeared within the world's most developed areas. Finally, Gat explains why the Modernization Peace has been disrupted in the past, as during the two World Wars, and how challenges to it may still arise. They include claimants to alternative modernity - such as China and Russia - anti-modernists, and failed modernizers that may spawn terrorism, potentially unconventional. While the world has become more peaceful than ever before, there is still much to worry about in terms of security and no place for complacency.