Kirjahaku

The question of when or if a nation should intervene in another country’s affairs is one of the most important concerns in today’s volatile world. Taking John Stuart Mill’s famous 1859 essay “A Few Words on Non-Intervention” as his starting point, international relations scholar Michael W. Doyle addresses the thorny issue of when a state’s sovereignty should be respected and when it should be overridden or disregarded by other states in the name of humanitarian protection, national self-determination, or national security. In this time of complex social and political interplay and increasingly sophisticated and deadly weaponry, Doyle reinvigorates Mill’s principles for a new era while assessing the new United Nations doctrine of responsibility to protect. In the twenty-first century, intervention can take many forms: military and economic, unilateral and multilateral. Doyle’s thought-provoking argument examines essential moral and legal questions underlying significant American foreign policy dilemmas of recent years, including Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

He explores their enduring theories, and recommends that they be applied to today's fundamental international dilemmas. Although no one school has all the answers, this analysis maintains that history has provided the theoretical tools to meet modern challenges, and that great political minds of the past can still guide modern politicians through the confusion of current events.

Does the United States have the right to defend itself by striking first, or must it wait until an attack is in progress? Is the Bush Doctrine of aggressive preventive action a justified and legal recourse against threats posed by terrorists and rogue states? Tackling one of the most controversial policy issues of the post-September 11 world, Michael Doyle argues that neither the Bush Doctrine nor customary international law is capable of adequately responding to the pressing security threats of our times. In Striking First, Doyle shows how the Bush Doctrine has consistently disregarded a vital distinction in international law between acts of preemption in the face of imminent threats and those of prevention in the face of the growing offensive capability of an enemy. Taking a close look at the Iraq war, the 1998 attack against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, among other conflicts, he contends that international law must rely more completely on United Nations Charter procedures and develop clearer standards for dealing with lethal but not immediate threats. After explaining how the UN can again play an important role in enforcing international law and strengthening international guidelines for responding to threats, he describes the rare circumstances when unilateral action is indeed necessary. Based on the 2006 Tanner Lectures at Princeton University, Striking First includes responses by distinguished political theorists Richard Tuck and Jeffrey McMahan and international law scholar Harold Koh, yielding a lively debate that will redefine how--and for what reasons--tomorrow's wars are fought.

With a historian’s eye and a theorist’s ingenuity, Michael Doyle, whose writings on liberal peace have revolutionised modern statesmanship, cogently assesses the tectonic shifts threatening a global order that has held for more than seventy years. As tensions among China, Russia and the US escalate perilously towards a new Cold War, Doyle introduces a radical paradigm that will facilitate the international co-operation necessary to avert the global threats of our time. Combining dramatic history with trenchant analysis and landmark theory, Doyle explores the impacts of cyber-warfare, foreign election meddling and the unprecedented schism of modern politics on American foreign policy. He demonstrates that there can be no success in addressing climate change without China’s cooperation, nor any hope of averting nuclear catastrophe without Russia’s. In the tradition of Gaddis’ The Cold War and Clark’s The Sleepwalkers, Cold Peace provides one of the most necessary analyses of global power in decades.

With a historian’s eye and a theorist’s ingenuity, Michael Doyle, whose writings on liberal peace have revolutionised modern statesmanship, cogently assesses the tectonic shifts threatening a global order that has held for more than seventy years. As tensions among China, Russia and the US escalate perilously towards a new Cold War, Doyle introduces a radical paradigm that will facilitate the international cooperation necessary to avert the global threats of our time. Combining dramatic history with trenchant analysis and landmark theory, Doyle explores the impacts of cyberwarfare, foreign election meddling and the unprecedented schism of modern politics on American foreign policy. He demonstrates that there can be no success in addressing climate change without China’s cooperation, nor any hope of averting nuclear catastrophe without Russia’s. In the tradition of Gaddis’ The Cold War and Clark’s The Sleepwalkers, Cold Peace provides one of the most necessary analyses of global power in decades.