7/27/2019 5885525

1/77

International Relations theory

After victory: institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major

wars. By G. John Ikenberry. Oxford, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. . pp.Index. .. ISBN . Pb.: .. ISBN .

This is unquestionably one of the most important books in the field of the past decade, andanybody familiar with the series of high-profile articles written by the author will already havea sense of the overall argument. Like Henry Kissinger, Ikenberry is interested in the nature ofhistorical international orders, and why some are more durable and stable than others. However,while Kissinger assessed that stability solely in terms of the degree of acceptability of the orderto all the Great Powers, Ikenberry makes a profound theoretical statement about the constitu-

tionality of some orders, and particularly of the one that has developed since .This issues inhis perhaps unique blend of realist and liberal positions.The framework sets the scene for anintriguing analysis of the post-Cold War order, and whether it should be regarded as hegemonicor constitutional.

The authors basic position is that, in any order-defining postwar settlement, the victors face achoice of exacting by means of power, or of exercising a degree of strategic restraint in whichthe returns to power are diminished. In this latter case, the order emerges as a trade-off betweenvictors and vanquished and, to the degree that it becomes institutionalized, the victors need torely less upon coercion to uphold it.The bonus for them is that the order remains stable, evenwhen the power of the victors begins to decline.Readers will not be surprised at the theoreticalvigour and originality of Ikenberrys exposition.What might be less expected is the very detailed

and serious historical engagements with the , and settlements which constitutefully one half of this book, and which are by themselves erudite historical statements, based uponextensive scholarship.These chapters can be read, with great profit,by all international historians.

Does the argument, applied to the post-Cold War context, convince? Not quite, but ifIkenberry is wrong, he is so for mostly the right reasons. He is surely correct to insist on thesubstantial continuities between the Cold War and post-Cold War orders. Many of the charac-teristic features of the world today were already formed in the period after. But one of thesecharacteristics was American hegemony, which has assuredly not diminished since the end of theCold War. It is the tension between Ikenberrys own account of American hegemony, and hisvision of a constitutional order, that raises the key problems in this book.To be fair, the authoracknowledges as much in his remarks about the NATO bombing of Serbia in (p. ), but

he does not resolve that inner tension.How US unilateralism is to be contained by the new orderhas, of course, become a more pressing issue since the change of presidency, and after his book

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

2/77

was completed. For that reason,many readers may well demur from some of Ikenberrys conclu-sions, but all should certainly read the book in the first place.

Ian Clark, University of Wales,Aberystwyth, UK

World politics: progress and its limits. By James Mayall. Cambridge: Polity Press. .pp. Index. .. ISBN .Pb.:.. ISBN .

James Mayall describes this book as short. But it is short only in length. It is not short on ideas,and it is certainly not short on ambition. It aims no less than to take stock of the state of worldaffairs at the start of the new millennium.And in doing so, Mayall ranges across the history andphilosophy of international relations over the last years.What gives point and shape to hisdiscussion is the concept of international society. For Mayall, this concept opens the way to acomparative sociology that allows us to take account of both continuity and change in thehistory of international relations, but it also makes it possible to offer a narrative that exposes thepassion and drama of the past.

International society provides a framework that describes the context of international relationsin terms of institutions, such as law, diplomacy and the balance of power, on the one hand, and

principles, such as sovereignty, territorial integrity and human rights, on the other. Mayall is,therefore, very much following in the wake left by Martin Wight and Hedley Bull. Indeed, it ispossible to see this book as an extension of Bulls The anarchical society: re-exploring Bulls ideasin the light of events that have taken place over the twenty-five years since Bull produced hisinfluential assessment of international society. Mayall, for example, draws heavily on Bullsdistinction between solidarist and pluralist conceptions of international society. Curiously, Bulldoes not make anything of this significant distinction in The anarchical society.

Although Mayall does sketch the competing stories of how international society has developedsince its inception in the seventeenth century, the primary focus is on the twentieth century, andin particular the putative changes that have taken place since the end of the Cold War.International society is explored in terms of its members, its boundaries and the modifications

that have taken place in its institutions and principles. But at the heart of the book is the analysisof sovereignty, democracy and intervention.

Somewhat disarmingly, Mayall insists that he has adopted, deliberately, an old-fashionedapproach in this book. I think he means by this that he has written in a style that is readily acces-sible. But perhaps he is referring to the paucity of footnotes. Or, much more significantly, hecould be drawing attention to his belief that most of the fundamental issues in internationalrelations are moral ones.And for this reason, he wants to establish a framework that allows theseissues to be debated by both citizens and academic experts.

It is also just possible that Mayall views his profound scepticism of liberal attempts to managethe world order in the aftermath of the Cold War as old-fashioned.This scepticism certainly givesrise to some of the most arresting analysis in the book. He compares economic sanctions, forexample, to siege warfare,where there was a deliberate use of violence to bring about submissionthrough starvation. By the same token, economic sanctions are seen to perpetrate invisibleviolence where the responsibility for the action is shifted onto the victims and is often barelyacknowledged by the instigators. It is this refusal to take responsibility for actions and outcomesthat Mayall finds most disturbing about the post-Cold War era. He provides telling evidence forthis line of argument from cases like East Timor and Kosovo.He calls for the restoration of a newrealism where decision-makers do take responsibility for their actions.

This is a little book that reflects long and hard thinking about difficult subjects. It will repaymore than one reading and represents an important contribution to the canon of works from theEnglish school of International Relations.

Richard Little, University of Bristol, UK

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

3/77

Identities, borders, orders: rethinking International Relations theory. Edited by

Mathias Albert, David Jacobson, and Yosef Lapid. Minneapolis, MN: University ofMinnesota Press. . pp. Index. .. ISBN . Pb.: .. ISBN .

For some time now, and especially since the end of the Cold War,International Relations scholars

have been questioning whether the dominant Westphalian model of international politics, amodel that depicts the world in terms of a multiplicity of sovereign nation-states exercisingexclusive authority over a population living within the confines of a territorially demarcatedspace, can continue to provide an appropriate analytical framework for understanding theimportant events that are shaping the contemporary world.The tragic events of, and following, September would seem to provide additional evidence for those who have been arguingthat that we are witnessing a fundamental transformation in the basic practices and processes thatconstitute the Westphalian state system. The provocative chapters in this truly interesting andtimely book, written by a network of scholars who are affiliated with the Identities, Borders,Orders Group, all describe, in various ways, how the central categories and units of analysis thatare derived from the Westphalian model are no longer adequate when it comes to understanding,

in John Ruggies terms,what makes the world hang together in the international sense.Yet whatdifferentiates this book from the many others that are attempting to convince us that theWestphalian order is finally coming undone is the painstaking effort that is made to develop analternative theoretical framework that can help us to conceptualize the central factors shapingthe uncertain post-Cold War world.

The central innovation introduced in this book is referred to as the Identities, Borders, Orders(IBO) triad that is claimed by its proponents to provide an important new heuristic tool forrethinking familiar concepts in the field, such as the state, the international, and the political, andfor coming to grips with the transformative practices of integration and fragmentation.YosefLapid explains that the book is premised on the idea that the road to a better theory of inter-national relations passes through the intersections of the IBO triad (p. ). Yet in both the

introduction and the conclusion, it is made clear that the IBO project is not another attempt tobuild grand theory, but rather one that deliberately is pluralistic, cross-disciplinary, and anti-foundationalist in its quest to comprehend a world that is argued to be in a constant state of flux.In this sense, the IBO triad is to be considered as an analytical point of departure not only forrethinking the key concepts that form the triad, but also for examining the interesting relations,interactions, and meanings that can be found in various manifestations of the IBO framework. Itis shown,for example, that the same phenomenon can be situated at different intersections of theIBO triad, such as the identities/borders nexus or the borders/orders nexus to highlight how thistool can be employed to reorient research in previously unimagined directions.

The individual chapters succeed in showing the reader how the IBO triad offers a powerfulanalytical window for critically examining many of the standard assumptions that inform tradi-

tional International Relations theory and for opening new possibilities and providing arefreshingly new perspective on a variety of important issue areas. Some of the substantive issuesthat the contributors address include nationalism, migration, human rights, democratization, warand citizenship.The book is divided into two parts. Part I is devoted to rethinking the interna-tional category that Westphalia allegedly demarcated from the domestic. All of the chapters inthis section address how, if at all, the international continues to hang together in a post-Westphalian world that is offering a radically new configuration of identities, borders and(dis)orders. In the process, many of the authors provide a powerful account of how theWestphalian order is being transformed. Part follows logically and each of the chaptersundertake the task of rethinking the meaning of the political. The IBO triad is shown to beespecially insightful when it comes to understanding the politics of inclusion and exclusion.The

chapters demonstrate that thinking through the political using IBO terms is currently tanta-mount to rethinking it (p. ).

International Relations theory

7/27/2019 5885525

4/77

There is little doubt that this book may prove to be disconcerting to some readers, but theauthors would likely reply that this is the price that we have to pay for living in a period ofunprecedented change and transformation.The IBO Group takes it as axiomatic that the worldis in a state of flux, and is convinced that the standard categories of analysis are no longer usefulin helping us to understand the world in which we live.Yet those,particularly realists, who believethat the continuities of international politics are more important than the changes, are not likely

to find the arguments defending the utility of the IBO triad to be particularly persuasive.Thosewho are convinced that everything solid is melting into air will find this book to be extremelyinsightful and useful. If the world is undergoing a fundamental change, we might have no choicebut to reorient ourselves to thinking in terms of process rather than structure, of flux instead ofstability. This book represents the very best standard of scholarship devoted to the task ofrethinking International Relations theory.

Brian Schmidt, SUNY New Paltz, USA

Gendering world politics: issues and approaches in the post-Cold War era. By J.Ann

Tickner. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. . pp. Index. .. ISBN

.Pb.:

.

.ISBN

.In re-assessing the conventional categories of IR theorists and practitioners, from a feministviewpoint, this in-depth study explores new ways of understanding world politics.Tickner illus-trates how IR feminists ask questions based on different realities and normative agendas and usevarious methodologies to gain answers. Rather than rationalistic theories feminist IR isgrounded in humanistic accounts of social relations, particularly gender relations (p. ). Debateson how connected feminism should be to the IR discipline are central. Differences betweenrealists and feminists are clear in considerations of war, peace and security, with feminist analysesof wartime rape cutting across conventional emphases on interstate politics or domestic deter-minants of foreign policy. Finally, feminist claims that reducing/eliminating unfavourable genderhierarchies is necessary for reducing conflict are perhaps being listened to in UN circles.

A focus on populations at the margins of the world economy in chapter shows that, despitedifferences among them, women are disproportionately situated at the lowest levels of socio-economic scales in all societies. Both devaluation of womens work and splits betweenreproductive and productive labour underlie this feminization of poverty. Tickner extends thestudy of globalization beyond gendered structural adjustment programmes to consider the spreadof Western-centred definitions of human rights and democracy. Post-colonial feminists highlightthe complicity of Western feminisms in imposing such views. Unpacking gendered notions ofdemocracy is vital, as new democracies are not all women-friendly, and focus on state institutionsby scholars can miss the various ways in which women are participating outside formal politics.

In considering global perspectives,Tickner analyses some feminist literature that is rethinkingboth the importance of the state and models for a more genuine democracy (p. ). If thesemodels could assist in conceptualizing a global politics that could lessen gender hierarchies andother oppressive relations they might promote international security and peace. As withinfeminist political theory, with the exposure of gender-neutral citizens as male, so IR feministsexplain that universal claims within human rights norms are based on male definitions of rights.In order to maintain their investigations through the kinds of questions they seek to answer, IRfeminists will continue to go outside political science using varying methodologies. In so doingnew research agendas are being established and new ways of knowing developed. There areconsequences in pushing the boundaries: Power differences between conventional and criticalapproaches ...will continue to render judgment of feminist approaches as less than adequate, andfrustration with strategies of cooptation or attempted exclusion will persist (p. ). Despitethese obstacles the directions developed will continue to be forged and IR feminists willcontinue their questioning of the founding assumptions of IR, towards a means of developing amore peaceful and just world. In tapping these deep veins of knowledge, Tickners tightly

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

5/77

analytical study will prove invaluable to a broad range of political and social theorists seekingways to explore progressive changes in societies from local to global levels.

Chris Corrin, University of Glasgow, UK

Contending liberalisms in world politics: ideology and power. By James L.

Richardson. London, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. . pp. Index. Pb.: .. ISBN X.

I had previously been aware of Jim Richardson as an orthodox (though very good) writer in thefield of strategic/security studies, so it has been interesting to discover how he has been reshapinghis lines of enquiry, in keeping with so much that has changed since the unanticipated demise ofthe Cold War.He rightly points out that it is no longer plausible, if it ever was, to consider a geo-political order independent of the socio-economic (p. ).

In this book he therefore turns his attention to what he labels the neo-liberal order in contem-porary global politics. Against this neo-liberal order (negative rights/freedoms, free markets,rolled-back states etc.) that in practice enhances inequalities, perpetuates human deprivation, andoffers a scaled-down version of liberalism and democracy (p. ) Richardson seeks to explore the

prospects for the revivification of more radical, less elitist forms of liberal thought that weremanifest in the embedded liberalism of the first three decades following the Second World War,and that first emerged as a critique of the initial laissez-faire vision of the nineteenth century.

He draws, too, upon neo-Gramscian strands in attempting to identify the constituent compo-nents that combine to produce the hegemony, intellectual and otherwise, that characterizes theneo-liberal grip upon the contemporary scene. From this Gramscian tradition he is also able toaffirm that agency matters as much as structure, and that too many policies made in the Western,and especially American, centres of power are presented as imperatives, matters of necessity ratherthan normative choice.Similarly, too much of the neo-liberal order is underpinned by an ahistoricaluniversalism that has, for example, often been calamitous when applied to developmental schemesoutside the West.The sketch of past liberal thought that Richardson provides in the first section of

the book is precisely to provide an antidote to the ahistorical mindset of contemporary politics, areminder of the possibilities offered by contingency and historical change.

Having suffered three wasted years at their hands as an undergraduate it was a pleasure to readRichardsons polemic against the High Priests of the economics profession and the manifestnonsense of positive economics, even if some of his economic analysis is probably too sketchyto satisfy many political economists, let alone economists.He is plausible too, in claiming that thestranglehold that neo-liberal economics exerts upon policy-makers in the West is the funda-mental intellectual pillar of the existing order.The other forces sustaining neo-liberal ideologyare structural, in the form of the changing balance of political forces in Western countries inrecent decades, and structural/cultural in the specific form of the United States and theprojection of its valuesbasically Lockeanthrough the international system (p. ).

In terms of the immediate prospects for change Richardson is neverthelessand wiselycautious, though his fundamental point that there is more scope for agency and the exercise ofnormative judgement than our policy-makers would have us believe is persuasive.

Mitchell Rologas, University of St Andrews, UK

International law and organization

Genocide in international law. By William A. Schabas. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. . pp. Index. .. ISBN .Pb.:.. ISBN .

We should be disturbed by the fact that we need another study of genocide and the Genocide

Convention of in the opening decade of the twenty-first century, but we do. Schabas beginsby quoting Sartres dictum that the fact of genocide is as old as humanity, adding that the law,

International law and organization

7/27/2019 5885525

6/77

however, is considerably younger. He provides a detailed exegesis of the articles of theConvention, its drafting and philosophy, as well as its letter. Specific chapters on the groupsprotected by the Convention, the elements of the crime, defences, the prosecution of genocide,the role of international tribunals, etc., are offered.The research is detailed, the opinions balancedand sensible. While the legal-interpretative approach is maintained throughout, the author isperceptive on the broader ebb and flow of events.

Schabas notes that by the s and s, interest in the Convention had dissipated, relegatingit to an historical cur iosity, somewhat like the early treaties against the slave trade (p. ).All thatwas destined to change.Violent inter-ethnic conflict, including events in the former Yugoslaviaand Rwanda, were to make the application of the Convention more urgent than ever. OnRwanda, Schabas writes that he remains marked and indeed haunted by the failure of the inter-national community to intervene in order to prevent the Rwandan genocide (p.).This takesthe reader to the authors principal claim: that we do not need an expansion of the scope of theConvention (and there is little appetite among States to revise it) so much as a strengthening ofthe obligations flowing from it. He is much concerned with developing the preventive elementsin the Convention, which is after all styled a convention on theprevention as well as punishmentof the crime of genocide.As he puts it,if a choice must be made, it would be better to engageStates in a commitment to intervene, with force if necessary, in order to prevent the crime ofgenocide, rather than to expand the definition or suggest its borders are uncertain (p. ).Whether the international community would ever gear itself up to do this in a systematic way,in the light of frequent accusations of double standards when forcible action is taken, is open toquestion.This caveat should not detract from a frank and commendable analysis of the deeplytroubling and emblematic crime of crimes.

Patrick Thornberry, Keele University, UK

Reflections on humanitarian action: principles, ethics and contradictions. Edited by

Humanitarian Studies Unit, Transnational Institute. London, Sterling,VA: Pluto Press.

. pp. Index. .. ISBN .Pb.:.. ISBN X.This book addresses several important issues relating to humanitarian action, especially in thes. It looks at the ethical, legal, moral,economic and political aspects of humanitarianism, andexamines humanitarian assistance from the perspectives of both the donors and the recipients. Itdiscusses the roles of states,multilateral organizations like the UN, the media and the NGOs.Alsoanalysed are the links between aid, development and emergency action. In short, the eightchapters that comprise this book touch on most aspects of humanitarian action. However, whilemost of the chapters are based on solid research or long periods of observation in the field, theyappear to have been haphazardly selected.

To compensate for the random way the chapters were selected, the introduction, written bythe Humanitarian Studies Unit of the Transnational Institute, Amsterdam, successfully tiestogether the various themes of the book.The first chapter by Adam Roberts on humanitarianprinciples in the s is comprehensive and well written. As in his previous work, ProfessorRoberts addresses many of the issues that impact on humanitarian action and internationalhumanitarian law and does so in a style and language that are easy to understand. However,owing to the fact that his chapter was initially written for the International Review of the Red Cross,those looking for references will find none.

The second chapter by Joana Abrisketa on the right to humanitarian aid is well researchedand engaging. Abrisketa argues that the right to humanitarian aid implies the right of thevictims of armed conflicts and other disasters to receive assistance and protection with thepurpose of satisfying their immediate needs (p. ). She then traces the legal basis of this rightto the Geneva Conventions of and the additional protocols of. In chapter, XabierEtxeberria examines the ethical framework of humanitarian action, explaining the obligationsand rights that come into play in the provision of humanitarian assistance, namely the right of

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

7/77

all victims to be offered aid and the corresponding obligation on the part of those who arecapable to offer assistance.

The question of how to coordinate the activities of all those involved in humanitarianactionmultilateral agencies, NGOs, governments, armed forcesis the theme of chapter, byFrancisco Rey. He claims that the increase in the number of actors in humanitarian action hascontributed to confusion, dwindling enthusiasm and the squandering of resources. David Sogge

discusses the perspectives of aid recipients in chapter , while Joanne Raisin and AlexanderRamsbotham re-examine the relationships between relief assistance, development and humani-tarian intervention in chapter.The penultimate chapter by Mariano Aguirre discusses the roleof the media. The final chapter, by Mdecins Sans Frontires, exposes the incoherence, ineffi-ciency and politics at the heart of Operation Lifeline Sudan. MSF argues that while severalthousand children in southern Sudan died of starvation in , there was a surplus of. milliontons of sorghum in the country, , tons of which was exported to Eritrea.

Like most edited volumes, the quality of this books contributions varies from one author tothe other. However, as a whole the book provides critical and very useful perspectives onhumanitarian action.

Samuel M. Makinda, St Antonys College, Oxford, UK

The limits of humanitarian intervention: genocide in Rwanda. By Alan J. Kuperman.

Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press. . pp.Index.$.. ISBN .Pb.:$.. ISBN .

Contrary to most studies on the Rwandan genocide, Alan Kuperman argues in his work that,once the genocide had started, there was no possibility of halting the killings. He states thatalthough some lives could have been saved by intervention at any point during the genocide,even a large force deployed immediately upon recognizing the genocidal intent would havearrived too late to save even half of the ultimate victims (p. ).This claim relies on three points.First, the speed of killing in Rwanda was so extreme that about half of the eventual victims

perished by the end of the third week of the genocide. Second,Western press coverage did notaccept that genocide was underway in the whole of Rwanda until at least two weeks into themassacres.Third, due to the intricacies of troop deploymentapparently underrated by high-ranking army officials and other observersit would have taken several weeks to establish a forcethat could have stopped the genocide.

In his detailed attempt to criticize or even discredit those analysts who argue that an earlyintervention could have significantly mitigated the death toll in Rwanda, Kuperman makesseveral mistakes, some of which go beyond the scope of this review. First, it is dubious to basethe US governments knowledge of the situation on newspaper coverage. The poor coverage,especially in the anglophone press, cannot be taken as a measurement of what the USgovernment could or should have done. The United States own CIA produced a report in

January predicting a possible half-million deaths in Rwanda, and Kuperman also quotes alater report produced by the DIA. However, Kuperman is at pains to justify why the gravity ofthese and other warnings was underrated.Whether this information was dismissed deliberatelyor whether it was underestimated, the responsibility of the US government has to be appreciatedin the light of these warnings.Even if it was not realized that genocide was underway in Rwanda,it was certainly clear that something terrible was taking place.

Second, via a number-crunching analysis of troop deployment, Kuperman dismisses theanalyses of high-ranking military officials, some of whom were on the ground.Taking very littlenotice of the French parliamentary report, the book misses the fact that even the French GeneralChristian Quesnot, who knew Rwanda well from Frances prior involvement, estimates that acombined force (UNAMIR plus the evacuation forces) could have stopped the massacres.Furthermore,Kuperman vehemently writes off diplomatic efforts to stop the genocide.Althoughhe states that the killings were slower in areas where there were Western observers, he then goes

International law and organization

7/27/2019 5885525

8/77

on to say that a foreign presence would not have stopped the genocidal killers. Merging the civilwar and the genocide,he even argues that foreign intervention would have increased the numberof victims, because supporting the weaker side would encourage more killing. However, thecivilians who were killed in the genocide were not involved in the civil war.

In addition to these problems, Kuperman loses the thread of his argument in the middle ofthe book. He sets up the argument in the first chapter, and touches on it in chapter, but it is

not until chapter that he really makes his point.The reader is bombarded with details withoutreally knowing where they are leading.Although Kuperman makes one or two valid points withregard to the importance of conflict prevention and the problem of humanitarian intervention,the book is an amazing apologist piecea great way to make policy-makers rest easier forbehaving badly.

Daniela Kroslak,Training for Peace Programme, Norwegian Institute of Foreign Affairs, Oslo

The politics and practice of United Nations peacekeeping: past, present and future.

By Indar Jit Rikhye. Clementsport, Canada:The Canadian Peacekeeping Press. . pp.Pb.: $.. ISBN .

The author of this book was Chief of Staff of UNEF () and intimately involved in UNpeacekeeping activities throughout the s in the UN Secretariat. Between and hewas President of the International Peace Academy in New York, which has played a leading rolein improving UN peacekeeping, and he has authored several books and articles on the subject.It is therefore hard to think of a person better placed to write a book that reviews the conductof past and present operations and suggests how future operations might be made more effective.The books publication is also timely, as the UN-sponsored Brahimi Report (August ) hascreated political momentum for improving UN peacekeeping operations. However, the timingalso turns out to be something of a disadvantage, because the analysis in the book pales incomparison to the Brahimi Report.The latter provides a far better examination of the problems

facing contemporary peacekeeping operations, and its reform proposals are also more detailedand better presented. Still, Rikhye highlights the same problems and makes essentially the samerecommendations as the Brahimi Report, leading the reader to hope that this book willcontribute to sustaining the momentum that the Report has created.

Overall, the book provides a good, short introduction to the history and development of UNpeacekeeping operations. The first chapter is a general introduction to the subject, whichprovides an overview of UN activities in peace and security from to the present.Thenfollows an assessment of four UN operations from the s. Chapter analyses the evolutionof peacekeeping doctrine from the launch of the first operation in until the present andends with a call for a development of an official UN doctrine, something that the organizationhas never had. Chapter discusses four general types of peace operations that go beyond tradi-

tional peacekeeping, looking at their implications for the UN, and identifies a need for greaterinvolvement of regional organizations. Finally, chapter outlines a list of recommendations forstrengthening UN peacekeeping operations.

While the book contains many valuable insights and some excellent passages, the author isclearly more at home in the Cold War era than in the present, and the book is thus rather disap-pointing. Read in isolation most of the chapters are quite good, but there is no overall structureor logic linking them together. The book is supposedly structured around eight questionspresented in the preface, but they disappear in most of the chapters.The first chapter, which issupposed to focus on the role of the Secretary General and the Security Council, also containsan introduction to the regional arrangements, which would have made more sense in chapter,where their weaknesses are discussed. The analysis of the four operations in chapter is not

explicitly linked to the other chapters, and it would also have made more sense after chapter,which discusses the evolution of peacekeeping doctrine since . Finally, the analysis of

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

9/77

contemporary peacekeeping is at times too superficial because the author bites off more than hecan chew, and furthermore much of it has been overtaken by events.

Peter Viggo Jakobsen, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Foreign relations

Russia and Europe: conflict or cooperation? Edited by Mark Webber. Basingstoke:Macmillan. . pp. Index. .. ISBN .

The product of a conference at Loughborough University in July , revised and updated inAugust , this book explores Russias relations with Europe since the end of the Cold Warand the disintegration of the Soviet Union.Thanks to the firm editorship of Mark Webber, thecontributions are not only concise and informative but closely focused. In short, the bookprovides an excellent wide-ranging review that usefully complements the earlier SIPRI volumeon the same subject.

Since the relations between Russia and the states of Europe have been routinely conducted asmuch through Europes multilateral institutions as through the more traditional mechanisms of

bilateral diplomacy, much of the volume focuses on Russias relations with these institutions.Four of the nine chapters examine Russias relations with NATO, the EU, the OSCE and theCouncil of Europe.Additionally, many of the concerns examined in the chapters on Russia andissues of demilitarization and Russia and the Former Yugoslavia have been handled within thedense mesh of Europes security institutions.

In his lively introduction, Mark Webber identifies those elements in Russias relations withEurope which have generated competition and conflict and those which have made for cooper-ation and accommodation, and concedes that the question posed in the subtitle of the bookelicits no simple answer. However, the focus on the multilateral basis of Russias relations withEurope reflects a broader set of theoretical propositions set out by the editor.A persuasive case ismade for the neo-liberal institutionalist view that within the dynamism and uncertainty that hascharacterized post-Cold War Europe, the multilateral institutions have provided both an anchorand a compass for Russia in Europe (p. ). Consequently, the working premise of the book isthat notwithstanding the disagreements and tensions cooperation has endured throughout all thevissicitudes of Russias domestic political and economic upheaval and at a time of flux in theinternational relations of the European continent (p. vii).

By contrast, the future of RussianEuropean relations looks uncertain. In the absence of theprospect of Russias membership of the EU, the EURussia dialogue remains a largely bureau-cratic exercise, but Moscows accommodation of EU enlargement nonetheless seems assured,boosted by indications of EU support for Russias six-year-old application to join the WorldTrade Organization. However, it is recognized that further NATO enlargement at the Praguesummit in December, possibly embracing the Baltic republics as the first states of the formerSoviet Union to come under the American nuclear umbrella, promises to be the single mostlikely cause of a wholesale deterioration in RussianEuropean relations (p.).Alternatively, inthe wake of the events of September and the measured participation of Russia in theUS-led coalition against international terrorism, a re-thinking of patterns of regional securitymanagement and the evolution of NATO into a broader regional security organization maygenerate some sort of triangular USEU/NATORussia defence and security architecture todeal with a wider range of international security concerns.

John Berryman, Birkbeck, University of London, UK

Foreign relations

7/27/2019 5885525

10/77

Turkeys transformation and American policy. Edited by Morton Abramowitz.

Washington DC:The Century Foundation Press. . pp. Index. $.. ISBN .

This edited volume brings together a group of experts to provide an impressive collection, mostlyfor an American audience. With their diverse backgrounds and well-established credentials ingovernment, journalism and academia, and with their knowledge of Turkey and the Turkish

language, the contributors are able to present lucid, well-written, easily digestible and argumen-tative chapters on post-Cold War Turkey and TurkishAmerican relations.

Certain individual chapters within the book are of high quality and offer significant insightinto the nitty-gritty of different aspects of TurkishAmerican relations. Heath Lowry and AlanMakovksy in particular provide useful perceptions into the past and the future of the relationship.Their balanced analyses of opportunities for improvement of the relationship and obstacles to itsfurther enhancement provide useful sobering warnings as well as hope for the future.

Even those less satisfactory contributions are well structured and professionally done. Theirweaknesses stem mainly from the fact that their authors primary interest is notTurkishAmerican relationsper se. The book was commissioned by an American foundation foran American audience, with the intention to analyse the importance of Turkey for America,

without much scholarly focus.The fact that three of the seven authors (Abramowitz,Wilkonsonand Makovsky) have worked or are still working for the US government; one author (andar)is a journalist; and the main area of specialization of the remaining authors is notTurkishAmerican relations (nis is an economist; Robins is an expert on Turkeys MiddleEastern policy and Lowry is an Ottoman historian), is reflected in the books occasional flaws,although these are not numerous.

Despite the individual quality of most of the chapters, the collection as a whole lacks acoherent framework and fails to be a comprehensive study of all aspects of USTurkish relations.While domestic aspects of both countries figure predominantly in many chapters (chs ), onlychapter deals with a third-party involvement in the smooth functioning of the relationshipbetween the two countries. One expects to find additional chapters dealing with the

TurkishAmericanIsraeli tr iangle, or TurkishUS cooperation in the Caspian Games, thoughmany authors mention these in passing. In addition, niss chapter is a survey of Turkeyseconomic problems, and it is not made clear how these are relevant to TurkishUS relations,except in the rightful conclusion that there is room for improvement (pp. ). andar, onthe other hand, being an ardent supporter and adviser/originator of the late President zalsactive foreign policy, cannot occasionally avoid partiality and a biased approach. Finally, despitean excellent introduction and overview by Morton Abramowitz, the book needs a concludingchapter that could have summarized the findings of the various chapters into a coherent wholeto present guidelines for the future, though again many authors do that individually.

Another problem for the reader is the result of the dynamism that overwhelms the Turkeyspecialist;Turkey is a country on the move,and change in every aspect of daily life from economics

to foreign policy is an inescapable phenomenon.The authors of individual chapters of this bookhave also been caught out by this dynamism, so that detailed information is sometimes out-of-date (see, for example, pp. , , , , ), though their overall analysis is not.

The main problem with the book is that it is an edited volume; thus, like all other such works,it brings together some perfect and some not-so-good articles.Nevertheless, it contains good andinsightful individual papers and overall it does justice to its stated aim, that is, to offer insightfuland important explanation(s) of American interests, Turkeys domestic problems, and a likelyfuture agenda of bilateral relations (p. vii). In short, it will be useful for those engaged in Turkishforeign policy studies and for those who wish to grasp how American foreign policy regardingits smaller allies is made.

Mustafa Aydin,Ankara University,Turkey

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

11/77

Conflict, security and armed forces

Waging modern war. By Wesley Clark. Oxford: PublicAffairs. . pp. Index. ..ISBN .

During NATOs war in Kosovo, General Wesley Clark was asked by Prime Minister Tony Blair,

Are we going to win?. He replied Prime Minister, I have never lost anything in my life, and Idont intend to. Sadly, his brave words were not borne out by subsequent events, for NATOproved not only incapable of winning a victory against the Serbs in the classic sense, but theAlliance tragically failed to deliver the humanitarian, military or even political objectives set outat the start of the war by its political leaders.The first of these objectives was, in the words of theSecretary General, to prevent more human suffering and more repression and violence againstthe civilian population of Kosovo. In the eleven weeks that followed the onset of hostilities,thousands of people were killed and one million driven from their homes in a programme ofethnic cleansing that actually accelerated after NATOs bombing campaign began on March. Nor was the second objective achieved which, in the words of General Clark,was supposedto disrupt,degrade, devastate and ultimately destroy the Serb war machine. In fact, the bombing

campaign scarcely damaged the Serb army and it was ultimately allowed to withdraw undefeatedinto Yugoslavia.Third, at a political level, the main point of disagreement at Rambouillet thatconcerned freedom of movement for NATO troops in Yugoslavia was never conceded byMilosevic in the peace discussions that ended the war.

NATO failed to achieve its war aims,quite simply, because it fought the wrong war.Its purposeshould have been the safeguarding of a human population, not the destruction of an enemy warmachine.Today, it is apparent from reading General Clarks book that nothing much has changed.General Clark describes how as a cadet he was taught that strategic art involved bringing anenemy to battle at a time and place of your choosing,where you can finish him off .As we haveseen so often since the end of the Gulf War, war does not always fit into this traditionalClausewitzian model. It has now moved on to a new form of post-modern conflict in which

there is no clearly defined enemy, end state or victory in the classic sense. In such forms ofconflict, military power alone will seldom produce enduring solutions. Even in the Balkans, asBiljana Plavsic reminded General Clark, the answer to Kosovo was to be found in establishingdemocracy in Belgrade. By bombing Yugoslavia,NATO only served to weaken the existing Serbopposition to Milosevic and thus further delay the start of the democratic process in that country.

In what are, at times, almost shocking revelations about the inner workings of the US admin-istration, General Clark describes an almost total breakdown of trust between himself and hismasters in Washington.As the Supreme Allied Commander Europe and US C-in-C Europe, hefound himself without clear mandate or political support at home. Before the war had evenstarted, he was described by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as having one foot on abanana skin and one foot in the grave. By the end of the book, he comes across as a lonely and

somewhat heroic figure fighting a war on three fronts simultaneously; against his own dysfunc-tional administration, against a foot-dragging Alliance and against Milosevic, with whom heseems to be fighting a personal vendetta. Nevertheless, one cannot help having a sneaking feelingof sympathy for him as a commander, even though it is obvious that he was partially responsiblefor his own sorry predicament. For example, by unduly pressing his case for the deployment ofApache helicopters to Kosovo, he raised enormous political opposition against himself inWashington for little tactical gain. Given the prevailing unhappy atmosphere, it was not surprisingthat at the end of the war he was summarily dismissed by Cohen, thus adding his name to thelong list of commanders who have been similarly treated by their own ungrateful countries.

His book also raises legitimate worries about the decision-making process at the political andmilitary levels in NATO. Although he remained friends with the Secretary General, he hadconsiderable difficulty in persuading all member states that NATOs target lists should be widenedto include bridges, electricity plants, fuel depots and TV stations.As a result,by the end of the war,

Conflict, security and armed forces

7/27/2019 5885525

12/77

it seemed that the credibility and cohesion of the Alliance weighed more heavily on GeneralClarks mind than the humanitarian disasters being daily visited upon the people of Kosovo.

General Clark may have done us great service in revealing the difficulties of command insuch an unhomogeneous alliance as NATO, but we must be careful not to be beguiled by thecentral message in his book. For if we continue to believe that air power by itself has the abilityto solve complex human problems on the ground, then we will condemn future generations to

suffer the same dreadful fate as the people of Kosovo.Although air power undoubtedly providesthe most effective weapon systems of the battlefield, as we are seeing in Afghanistan today it isthe soldiers on the ground who are seizing territory and rescuing the Afghan people from theirTaliban oppressors.

Michael Rose

Security, strategy, and critical theory. By Richard Wyn Jones. London, Boulder, CO:Lynne Rienner. . pp. Index. .. ISBN .

Although Critical Security Studies (CSS) is starting to build up a track record of research output,

there is a great need for a book which explores directly the relationship between critical theoryand security studies. Richard Wyn Joness book fills that gap admirably, whether or not one agreeswith his positions and conclusions. His aim is to outline and argue for an approach to securitystudies based on the work of the Frankfurt schoolthe originators of critical theory as that termis usually understood (p. ix). He also states that critical security studies should be developed in... the light of ... Frankfurt school critical theory (p. ix).This seems to go beyond claiming thatCSS can learn from critical theory to claiming that CSS (and perhaps even security studiesgenerally) should be based on the Frankfurt school. I want to consider these contentions in termsof Wyn Joness rejection of traditional theory, his exploration of the strengths and weaknesses ofcritical theory, and his discussion of the relationship between theory and practice.

Following critical theorist Max Horkheimer, Wyn Jones distinguishes between traditional

theory and critical theory. He rejects traditional theory and its epistemology and yet he alsoembraces the Enlightenment (pp. , ). However, the two appear to overlap heavily in hiswriting, in that both seem to involve distinctions between fact and value, and subject and object.If what he means is that traditional theory is some kind of distortion or perversion of theEnlightenment, then traditional theory as he describes it appears to be simply ideology, andideology can be challenged not by rejecting science and rationality but by employing them.Wyn

Jones argues that the epistemology of traditional theory leads to analysis that is pro-status quo andamoral (p. ). However, it may only appear to be that way because many traditional theoristsare themselves pro-status quo and amoral: the work of people like Noam Chomsky can hardly beplaced in either of these categories. Furthermore, Wyn Jones takes Horkeimer and TheodorAdorno to task for criticizing rationalityper seinstead of following critical theorys own stricture

to make any critique historically specific (p. ). Yet, in asserting that certain epistemologicalassumptions cannot be other than pro-status quo and amoral he violates that stricture himself.

Nor is Wyn Joness account of the evolution of Frankfurt school critical theory and thedebates within it any more persuasive of its superiority as an approach. I would argue that, ifcritical theory is about any one thing, it is about a normative commitment to emancipationrather than a commitment to a particular meta-theory. What do critical theorists mean byemancipation? What are their grounds for believing that emancipation is possible? Wyn Jonesassesses the attempts of Horkheimer, Adorno, Jrgen Habermas, Alex Honneth and StephenBronner to answer these questions. As it turns out, he criticizes all of them for theirundeveloped notions of politics and society; their neglect of interests and the workings ofcapitalism; their tendency towards grand generalization rather than historically-specific analyses;their tendency to treat their central concepts as static and independent instead of mutuallyconstitutive; their very unambitious ideas regarding the political role of theorists; and their

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

13/77

7/27/2019 5885525

14/77

strike out on its own; security in South-East Asia; peacekeeping; environmental security; prolifer-ation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD); and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism.

Bearing in mind the target audience, the quality and utility of the chapters varies considerably,with some being too technical and narrowly focused to serve as an introduction to theuninitiated.There are also some rather gaping holes in the subject matter covered, the inclusionof which may have better tied the book together.The principal topic not included is interna-

tional law and how it is increasingly impinging on armed conflict.The International CriminalTribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court are monumental,indeed unique, developments in the post-Cold War paradigm.Another area completely ignoredis conflict below the threshold of arms, namely the increasing use (and misuse) of diplomatic andeconomic sanctions. Furthermore, for a book that includes the phrase global age in its title, theimpact of global economic and cultural integration as a dissuading influence against the recourseto arms (not a panacea) ought to have been included. Finally, while perhaps not mandating achapter of its own, the emergence of a strong non-state based international community (NGOs,IOs, media and the UN) certainly deserves some attention. It is these actors who are often thefirst to intervene in active or burgeoning conflicts to mitigate their effects, and through theiractions and the attention they receive, force states to become involved in humanitarian inter-vention.The cases of Somalia and Kosovo are but two where responses were forced from theleading powers in stark disproportion to their strategic interests in the area in conflict.

Despite these faults, sections of this book would certainly complement undergraduate studiesin the field.While the editors by their own admission did not set out to produce a concise worldview, it seems that in not striving to create even the framework of a wider context and doingmore to tie the individual chapters together they have done a disservice to the subject.The resultis that the book is unfortunately not greater than the sum of its parts, which by default dimin-ishes the contributions of each author, which are otherwise quite informative and interesting.International security is not compartmental but interlaced and fluid, and any book looking tobroach the subject would do well not to defy its subjects nature.

Daniel Neysmith, UNHCR

Civilians in war. Edited by Simon Chesterman. London, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.. pp. Index. Pb.: .. ISBN .

Global insecurity. Edited by Mary Kaldor. London, New York: Continuum. . pp.Index. Pb.: .. ISBN .

An edited collection of articles always presents a reviewer with the problem of assessing the overallquality and lasting value of the volume in question. On the one hand, edited volumes, especiallyif they emanate from an academic conference or workshop, are invariably of mixed quality. Onthe other hand, the chances are that something of interest will be said even in the blandest of

collections or in the most boring of conferences. In the end, the one test that can and should beapplied is whether the editor or editors have succeeded in providing a measure of intellectual andthematic coherence to the book so that the sum is greater than the individual parts.

In Civilians in war, Simon Chesterman has succeeded admirably in doing just that. Its thematicstarting point is the body of rules that already exists to protect civilians in times of war. It recog-nizes, however, that in the contemporary context more than reliance on rules is needed and thebook successfully manages to explore the wider implications of this basic insight.The recognitionof the need to place the discussion of civilians in war within a historical and political context isone of the books virtues. So is the use of in-depth and carefully researched case-studies onNamibia,Angola, Mozambique, Colombia, and Rwanda, among others.

By contrast Global insecurity is far less focused and, ultimately, much less rewarding as a body

of research to which others can look for ideas and insights.At the outset the reader is treated toan overview of the basis for Mary Kaldors claim (presented in greater detail in her otherwritings) that the international community is faced with so-called New Wars, as distinct from

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

15/77

old wars,Clausewitzean wars or wars of classical modernity (these categorizations have beenused interchangeably elsewhere but, as a form of periodization, they remain deeply confusing andhighly problematic). According to Kaldor, the misdiagnosis of security planners lies in theirfailure to recognise the importance and character of new wars. The difficulty is that thedistinctive characteristics of New Wars turn out, on closer inspection, to be neither distinctivenor very new (e.g. violence in New Wars is directed mainly against civilians).More importantly

in this context, the framework posited does not really provide a central theme around which thesubsequent chapters fit. The conclusion returns to the notion of New Wars but without anycritical detachment. Instead, it is as if the notion represented a clear-cut and unproblematiccategory of analysis that allows for specific policy recommendations to be made. Some of theindividual chapters in the book are very good.Alex de Waals chapter Wars in Africa is a case inpoint; wide-ranging, thought-provoking and carefully researched. On the whole, however, thebook compares unfavourably to Civilians in war, which is likely to be of interest to a wideraudience and to remain so for a much longer time.

Mats Berdal, International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, UK

Justice and reconciliation: after the violence. By Andrew Rigby. London, Boulder, CO:Lynne Rienner. . pp. Index. Pb.: .. ISBN .

One of the merits of this book is the way in which the authors previous work on non-violentsocial change in general, and Palestinian experience under Israeli occupation in particular,informs his analysis of the complex requirements of reconciliation during times of transitional

justice after the violence. A refreshing honesty and personal commitment infuse the text.Readers coming to this topic for the first time will welcome the clarity with which the issuesare laid out in the first chapter, where four alternative approaches are adumbratedamnesia,punitive trials, truth commissions, and reparationsand then briefly related to classic analyses byArendt and Jaspers and to more recent treatments by Kritz, Huntington and Lederach.

The main substance of the text is contained in the five case-study chapters which exemplify

the first three of these alternative models by looking at, respectively, post-Franco Spain, post- and post- Europe, and Latin America and South Africa. The chapters are informativeand do succeed in general terms in illustrating the authors central contention: that the scope forthese varied strategies is largely a function of the politics of the transition phase, where, roughly,the more clear-cut the transfer of power, the less the need to accommodate the interests offormer power-holders and the greater the scope for instituting justice without a risk to peace.Other dimensions of this large topic are not dealt with here, however, such as the influence ofdifferent cultural settings on questions of justice and reconciliationone reason perhaps beingthat only Christianized examples are looked at in these chapters. A sixth chapter, in which theauthor does look at a non-Christian example, is his Palestinian case-study, which stands out fromthe others in a number of ways, not least because the violence there has not yet ended. Here hisinsight into the problem of how to handle collaborators is noteworthy.

Four broad conclusions are reached on the wider dimensions of the process of reconciliation:that the multidimensional nature of reconciliation requires time within which the different facetsmay be accommodated cumulatively as opportunity arises; that all strata of society musteventually be involved in the healing process; that outsiders have no right to dictate if, how orwhen victims are able to forgive and let go of the past; and that restitution must include anovercoming not only of personal injustice but of structural injustice also.This well-written andaccessible book offers an excellent short introduction to one of the great issues of our day.

Oliver Ramsbotham, University of Bradford, UK

Conflict, security and armed forces

7/27/2019 5885525

16/77

Peace building in Northern Ireland, Israel and South Africa: transition, transfor-

mation and reconciliation. By Colin Knox and Padraic Quirk. Basingstoke: Macmillan.. pp. .. ISBN .

Knox and Quirks book attempts an analysis of peace building in Northern Ireland, Israel andSouth Africa viewed from a rather more holistic perspective than many other works on peace

processes.As the authors note, many academic accounts have looked at the macro level of highpolitics, treaties and elite accommodation when casting an eye over peace processes in each ofthe three countries.Yet this provides only a restrictive framework for comparative analysis andignores the possibility that whilst macro level accommodation is a necessary precondition forpolitical progress, it may not, by itself, be sufficient to achieve the goals of building peace andreconciliation (p. ).

The book specifically adopts the alternative conceptualization of peace building formulated byJ. P. Lederach in Remember and change(). Briefly, the three main observations in this analysisare that ) there is an overemphasis on crisis management in peace processes, rather than an over-arching strategic vision; ) there exists an hierarchical, and insufficient, approach to peacebuilding in which most attention focuses on the top level of elite accommodation, to the

detriment of the study of grassroots activity; and ) an organic, comprehensive approach isneeded to transform conflicts in the search for communal reconciliation, one which embracesnot merely the political, but also social, economic, socio-psychological and spiritual changes.Thestructure of the book mirrors this underlining of the necessity of bottom-up peace buildingaction. In each of the case-studies, one section relates to the macro level of governmental negoti-ations, while the second explores the micro grassroots activity.The first sections provide a solid,standard introduction to the conflicts and peace processes in each of the three countries, but itis in the examination of the grassroots and middle-level activity, and the impact of state policywithin these sectors, that we find the real crispness and detail of the authors analysis. Thebottom-level peace building activity in each of the examples is insightfully picked apart, anduseful comparisons and contrasts made.

Northern Irish grassroots activity, the authors note,has been characterized by a relative lack ofspontaneous involvement by peace movements and the churches, elements which occur to agreater or lesser extent in Israel or South Africa.Yet many of the state attempts at addressing socialimbalance have had greater success, and quasi-autonomous organizations which are largelyfunded by government, such as the Community Relations Council, have also shown ability infostering reconciliation. The section on Israel/Palestine illuminates the rather fractured andpartially moribund nature of peace and reconciliation activity there and indeed the authorsprognosis on peace building in this case-study is somewhat bleak. Knox and Quirk have muchto say on how structural inequality, and the widely divergent views held by Palestinians andIsraelis on what peace is about, have done nothing to strengthen the grounding of accommo-dation in civil society. In South Africa, the success of peace building has been mixed.While the

Truth and Reconciliation Commission has partially advanced reconciliation through a kind ofcommunal catharsis, this socio-psychological edging forward has not been accompanied by thenecessary narrowing of the social and economic divide, essential to the bedding down of peacewithin local communities. Indeed, for many of South Africas whites, much of the activities ofthe Commission have an irritant rather than a soothing effect anyway.

While acknowledging deficiencies in Lederachs peace building approach, the authors makea strong empirical case for its usefulness in charting the success of peace processes, and fewwould disagree with their conclusion that political agreements must be underpinned by theactive involvement of civil society (p. ). This study makes a welcome contribution to theanalysis of peace processes, given its focus on the rather neglected role of civil society in trans-forming conflict.

Kris Brown, Linen Hall Library, Belfast, UK

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

17/77

A history of NATO: the first fifty years. Edited by Gustav Schmidt. Basingstoke:Palgrave. . vols. pp. Index. .. ISBN X.

Ever since Lord Ismays rsum The first five years (), NATO anniversaries have triggerednumerous in-depth surveys, analysing the Alliances past as well as its future challenges. In thisrespect, this extensive collection of articles is one among many, but it clearly towers above most.

Within an increasingly vast and disparate literature, it constitutes a firm and reliable reference point.Almost ten years ago, Donald Watt warned that it was too early to pronounce judgement on

the history of NATO because the evidence was both overwhelmingly rich and riddled withlacunae.Though there is much judgement in these three volumes on the first fifty years of theAtlantic Alliance, it is neither rushed nor unaware of the remaining lacunae.The result of aninternational conference to commemorate the Alliances fiftieth anniversary, the volumes,comprising more than articles by some of the worlds most distinguished security experts, aredivided into sections. The articles cover a range of subject areas, including the origins ofNATO, member and non-member states approaches to NATO and intra-alliance tensions, theAlliances out-of-area-problems, its enlargements, the import of the transatlantic relationship andthe European dimension of security, new forms of affiliation with former enemies, nuclear issues

and questions of military strategy and arms production. Each thematic chapter addresses theorganizations historical record, analyses its present state, and assesses its future.What has emergedis an important work of synthesis and or iginal scholarship that encourages reflection and providesthe impetus for further research.

Charles Cogans lucid essay on the security crisis of the late s is as much an analysis of theorigins of the Cold War (in the broader sense), as of the origins and significance of the Alliance.Alan Milward presents a thoughtful discussion on the competing interests of long-termeconomic security and immediate military security in the early s, and concludes that thehistory of NATO is ... the history of a new stage in the history of the state (vol. , p. ).Presenting some of the intricacies of and major turning-points in the evolution of NATOnuclear strategy, Michael Wheeler reminds us of Lawrence Freedmans memorable phrase that

nuclear deterrence worked better in practice than in theory (vol., p.).And Vojtech Mastny,by utilizing new archival material, provides insights into the inner workings of the Warsaw TreatyOrganization, where, as other authors confirm, perception and reality increasingly drifted apart.

History suggests that once alliances succeed in their primary purpose, i.e. to contain thecommon enemy, they disband. How then do we account for NATOs post-Cold War survival?Inan attempt to reassess the evolution of the Alliance, Frdric Bozo argues that, from its veryinception, it had a more embracing scope than was commonly believed, which was progressivelyto reveal itself as the initial threat became less pervasive; that new tasks have been given prior ityby NATO at least since the s, and that they have played a decisive role in preserving itscohesion and purpose throughout the second half of its Cold War existence, as well as providingthe basis for its post-Cold War persistence. Continuity, however, Bozo suggests, would not have

been sufficient to ensure the successful transformation of the Alliance after the Cold War withouta second factor: relevance. Indeed NATOs historical record of adaptability to its new missionshad to be supplemented by the actual demonstration of its ability to effectively carry outfunctional change after the Cold War (vol. , p. ). Some of these aspects of functional changeare expertly discussed in the chapters that deal with the relationship between NATO and theUnited Nations in the s and, more specifically, with the Alliances role in the Balkans crises.

Ironically, it is precisely the Alliances new roles and missions in a transformed strategicenvironment that do not hold much attraction for those seeking to join NATO.As Sean Kay pointsout, new allies did not and Alliance candidates do not seek to join a new NATO.They sought,and respectively seek, membership for the purposes of the old NATOcollective defense and ahard American security guarantee (vol. , p. ). Consequently, several authors have thrown into

question the strategic purpose of the Alliances enlargement policies. Nevertheless, LawrenceKaplans submission that the best that could be expected is to convert NATO into a collective

Conflict, security and armed forces

7/27/2019 5885525

18/77

security organization, keeping peace among themselves, in place of a collective defense organi-zation (vol. , p. ), seems to have been invalidated, at least for the time being, by recent events.

Even though the sudden re-emergence of European defence, powerfully symbolized by theAnglo-French Joint Declaration signed in St Malo in December, could not fully be takeninto account, a number of articles trace the several policy changes in this area: from the notionof a European pillar within NATO in the s, to attempts to create purely European struc-

tures to rival NATO in the early s, and back to a Europeanization of NATO. Recentdevelopments in this field are viewed with scepticism. It is stressed that it will be a long timebefore EU countries can consistently manage collectively to formulate policies that go beyondthe lowest common denominator efforts.

In sum, this remarkable collection, which includes a useful bibliography and index, serves as areader in the best sense of the word. It offers invaluable insights for those engaged in interna-tional studies, for the expert, and indeed, for todays decision-maker.

Victor Mauer, University of Bonn, Germany

Alliance politics, Kosovo, and NATOs war: allied force or forced allies? Edited by

Pierre Martin and Mark R. Brawley. New York: Palgrave. . pp. .. Index. ISBN .

NATOs humanitarian war over Kosovo provoked more questions than it answered for thoseinterested in global politics.For some, it ushered in a new international community in which therights of states would be tempered in important respects by their responsibilities to individuals.For others, Operation Allied Force represented a dangerous turn, the dawning of a new militaryhumanism that threatened international stability. One of the issues that has not yet received agreat deal of consideration is the question of Alliance politics. It is this issue that the authorsgathered in this volume address. The editors ask whether the NATO operation was a case offorced allies, obliged to fall into line on the Balkans by the American hegemon. In doing so, they

allude to an interesting framework for understanding why the various states acted as they did,encompassing realist, liberal institutionalist and social constructivist approaches to state conflict.The volumes first section contains four chapters on the future of the Alliance and the European

security architecture. They ably set up the remainder of the book by identifying some of thecentral dilemmas that confront Euro-Atlantic relations (such as American reluctance to act and theEuropean Defence Initiative). However, they also reveal the extent to which the depth of therelationship and the shared values that underpin it will continue to bind different states together.

The second section contains case-studies of the way in which different allies responded to theviolence in Kosovo, which provide an interesting overview of the interplay of domestic politics,foreign/institutional politics and humanitarian concern. In frontline states, such as Hungary andItaly, concern with the practical repercussions of the conflictfor Vojvodinas Hungarians in the

former and in terms of refugees in the latterwas overcome by the perceived institutionalbenefit of maintaining NATO cohesion and the question of humanitarian need. Both states wereable to shape their contribution to the Alliance effort in innovative ways. Other members facednone of these problems.The British government, for example,was domestically secure, externallyunthreatened and morally determined, producing its hawkish stance. Many of the case-studiesappear to follow a particular framework of analysis, but a fuller extrapolation of this impliedframework could have improved what is already a very good contribution to our understandingof the issues.

As the literature on Kosovo continues to expand, this collection provides a welcome addition.Although the individual case-studies by themselves do not tell us much that is new, and theapproach adopted throughout is decidedly North American, its analysis of the way in which the

Alliance functioned across a variety of levels and came to a consensus despite a wide variance ofopinion provides a valuable contribution. It also points towards further research on why

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

19/77

particular states acted as they did, how they related to each other, and what Kosovo might meanfor the future of NATO.

Alex J. Bellamy, Kings College London, UK

NATO in the first decade after the Cold War. By Martin A. Smith. Dordrecht,TheNetherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. . pp. Index. .. ISBN .

In the wake of the terrible terrorist attacks in New York and Washington DC on September, an oft stated sentiment is that everything has changed.As the US is still engaged in aerialattacks against targets in Afghanistan, whether and in what way this sentiment may be trueremains to be seen. Looking back to , however, it is clear that the opening of the Berlin Walland the subsequent ending of the Cold War did indeed herald a significant transformation.Theresulting change was perhaps most prominent in Europe, where the North Atlantic TreatyOrganization (NATO) had faced the Warsaw Pact, which had been at the core of the EastWestCold War confrontation. Over a decade later, the Warsaw Pact is of course no more, whileNATO, in spite of early prognostications that it would wither away, remains a vital and vibrantorganization.Martin Smiths aim is to examine whether and howNATO maintained its viability

as a functioning security institution through the s.The basis for Smiths investigation is the argument that NATO developed through the Cold

War into an institution with a set of core norms and rules, or regimes, that had become fairlywell entrenched by the s.These norms and rules, though there is variation in the degree towhich they have been developed across issue areas as well in the degree to which there is closeadherence, are evident in the Alliances processes of consultation in force-planning, EastWestrelations, and the out-of-area activities of individual member states. Smiths concern, then, is toexamine the degree to which there has been a continued adherence to these regimes, orconversely whether observation of these regimes has fallen by the wayside,as NATO has endeav-oured to adapt to the post-Cold War security environment. He does so by examining four keyissue areasnuclear weapons planning, conventional force planning, eastern engagement and

enlargement and out-of-area activitiesstarting with an examination of whether and to whatdegree norms and rules evolved with respect to each of these issues during the Cold War, andthen examining whether and to what degree there was continued observance to these regimesas NATO sought to adapt to the post-Cold War security environment.Smiths overall contentionis that NATO does indeed embody core norms and rules that not only have remained signif-icant and influential, but that their enduring value is a strength of the Alliance, one that, coupledwith its capacity to adapt, helps us to understand why it has persisted as the primary securityorganization in Europe.

This brief exegesis of Smiths analysis could be taken to suggest that this is a work of theory,one concerned with the interminable debate between the neo-realists and neo-institutionalistsabout whether institutions matter. But while his analysis does have a theoretical framework andprovides fodder for the neoneo debate, there is much more to Smiths analysis than this wouldsuggest.The empirical case-studies he develops furnish interesting analyses of NATOs post-ColdWar adaptations, and in doing so he provides considerable insight into the concerns and politicsthat influenced change in the Alliance and the internal processes by which this occurred. Smithsanalysis thus importantly complements those few empirical works that have endeavoured toelucidate why and how NATO has changed, as well as contributing to the broader debates aboutthe relative merits of particular bodies of theory. One can only hope, in this time of potentialsignificant change, that Smiths conclusion about NATOs strength as an institution, and the valueof the regimes it represents, continue to serve it well in the coming years.

Terry Terriff, University of Birmingham, UK

Conflict, security and armed forces

7/27/2019 5885525

20/77

Politics, democracy and social affairs

The Blair effect: the Blair government, . Edited by Anthony Seldon.London:Little, Brown. . pp. Index. .. ISBN .

This sizeable volume, its chapters covering pages, is another weighty addition to the

Anthony Seldon collection of edited books on British politics. It largely succeeds in providing abroad,at times panoramic, survey of the work of the Blair-led Labour government in its first term.The editor has brought together an impressive number of experts who together provide clear-sighted description and analysis of the politics and policy of the Labour government as it entersits second term. In what is largely an even collection, it may seem invidious to select particularchapters, but, without detracting from others, those by Ivor Crewe, Philip Norton, BrendanOLeary, Philip Stephens, and Christopher Hill, strike this reader as particularly insightful.

Although Dennis Kavanaghs opening chapter usefully outlines the contemporary debateabout what the Labour government is actually doing (and how it is doing it), one feature of thecollection is that there is no sustained attempt to draw the work of the contributors together.Each chapter tends to stand alone, and as a result the book tends to focus on micro-level rather

than macro-level analysis. In short, it chooses to look at the trees rather than at the wood. Ofcourse, given that a great deal of the existing literature on the New Labour phenomenon oftendoes precisely the opposite, this is not necessarily a bad thing.Looking at the trees is as importantas looking at the wood, and at this stage of any governments life we need to have interimempirical assessment of its work in a variety of policy fields. In this regard, the book solidlydelivers, and therefore provides a welcome and useful addition to the burgeoning literature onNew Labour and the Blair government.

Perhaps the defining feature of New Labour has been its willingness to accommodate itsreform agenda to the political and economic world within which it finds itself, and as PhilipStephenss chapter on the Treasury under Labour emphasizes, this has prompted Labours recon-ciliation with the market economy and with the macro-economic orthodoxy of the times.With

contemporary mainstream politics having moved away from the nostrums of the postwar socialdemocratic era, Labour acknowledges that it operates within a neo-liberal policy paradigm, onethat frames and constrains government policy.The government pursues social reforms by seekingto empower, free and liberalize the market by championing wealth creation, promoting businessand encouraging entrepreneurship. In contrast, after, building on a collectivist politicalworldview developed in the s and s, Labours economic policy reflected an ideationalframework in which the role of the state was to manage the market, manipulating, controlling,directing and taming it through the social democratic, quasi-corporatist state. Even before ,to quote Stephens again, Labours ambition of greater social cohesion was contingent on ademonstrable capacity to run the economy competently, and it is this set of priorities that haslain at the heart of the governments domestic policy agenda since .

While not wishing to diminish the importance of the Blair government, this reader does (forthe present, at any rate) take some issue with Anthony Seldons assertion that the generalelection will rank as a turning-point as important in British political history as the generalelections of, and . For one thing, it is too soon to tell. By themselves, election

years change nothing, other than the administration of the day, and may not even change theprevailing policy agenda. Some, of course, do manage to do precisely that. However, dramaticpolitical change, the exception not the rule, is the product of political events in the yearspreceding and succeeding an election. Elections are only staging posts in the making of politicalevents, not by themselves turning-points in political affairs. Despite his many successes, and thefact that under his leadership Labour has secured an unprecedented full second term, it is waytoo soon to tell if Tony Blair is a politician able to make the weather, as it were, as did MargaretThatcher before him. Of course, this book does not set out to demonstrate that, nor holisticallyto explain New Labour, but merely to provide a useful and in places detailed interim record of

Book reviews

7/27/2019 5885525

21/77

what the Labour government has done within the policy fields in which it is obliged to act. Inthis it succeeds admirably.

Richard Heffernan,The Open University, UK

Hard choices: social democracy in the twenty-first century. By Christopher Pierson.

Cambridge: Polity Press.. pp.Index... ISBN .Pb.:.. ISBN .

Christopher Pierson has produced a timely book that should do much to resurrect interest intraditional social democratic politics and discourage those who are currently seeking an elusivethird way outside the social democratic tradition.

In the first part ofHard choices Pierson provides trenchant critiques of those, such as John Grayand Anthony Giddens, who appear to wish to bury traditional social democracy.Writing in aneasily accessible style, Pierson demonstrates that the social democratic tradition is far richer thanmany of its critics have supposed and, in particular, that the Keynesian welfare state is notsynonymous with social democracy. He also demonstrates that social democracy is actually amuch more diverse and, perhaps surprisingly, interesting tradition than both its detractors and

many of its admirers have imagined (p. ). It follows that the route march of social democratswas essentially to follow national roads (p. ) and that it is misleading to take any single nationas the exemplar of social democracy. Pierson is particularly successful in demonstrating that manyof the apparent concessions to neo-liberalism granted by the Australian Labour Party enabled itto implement other policies that advanced broadly social democratic aims.The reader is thereforereminded that all around the world social democratic parties are making hard choices, tradingdesirable goals against one another, compromising and getting their hands dirty in government.

In the second part of Hard choices Pierson examines two developmentsglobalization anddemographic changethat have been thought to herald the end of social democratic politics.He does not deny that these developments have serious implications for social democraticparties, but argues that neither implies that any attempt to nudge, cajole or regulate the market

is impossible. Elsewhere he follows the implications of the globalization thesis to its logicalconclusion, pointing out that if hyperglobalization were to be realized, we should all end up withthe social protection regime of Chad (p. ). If only more social democrats were as comfortablein expressing moral outrage at the logic of twenty-first century capitalism!

The logic of Piersons argument is that social democratic parties can continue to prosper andthrive, but the precise trajectory of those parties will depend on the precise circumstances facedby each nation; its position in the world economy, the health of its right-wing opponents andthe personal inclinations of its leaders.The global pretensions of the Third Wayers are thereforeexposed as hopelessly ahistorical.

Social democracy remains a very diffuse set of values (p. ).Arguably it falls short of being afully-fledged ideology and is merely an amalgam of practice and ideas (p. ). Ideologues of theleft and the right have often expressed frustration at its apparent incoherence.Yet social democratsshould take heart from this book. As long as capitalism, in any of its manifestations, producesobscene inequalities, there will be a need for a politics that tries to build wide-ranging coalitionsfor the amelioration of inequality and the rectification of injustices (p. ).

Well-written, witty and mercifully free of jargon,Hard choices represents a compelling additionto the literature on social democracy. Most impressively of all, the word projectoccurs only oncein the whole book (p.) and even then only to express a suitable degree of scorn for the conceitof post-modernists.

John Bartle, University of Essex, UK

Politics, democracy and social affairs

7/27/2019 5885525

22/77

Reshaping world politics: NGOs, the Internet, and global civil society. By Craig

Warkentin. Oxford, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. . pp. Index. Pb.: $.. ISBN .

This largely descriptive book sets out three questions of interest to international relations scholarsand policy-makers:What is global civil society? What are its origins? And what are the roles of

individuals in creating and maintaining it? After a brief literature review, the book provides adefinition: global civil society is a socially constructed and transnationally defined network ofrelationships that provides ideologically variable channels of opportunity for politicalinvolvement (p. ). This definition reflects the books grounding in people-centeredInternational Relations theory, drawing on the English school of Wight and Bull and parallelingthe American constructivist paradigm to focus on agency as well as structure. It then examineseight Northern non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as exemplars of how global civilsociety is creating itself with heavy reliance on the Internet. All are progressive advocacy organi-zations: three environmental, three development-focused, and two online resource networks thatattempt to serve the communications and information needs of large NGO networks.

Craig Warkentin evaluates the eight in terms of three characteristics he ascribes to global civil

society: dynamism (how flexible and adaptable the organization is), inclusiveness (the degree towhich it reaches out and facilitates mutually respectful relations), and self-reflection (whatWarkentin calls cognizance, or the degree to which the people in an organization see it ashaving a particular role in the world). This approach provides a wealth of detail, but thetheoretical and analytical contribution is less clear. He refers to these characteristics as anexpansion of the definition, but the connection is unspecified. The case-studies are primarilycompilations of the organizationsown documents and website materials, supplemented by inter-views with present and former staff, rather than independent critiques.This makes it difficult totell whether these organizations are contributing to the development of a global civil society thatmatters. Dynamism, for example, is portrayed as reflecting nimble adaptation to ensurecontinued effectiveness under changing circumstances, but it could just as easily reflect mere

frenetic activity. Only Greenpeace comes in for any significant criticism for its relative lack ofadaptability in the s, and even in that case Warkentin argues that there are signs ofimprovement. In another case, the book praises one online network for its adaptability, but buriesin endnotes the fact that part of the adaptation consisted of slashing the budget from $ milliona year to less than a tenth of that amount, with associated staff cuts. It would be interesting tohave an evaluation of whether that change reflected flexibility or failure.

This book is a useful compilation for anyone interested in how such NGOs see themselves orin the details of their operations. It would be an appropriate supplementary text for courses oninternational relations and globalization.

Ann Florini, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,Washington DC, USA

Democracy beyond the state? The European dilemma and the emerging global order.

Edited by Michael Th. Greven and Louis W. Pauly. Oxford, Lanham, MD: Rowman &Littlefield. . pp. Index. .. ISBN .Pb.:.. ISBN .

This is a coherent edited volume in which the authors present competing views on a centraltheme: the possibility of democracy beyond the nation-state.