Since the sudden disappearance of the Soviet Union, many scholars have argued that the balance of power theory is losing its relevance. This text examines this viewpoint, as well as looking at systematic factors that may hinder or favour the return of balance of power politics.

This book explores all aspects of an important scholarly debate that has widespread implications for the political world, including the making of foreign policy--i.e., a debate over whether the contemporary theory of the balance of power as presented by Kenneth Waltz is a scientifically acceptable theory. It allows readers to examine and analyze the different views (in their original form) by all those in the debate and to come to their own conclusions. An Introduction gives an overview of the debate, defines and clarifies in simple language some of the major concepts used in philosophy of science, sets the historical context of the debate, and explains why it is important for both international relations theory and foreign policy making. An editorial commentary for each article highlights areas of agreement and disagreement with the other authors. First presents the original articles in the initial debate with responses from several of the leading international relations theorists in the field--Kenneth Waltz, Thomas Christensen, Jack Snyder, Colin Elman, Miriam Fendius Elman, Randall Schweller, and Stephen Walt. Then features response from scholars who take differing methodological approaches and who have disparate views on realism and balancing of power (e.g., Jack S. Levy, Paul W. Schroeder, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, Zeev Maoz, Richard Rosecrance, Charles L. Glaser, William C. Wohlforth, Michael Barnett). For anyone interested in the philosophical underpinnings of international relations.

The balance of power principle has been central to both the study and practice of international politics for over 300 years. It has guided governments in the conduct of foreign policy and provided a structure for explanations of some of the recurring patterns of international relations. This study examines the various meanings given to the balance of power over the centuries and traces the historical evolution of its theory and practice through steadily more complex forms. It describes the balance principle in practice, both as a guiding light of national foreign policies and as a structural explanation of how the international system operates. The reader is provided with an understanding of the various meanings of the balance principle and the key thinkers and politicians who have influenced its development. The text presents the essence of arguments concerning the morality of the principle as a foreign policy guide and its value as a structural explanation of the fundamental reality of international relations.

From the unification of North and South Yemen, to the struggle for Mahgreb unity, and the experiences of the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council, this book presents a complex portrait of the history and prospects for Arab integration.

Relying on a rich cache of previously classified notes, transcripts, cables, policy briefs, and memoranda, Andrew Cooper explains how oil drove, even corrupted, American foreign policy during a time when Cold War imperatives still applied, and tells why in the 1970s the U.S. switched its Middle East allegiance from the Shah of Iran to the Saudi royal family. Amid the oil shocks of the early 1970s, there was one man the U.S. could rely on: the Shah of Iran. The Shah sold us oil; we sold him weapons. But the U.S. and other industrialized economies could not tolerate repeated annual double digit increases in oil prices. During the 1976 election campaign, President Gerald Ford decided that he had to find a country that would break the OPEC monopoly and sell the U.S. oil more cheaply. On the advice of Treasury Secretary William Simon -- and against the advice of Secretary of State Henry Kissinger -- Ford made a deal to sell advanced weaponry to the Saudis in exchange for a more moderate price hike in oil. The Shah's economy was destabilized, and disaffected elements mobilized to overthrow him. The U.S. had embarked on a long relationship with the autocratic Saudi kingdom that continues to this day.

A multi-archival documentary history of British policy towards Nasser's Egypt under the Churchill, Eden, Macmillan, Home and Wilson governments. The primary focus of the study is an enquiry into the causes of the Anglo-Egyptian Cold War from 1952 to 1967.

One of the fundamental issues of international relations concerns whether, and under what conditions, stability prevails in anarchic systems--systems in which all authority and institutional restraints to action are wholly endogenous. This book uses the tools provided by contemporary game theory to develop a comprehensive theory of such systems and details both necessary and sufficient conditions for stability. The authors first define two forms of stability--system and resource stability. International political systems are said to be stable when no state confronts the possibility of a loss of sovereignty. Resource stability, in contrast, requires that the current distribution of wealth and power among states can change only due to differences in the vitality of economics. The theory developed in this book refines the classic balance of power theory and formally incorporates into that theory the consideration of endogenous resource growth, preventive war, war costs, and the imperatives of geography, revealing a fundamental conflict between the concepts of "balancers" and "central powers."

This new book provides a framework for understanding the international relations of armed groups, including terrorist organizations, insurgencies and warlords, which play an increasingly important role in the international system. Specifically, the book argues that such groups can be understood as taking part in the balance of power with states and other armed groups, as they are empirically sovereign non-state actors that are motivated by the pursuit of power and exist as part of an anarchic, self-help system. This radically new approach offers a renewed conceptualization of Neorealism, and provides new insights into debates about sovereignty, non-state actors, new wars, counterterrorism, and counterinsurgency. The approach is illustrated through case studies on Somali warlords, the security complex between the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), Sudan and Uganda, as well as Al Qaeda. The book provides insights into such issues as how non-state actors can be integrated into structural theories of international relations, and also offers pragmatic methodologies for the foreign policy or military practitioner, such as how to best deter terrorists.