What do you think?
Rate this book
Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History (Longman Classics Series), Fourth Edition
Part of the "Longman Classics in Political Science" Series, this highly readable and respected book balances history and theory to give international politics students a framework for analyzing the past and using it to understand the issues confronting us today. Part of the "Longman Classics" series, Nye's Understanding International Conflicts has been completely updated and features a new Foreword by Stanley Hoffman. A book that students enjoy reading, Nye's volume deftly balances theory and history to help students develop a well-rounded is a book that students enjoy reading, Nye's volume deftly balances theory and history to help students develop a well-rounded, informed framework for analyzing current issues and dilemmas. Updated with the most recent scholarship and replete with illustrative examples, the Fourth Edition explores the international issues confronting us at the beginning of the 21st Century. Understanding International Conflicts aims to provide students with the conceptual tools that will help them shape their own answers to the unfolding developments in our world long after exams are done.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1993
91 people are currently reading
1489 people want to read
About the author
Joseph S. Nye Jr.
41 books295 followersJoseph Samuel Nye Jr. was an American political scientist. He and Robert Keohane co-founded the international relations theory of neoliberalism, which they developed in their 1977 book Power and Interdependence. Together with Keohane, he developed the concepts of asymmetrical and complex interdependence. They also explored transnational relations and world politics in an edited volume in the 1970s. More recently, he pioneered the theory of soft power. His notion of "smart power" ("the ability to combine hard and soft power into a successful strategy") became popular with the use of this phrase by members of the Clinton Administration and the Obama Administration. These theories from Nye are very commonly seen in courses across the U.S., such as I.B. D.P. Global Politics.
Nye was the Dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, where he later held the position of University Distinguished Service Professor, Emeritus. In October 2014, Secretary of State John Kerry appointed Nye to the Foreign Affairs Policy Board. He was also a member of the Defense Policy Board. He was a Harvard faculty member since 1964. He was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, a foreign fellow of the British Academy, and a member of the American Academy of Diplomacy.
The 2011 Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) survey of over 1,700 international relations scholars ranked Nye as the sixth most influential scholar in the field of international relations in the past 20 years. He was also ranked as one of the most influential figures in American foreign policy. In 2011, Foreign Policy magazine included him on its list of top global thinkers. In September 2014, Foreign Policy reported that international relations scholars and policymakers ranked Nye as one of the field's most influential scholars.
Nye was the Dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, where he later held the position of University Distinguished Service Professor, Emeritus. In October 2014, Secretary of State John Kerry appointed Nye to the Foreign Affairs Policy Board. He was also a member of the Defense Policy Board. He was a Harvard faculty member since 1964. He was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, a foreign fellow of the British Academy, and a member of the American Academy of Diplomacy.
The 2011 Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) survey of over 1,700 international relations scholars ranked Nye as the sixth most influential scholar in the field of international relations in the past 20 years. He was also ranked as one of the most influential figures in American foreign policy. In 2011, Foreign Policy magazine included him on its list of top global thinkers. In September 2014, Foreign Policy reported that international relations scholars and policymakers ranked Nye as one of the field's most influential scholars.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews
December 2, 2017
In his book, Nye gives the logic of global conflict and cooperation starting with the consequences of Westphalia on global cooperation to overcome European feudalism and strengthen the concept of the state. He continues to argue about the imbalance of cooperation and the balance of power theory that existed in Europe prior to WWI as well as WWII, Cold War and the current era of the war on terror. As a neoliberal, the author uses evaluation concepts from Kenneth Waltz in determining reasons that led to these huge wars; men, state and international in addition to his amazing evaluation of consequences based on motives and means. A Very interesting read that is really an added value in political theory.
December 24, 2021
瞭解國際關係不能不熟知歷史，不過好的政治學學者不應該只對過去已發生的歷史做後知後覺的分析，而應該是對未來世界的發展有更前瞻性的想法，所以任何一本國際關係一定是從最後的章節開始閱讀，如果能有對未來有更多的想法與預測才能算是合格的政治學或國際關係學，也才適合考慮將整本書從頭到尾讀完，不然充其量只是政治歷史學，甚至是一本帶有偏見立場的“政治宣傳品”，這本書的副標題雖說是理論與歷史，不過很遺憾的是作者仍未能以學者之姿提出更深入的看法與預測，一旦沒有能力對未來提出想法，那書中羅列再多不同學者的理論也只能是作廢或紙上談兵而經不起考驗了，這本書的最後一章有些滑頭，東扯西拉卻總是避談自己對未來的預測，作者都如此了，那是不是表示讀者將本書讀完也一定是一頭霧水而毫無提出看法的能力，這樣對讀者來說是不是浪費時間精力？
再者，作者的理解始終無法跳脫以美國的角度為出發點，這樣的方式在解讀許多事件時實在難以中肯，甚至有意為特定立場而辯解開脫之圖，隨便將書中七、八、九章幾個明顯的錯誤舉出來讓大家參考：
第七章：
1．把以色列建國的原因淡化成是聯合國的承認，而刻意忽略了真正原因是美國在後面強推的結果，而美國強推除了國內猶太人在金融界勢力的影響外，更是為了把歐洲上千年對猶太人的排擠問題給一股腦的推進了中東的阿拉伯世界。
2．將阿拉伯世界對美國這種一廂情願的行為所對應的軍事行動說成是以色列為了維護國家生存而鬥爭，好像以色列就應該在別人的領土上立國，就應該合理化這種拿“聖經”故事來論述領土歸屬的荒謬可笑，這根本是司馬昭之心路人皆之。
3．把奧斯曼解體也是完全的推到了國聯的身上，卻故意忽視國聯是受英、法的操控，而英法在一戰前早就已經在對奧斯曼上下其手，不斷的瓜分佔有這個西亞病夫的土地，這才讓奧斯曼在一戰時不得不站在了德國的一方，一戰的結果只不過是讓英法抓到一個堂而皇之理由藉口來擴張自己勢力罷了。
4．以阿戰爭中埃及與以色列和談關於西奈半島的部分也沒有把來龍去脈講明，當時歐美如何對埃及進行政治分化，讓其退出阿拉伯聯盟的條件來歸還西奈半島，這除了無形的分化了阿拉伯聯盟，更讓埃及成為以阿之間的擋箭牌，這種借刀殺人之計難道教了一輩子政治學的哈佛老師看不出來嗎？
5．黎巴嫩的問題是在法國侵佔奧斯曼旗下的一個省時，為了自己身為天主教國家的利益而設計將該省分為敘利亞與黎巴嫩兩國，這在二戰後引起了許許多多的戰爭與紛爭，而作者一樣跳過沒有明講。
6．朝鮮的問題也是一樣，二戰時老蔣可是在開羅會議全力支持韓國獨立，是後來美英蘇為了自己的利益而出賣了韓國，讓其成為四國共管之地從而導致後來南北韓的分裂直到今天，美國就是始作俑者的一員，書中不僅提都不提，反而把責任推的一乾二淨。
7．關於今天中國一段更是誇張，作者不知哪來的自信，竟然宣稱美國沒興趣也沒意願“遏制”中國，這個黑白顛倒的講法真讓人懷疑這本書的可靠信，更別說美國與亞洲週邊國家之間的“條約”更是完全出自自私之舉，絕不能拿來當成美國在亞太駐軍或干預是一種“義務”來合理化其行為。
8．南海的問題更是沒有絲毫歷史查證，中華民國在二戰結束後就已經宣稱了對其的主權，當時可沒哪個歐美國家提出任何爭議，而南海週邊的亞洲國家當時也都還沒成立，怎麼現在話鋒一轉就把南海說成了是主權有爭議的地方？這種書真的能當成教材嗎？是要誤導事實到什麼地步？
9．中華人民共和國在聯合國是取代了中華民國所代表“中國”的地位，並不存在什麼合不合法的問題，中華民國也認定台灣是“中國”的一部分，怎麼講成是中國大陸才有這種認定？是在為法理台獨護航嗎？
10．所謂的“台海危機”中，美國哪有堅定的支持台灣？忘了艾森豪曾多次要求老蔣放棄金馬了嗎？要不是老蔣堅持立場，早就稱了美國的意，而使台灣更名正言順的成為第一島鏈的一環，從而為後來的分裂舖好道路了…
11．馬英九講的“不統、不獨、不武“指的是馬在“任內”不談統一、獨立、與武裝，並不是其終極立場啊，作者怎麼也學起獨派偷換觀念起來了？而且美國與中國大陸之間的三公報也絲毫未提，這是不是故意在創造兩岸的緊張而讓美從中得利呢？
12．釣魚島的爭議也是對歷史沒有明確的了解，美國只不過再用模糊的手法讓中日之間產生衝突來藉此從中得利，怎麼可以洗白成美國有“義務“保護這些島嶼呢？是為了替在宮古島、石垣島上的飛彈布署解套嗎？
第八章：
美國對中東國家內政的干預就是很明顯的例子，中東諸國以石油當籌碼是為了“要求”世界認真面對以阿之間衝突，而以阿的問題不就是美國一手造成的？怎麼講的好像這些行為都是中東諸國的自私自利一樣？這真的會嚴重誤導對近代史不熟的讀者，更別說美國短期的自作聰明造成的是長期加深一堆國家民族的仇恨與自己的困境，這在近年來也越益清楚，作者不僅毫無交待，反而故意將其切割到了其它章節段落，這樣的安排是不是較能誘導讀者認同美國將不合作的中東諸國合理定義成與“恐怖組織”或“邪惡勢力”？長期的洗腦下來是不是讓回教或穆斯林飽受“現代原罪”的抹黑？
第九章：
對網路訊息的講法其實缺少了“知識”與“資訊”之間不同的分析，網路上充斥的是資訊，但這些資訊是絕不是知識，因為資訊與知識的不同在於資訊是可以快速取得的，但知識卻要長時間累積與學習，這完全是兩個概念，更別說大多數在網路上的資訊其實都沒有所謂的驗證管道，資訊爆炸的情況下反而讓網路成為錯誤資訊散布的溫床，這不僅成為有心勢力的最佳工具，更是會產生集體反智的效果，最後造成短期讓人誤以為“知識”是可以如資訊一般速成，而長期還會使人失去真正學習所需的耐心，這就是現在有許多有心團體會不斷在網路上創造一些假資訊，再利用網軍大量散布帶風向，無知的群眾就會受騙上當，使得有心團體能達到其預設目的。作者不僅沒有提到這個已被大量使用並頗有成效的危害，反而不斷說明網路是一個讓政府力量減退的工具，殊不知這些有能力並有心團體的背後正是政府的力量嗎？
這本書總共十章，但光看後半部就這麼多的錯誤與偏頗，不好意思的講，這樣偷換觀念的學者真的適合談國際關係嗎？這本書真的適合用“歷史”來當副標題嗎？政治學需要對歷史、法律有一定的基本功才方便學習，不然很容易會被帶偏，個人被帶偏是一回事，如果最後淪為某特定勢力的棋子就得不償失了，奉勸喜歡國際關係或政治學的朋友在拜讀此書前要再三思考才是…
再者，作者的理解始終無法跳脫以美國的角度為出發點，這樣的方式在解讀許多事件時實在難以中肯，甚至有意為特定立場而辯解開脫之圖，隨便將書中七、八、九章幾個明顯的錯誤舉出來讓大家參考：
第七章：
1．把以色列建國的原因淡化成是聯合國的承認，而刻意忽略了真正原因是美國在後面強推的結果，而美國強推除了國內猶太人在金融界勢力的影響外，更是為了把歐洲上千年對猶太人的排擠問題給一股腦的推進了中東的阿拉伯世界。
2．將阿拉伯世界對美國這種一廂情願的行為所對應的軍事行動說成是以色列為了維護國家生存而鬥爭，好像以色列就應該在別人的領土上立國，就應該合理化這種拿“聖經”故事來論述領土歸屬的荒謬可笑，這根本是司馬昭之心路人皆之。
3．把奧斯曼解體也是完全的推到了國聯的身上，卻故意忽視國聯是受英、法的操控，而英法在一戰前早就已經在對奧斯曼上下其手，不斷的瓜分佔有這個西亞病夫的土地，這才讓奧斯曼在一戰時不得不站在了德國的一方，一戰的結果只不過是讓英法抓到一個堂而皇之理由藉口來擴張自己勢力罷了。
4．以阿戰爭中埃及與以色列和談關於西奈半島的部分也沒有把來龍去脈講明，當時歐美如何對埃及進行政治分化，讓其退出阿拉伯聯盟的條件來歸還西奈半島，這除了無形的分化了阿拉伯聯盟，更讓埃及成為以阿之間的擋箭牌，這種借刀殺人之計難道教了一輩子政治學的哈佛老師看不出來嗎？
5．黎巴嫩的問題是在法國侵佔奧斯曼旗下的一個省時，為了自己身為天主教國家的利益而設計將該省分為敘利亞與黎巴嫩兩國，這在二戰後引起了許許多多的戰爭與紛爭，而作者一樣跳過沒有明講。
6．朝鮮的問題也是一樣，二戰時老蔣可是在開羅會議全力支持韓國獨立，是後來美英蘇為了自己的利益而出賣了韓國，讓其成為四國共管之地從而導致後來南北韓的分裂直到今天，美國就是始作俑者的一員，書中不僅提都不提，反而把責任推的一乾二淨。
7．關於今天中國一段更是誇張，作者不知哪來的自信，竟然宣稱美國沒興趣也沒意願“遏制”中國，這個黑白顛倒的講法真讓人懷疑這本書的可靠信，更別說美國與亞洲週邊國家之間的“條約”更是完全出自自私之舉，絕不能拿來當成美國在亞太駐軍或干預是一種“義務”來合理化其行為。
8．南海的問題更是沒有絲毫歷史查證，中華民國在二戰結束後就已經宣稱了對其的主權，當時可沒哪個歐美國家提出任何爭議，而南海週邊的亞洲國家當時也都還沒成立，怎麼現在話鋒一轉就把南海說成了是主權有爭議的地方？這種書真的能當成教材嗎？是要誤導事實到什麼地步？
9．中華人民共和國在聯合國是取代了中華民國所代表“中國”的地位，並不存在什麼合不合法的問題，中華民國也認定台灣是“中國”的一部分，怎麼講成是中國大陸才有這種認定？是在為法理台獨護航嗎？
10．所謂的“台海危機”中，美國哪有堅定的支持台灣？忘了艾森豪曾多次要求老蔣放棄金馬了嗎？要不是老蔣堅持立場，早就稱了美國的意，而使台灣更名正言順的成為第一島鏈的一環，從而為後來的分裂舖好道路了…
11．馬英九講的“不統、不獨、不武“指的是馬在“任內”不談統一、獨立、與武裝，並不是其終極立場啊，作者怎麼也學起獨派偷換觀念起來了？而且美國與中國大陸之間的三公報也絲毫未提，這是不是故意在創造兩岸的緊張而讓美從中得利呢？
12．釣魚島的爭議也是對歷史沒有明確的了解，美國只不過再用模糊的手法讓中日之間產生衝突來藉此從中得利，怎麼可以洗白成美國有“義務“保護這些島嶼呢？是為了替在宮古島、石垣島上的飛彈布署解套嗎？
第八章：
美國對中東國家內政的干預就是很明顯的例子，中東諸國以石油當籌碼是為了“要求”世界認真面對以阿之間衝突，而以阿的問題不就是美國一手造成的？怎麼講的好像這些行為都是中東諸國的自私自利一樣？這真的會嚴重誤導對近代史不熟的讀者，更別說美國短期的自作聰明造成的是長期加深一堆國家民族的仇恨與自己的困境，這在近年來也越益清楚，作者不僅毫無交待，反而故意將其切割到了其它章節段落，這樣的安排是不是較能誘導讀者認同美國將不合作的中東諸國合理定義成與“恐怖組織”或“邪惡勢力”？長期的洗腦下來是不是讓回教或穆斯林飽受“現代原罪”的抹黑？
第九章：
對網路訊息的講法其實缺少了“知識”與“資訊”之間不同的分析，網路上充斥的是資訊，但這些資訊是絕不是知識，因為資訊與知識的不同在於資訊是可以快速取得的，但知識卻要長時間累積與學習，這完全是兩個概念，更別說大多數在網路上的資訊其實都沒有所謂的驗證管道，資訊爆炸的情況下反而讓網路成為錯誤資訊散布的溫床，這不僅成為有心勢力的最佳工具，更是會產生集體反智的效果，最後造成短期讓人誤以為“知識”是可以如資訊一般速成，而長期還會使人失去真正學習所需的耐心，這就是現在有許多有心團體會不斷在網路上創造一些假資訊，再利用網軍大量散布帶風向，無知的群眾就會受騙上當，使得有心團體能達到其預設目的。作者不僅沒有提到這個已被大量使用並頗有成效的危害，反而不斷說明網路是一個讓政府力量減退的工具，殊不知這些有能力並有心團體的背後正是政府的力量嗎？
這本書總共十章，但光看後半部就這麼多的錯誤與偏頗，不好意思的講，這樣偷換觀念的學者真的適合談國際關係嗎？這本書真的適合用“歷史”來當副標題嗎？政治學需要對歷史、法律有一定的基本功才方便學習，不然很容易會被帶偏，個人被帶偏是一回事，如果最後淪為某特定勢力的棋子就得不償失了，奉勸喜歡國際關係或政治學的朋友在拜讀此書前要再三思考才是…
July 30, 2025
I remember when I bought an older edition of Understanding International Conflicts, some 20 years ago, at a local book fair. I was a PhD student and I was very impressed, since it was pretty rare to find a IR handbook in Romania. Fortunately, a good one was just being published, written by a team of young Romanian scholars, but Joseph Nye Jr's approach was still very interesting. I recommend the 2017 edition, written in cooperation with David Welch, to the reader interested in a clear and broad perspective on contemporary struggles.
The late Joseph Nye Jr. was an important scholar of International Relations (IR) and a public figure. Alongside Robert O. Keohane and others, he created the liberal institutionalist school of thought. He also popularized the expression of soft power in an attempt to induce some subtlety into American's conduct of foreign relations. Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation is focused on security studies and on the use of force.
The major trend is globalization, with multiple dimensions, one of which is strategic. Joseph Nye was a moderate. He argued that, even if complex interdependence is on the rise, conflict still matters. According to Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation, there are traditional forms, like interstate war, and newer ones, like cyber attacks.
Joseph Nye argued in favor of a theoretical mix. He was a liberal who took insights from realism and constructivism. Thus, Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation contains the mandatory analysis of the Peloponnesian War, alongside studies of the rivalry between US and China and Russia's attempts to restore its empire. He also thought that the world is much bigger than this, that transnational relations are important and that they require soft power and strategic acumen.
The main message is that force and the state are still important, though a wise leader shouldn't depend only on coercion and brute power. Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation is written in a very accessible style and its explanations are compelling. Joseph Nye intellectual moderation and neutrality may seem too little in the eye of the ideologues. For me, they are qualities towards which any explanation should aspire.
PS
For the Romanian reader: avoid the translation, because the local editors distorted the text. Find a version in English.
The late Joseph Nye Jr. was an important scholar of International Relations (IR) and a public figure. Alongside Robert O. Keohane and others, he created the liberal institutionalist school of thought. He also popularized the expression of soft power in an attempt to induce some subtlety into American's conduct of foreign relations. Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation is focused on security studies and on the use of force.
The major trend is globalization, with multiple dimensions, one of which is strategic. Joseph Nye was a moderate. He argued that, even if complex interdependence is on the rise, conflict still matters. According to Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation, there are traditional forms, like interstate war, and newer ones, like cyber attacks.
Joseph Nye argued in favor of a theoretical mix. He was a liberal who took insights from realism and constructivism. Thus, Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation contains the mandatory analysis of the Peloponnesian War, alongside studies of the rivalry between US and China and Russia's attempts to restore its empire. He also thought that the world is much bigger than this, that transnational relations are important and that they require soft power and strategic acumen.
The main message is that force and the state are still important, though a wise leader shouldn't depend only on coercion and brute power. Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation is written in a very accessible style and its explanations are compelling. Joseph Nye intellectual moderation and neutrality may seem too little in the eye of the ideologues. For me, they are qualities towards which any explanation should aspire.
PS
For the Romanian reader: avoid the translation, because the local editors distorted the text. Find a version in English.
July 26, 2021
Monthly Bookworm Challenge - February 2021.
If you're interested in international relations in general or international conflicts in particular, I highly recommend reading Nye's work. He does a great job of introducing the basics of international politics (realist/constructivist/liberal theory) and some of the most illustrative examples (e.g. the Peloponnesian War/Thucydides's Trap) and then goes on to tell the history of the 20th and 21st century as analyzed by the concepts introduced.
Most convincing to me is his introduction to and application of the three levels of analysis: 1) the international system, 2) individual states and, finally, 3) individuals. This approach counters the common misconception enforced by popular literature that either a) only a few individuals are to blame for a specific war or b) individuals had no influence at all. Also, I really like his comparison of international conflicts to 3-dimensional chess games with security politics on top, economic interdependence in the middle and chaotic non-state actors at the bottom.
The only thing I still wished to know after reading the book is what his analysis would be of more recent developments such as the rise of China, US foreign policy under Trump and the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
I'll end with a quote: "To understand the current world, we must understand both the realist and liberal views of world politics and be alert to social and cultural changes constructivists emphasize. We need to be able to think about different ideal types at the same time. Neither realism nor complex interdependence exists; both are ideals. [...] All three approaches - realism, liberalism, constructivism - are helpful and necessary to understand international politics in a changing world." (pp. 260-261)
If you're interested in international relations in general or international conflicts in particular, I highly recommend reading Nye's work. He does a great job of introducing the basics of international politics (realist/constructivist/liberal theory) and some of the most illustrative examples (e.g. the Peloponnesian War/Thucydides's Trap) and then goes on to tell the history of the 20th and 21st century as analyzed by the concepts introduced.
Most convincing to me is his introduction to and application of the three levels of analysis: 1) the international system, 2) individual states and, finally, 3) individuals. This approach counters the common misconception enforced by popular literature that either a) only a few individuals are to blame for a specific war or b) individuals had no influence at all. Also, I really like his comparison of international conflicts to 3-dimensional chess games with security politics on top, economic interdependence in the middle and chaotic non-state actors at the bottom.
The only thing I still wished to know after reading the book is what his analysis would be of more recent developments such as the rise of China, US foreign policy under Trump and the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
I'll end with a quote: "To understand the current world, we must understand both the realist and liberal views of world politics and be alert to social and cultural changes constructivists emphasize. We need to be able to think about different ideal types at the same time. Neither realism nor complex interdependence exists; both are ideals. [...] All three approaches - realism, liberalism, constructivism - are helpful and necessary to understand international politics in a changing world." (pp. 260-261)
April 13, 2022
I understand the average American (including myself) might not be cognizant about what’s going on in other countries… I decided to purchase some textbooks and read up on this stuff because I felt ignorant… I may need to know this stuff if I plan on moving out of the country.
Highlights:
Those with more power are often able to ignore moral considerations (20).
The strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept (20).
Power, like love, is easier to experience than to define or measure (60).
Join the weaker side. Balance of power is a policy of helping the underdog because if you help the top dog, it may eventually turn around and eat you (65).
Plenty of information leads to scarcity— of attention. When people are overwhelmed with the volume of information confronting them, they have difficulty discerning what to focus on. Attention rather than information becomes the scarce resource, and those who can distinguish valuable information from background clutter gain (252).
…information power flows to those who can edit and credibly validate information to sort out what is both correct and important (253).
Highlights:
Those with more power are often able to ignore moral considerations (20).
The strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept (20).
Power, like love, is easier to experience than to define or measure (60).
Join the weaker side. Balance of power is a policy of helping the underdog because if you help the top dog, it may eventually turn around and eat you (65).
Plenty of information leads to scarcity— of attention. When people are overwhelmed with the volume of information confronting them, they have difficulty discerning what to focus on. Attention rather than information becomes the scarce resource, and those who can distinguish valuable information from background clutter gain (252).
…information power flows to those who can edit and credibly validate information to sort out what is both correct and important (253).
October 7, 2018
A very useful and simple manual for students (in a broad sense) of international relations without losing quality. Well divided, questions clearly exposed and answers supported by good historical examples in order to understand the theory. Truly like a class, exposing each way to view important matters and a real effort to avoid beeing dogmatic.
The few questions at the end of each chapter and some suggested bibliography contribute to self-check if we understood and reflect about what was taught.
Good student support material.
The few questions at the end of each chapter and some suggested bibliography contribute to self-check if we understood and reflect about what was taught.
Good student support material.
January 18, 2021
Satu-satunya buku dari masa kuliah yang masih saya simpan dan dibaca lagi dan lagi... :)
March 3, 2025
Joseph S. Nye is not only a Japan handler, but he is also a mentor to the official "opposition" of Japan and beyond. I read the 2017 edition of his excellent book.
It's well organized in order and categories - realist, liberal, structuralist, Marxist - of international-domestic-transnational issues of today since 1) the pre-Westphalian era of the formation of Just War Theory and Thucydides Trap, Prisoner's Dilemma, unipolar, bipolar, multipolar, hegemony theories developed from the Peloponnesian War narrative; 2) the realist-neorealist theory of balance/distribution of power and the Hobbesian anarchy state system and nation-state definition established in 17th century Europe since the Treaty of Westphalia(1648); 3) the failure of the balance of power theory and its replacement by the collective security theory of the UN, NATO, Warsaw Pact in the nuclear balanced bipolar world of the Cold War; 4) the era of the information revolution based on transnational non-state, substate actors penetrating vague boundaries of the state, less than 10% of which are ethnically homogeneous nations. In which nuclear balance, economic interdependence, and transnational actors dynamically contribute to both stability and instability. And we are in the midst of the AI industrial revolution while suffering from the neoliberal industrial mode of the late twentieth century.
The so-called transnational and international difference lies in the nature of the actors. States and non-state actors crossing borders. The latter is called transnational.
This book also points out implications for today's U.S.-China conflicts by refuting the 2015 cliché, the Thucydides Trap.
Moreover, it's intellectually shameful that Japanese "experts" and "masu gomi" massively peddled the centuries-old theory of collective security as the new one during Abe's Anpo constitutional "reform" in 2015. They should have read this book carefully.
a. The U.S. is not a hegemon in the strict sense as long as it can't solve transnational problems alone and is deeply involved in global economic interdependence. Here, the so-called hegemon is seen as the sole actor, like a super-sovereign in the Hobbesian system of anarchy, where there is no super-state authority. Thus, the U.S. is portrayed here as a non-hegemon, but it is affirmed as a superstate. In this, Nye admits that the present world politics is in a multipolar world like the US, China, Russia and the rising powers of the South. The weak point of this book seems to be its defensive position of US foreign policy to refute its hegemonic role.
b. The U.S.-Japan trade dispute in the 1990s in this book is surprisingly objective and comprehensive for the Japanese side, while Nye points out that the main internal cause of the U.S. trade deficit was the U.S. budget deficit itself. And some consumer advocacy groups and supermarket investors in Japan demanded that the U.S. pressure the Japanese government to open its market to U.S. sub-state actors. The US-China trade war is repeating the same scenario, but the narrative about the main cause of the trade deficit is divorced from the cosmic number of US budget constraints.
c. The Thucydides trap of the inevitability of the hegemonic war between the rising state and the hegemonic state is still not in the case of the bipolar disorder between the US and China. It's even completely refuted by the Cold War, while there was no hot war between the Soviet Union and the United States. This warmongering theory has a strong market for budgetary considerations of defense industries and departments, but Athens failed like the Soviets due to its internal corruption in the war, which was not based purely on power politics. However, conflicts, asymmetrical, transnational, proxy wars are real without a direct hegemonic military hot war between the two.
I highly recommend this book as a political text, as a guide to understanding today. It's the best!
It's well organized in order and categories - realist, liberal, structuralist, Marxist - of international-domestic-transnational issues of today since 1) the pre-Westphalian era of the formation of Just War Theory and Thucydides Trap, Prisoner's Dilemma, unipolar, bipolar, multipolar, hegemony theories developed from the Peloponnesian War narrative; 2) the realist-neorealist theory of balance/distribution of power and the Hobbesian anarchy state system and nation-state definition established in 17th century Europe since the Treaty of Westphalia(1648); 3) the failure of the balance of power theory and its replacement by the collective security theory of the UN, NATO, Warsaw Pact in the nuclear balanced bipolar world of the Cold War; 4) the era of the information revolution based on transnational non-state, substate actors penetrating vague boundaries of the state, less than 10% of which are ethnically homogeneous nations. In which nuclear balance, economic interdependence, and transnational actors dynamically contribute to both stability and instability. And we are in the midst of the AI industrial revolution while suffering from the neoliberal industrial mode of the late twentieth century.
The so-called transnational and international difference lies in the nature of the actors. States and non-state actors crossing borders. The latter is called transnational.
This book also points out implications for today's U.S.-China conflicts by refuting the 2015 cliché, the Thucydides Trap.
Moreover, it's intellectually shameful that Japanese "experts" and "masu gomi" massively peddled the centuries-old theory of collective security as the new one during Abe's Anpo constitutional "reform" in 2015. They should have read this book carefully.
a. The U.S. is not a hegemon in the strict sense as long as it can't solve transnational problems alone and is deeply involved in global economic interdependence. Here, the so-called hegemon is seen as the sole actor, like a super-sovereign in the Hobbesian system of anarchy, where there is no super-state authority. Thus, the U.S. is portrayed here as a non-hegemon, but it is affirmed as a superstate. In this, Nye admits that the present world politics is in a multipolar world like the US, China, Russia and the rising powers of the South. The weak point of this book seems to be its defensive position of US foreign policy to refute its hegemonic role.
b. The U.S.-Japan trade dispute in the 1990s in this book is surprisingly objective and comprehensive for the Japanese side, while Nye points out that the main internal cause of the U.S. trade deficit was the U.S. budget deficit itself. And some consumer advocacy groups and supermarket investors in Japan demanded that the U.S. pressure the Japanese government to open its market to U.S. sub-state actors. The US-China trade war is repeating the same scenario, but the narrative about the main cause of the trade deficit is divorced from the cosmic number of US budget constraints.
c. The Thucydides trap of the inevitability of the hegemonic war between the rising state and the hegemonic state is still not in the case of the bipolar disorder between the US and China. It's even completely refuted by the Cold War, while there was no hot war between the Soviet Union and the United States. This warmongering theory has a strong market for budgetary considerations of defense industries and departments, but Athens failed like the Soviets due to its internal corruption in the war, which was not based purely on power politics. However, conflicts, asymmetrical, transnational, proxy wars are real without a direct hegemonic military hot war between the two.
I highly recommend this book as a political text, as a guide to understanding today. It's the best!
September 14, 2024
Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation
An Introduction to Theory and History
Tenth Edition
Joseph S. Nye, Jr.
Harvard University
David A. Welch
Balsillie School of International Affairs, University of Waterloo
“No one won the last war, and no one will win the next war.”
~ Eleanor Roosevelt, The Wisdom Of Eleanor Roosevelt
"War does not determine who is right only who is left"
~Bertrand Russell
The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation.
~ Bertrand Russell
An Introduction to Theory and History
Tenth Edition
Joseph S. Nye, Jr.
Harvard University
David A. Welch
Balsillie School of International Affairs, University of Waterloo
“No one won the last war, and no one will win the next war.”
~ Eleanor Roosevelt, The Wisdom Of Eleanor Roosevelt
"War does not determine who is right only who is left"
~Bertrand Russell
The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation.
~ Bertrand Russell
July 27, 2020
Genel olarak insanlar (milletler, topluluklar, vs) arasindaki cekismeleri ve isbirligini akademik bir aciyla ama rahatca da anlasilabilen bir dille anlatmis, bu alana giris tarzinda bir kitap. Politika ve tarihle ilgilenen okurlara ilginc gelecek kitap bu alanlarda daha cok okumus ve ozumsemis okura biraz basit gelebilir, ama yine de birtakim basit tanimlari ve argumanlari sundugu icin yararli ve ilginc.
May 28, 2023
For only having a high school understanding of world conflicts, this books does a decent job of expanding on the major international wars and conflicts that have affected the 20th and 21st century. This book is tailored towards a political science major or similar. This is because of the extensive vocabulary used by the author describing the individuals making decisions and there labeled schools of thought.
April 4, 2022
O carte care m-a facut sa inteleg complexitatea domeniului geopoliticii. Explica, ofera exemple si e structurata impecabil. Nu trateaza tematica in maniera exhaustiva si nici nu cred ca era cazul. Si culmea, nu e plictisitoare. Cred ca o a doua citire ar fi indicata, mai ales in contextul realitatii pe care o traim.
June 14, 2022
Uluslararası İlişkiler öğrencileri için bir okuma listesi hazırlayacak olsaydım bu kitabı kesinlikle dahil ederdim. Kesinlikle oldukça akıcı, teoriyi ve pratiği gayet iyi harmanlayan bu kitap uluslararası politikayı kapsayıcı bir yaklaşımla ele almış. Her ne kadar tamamen başlangıç seviyesinde olduğunu düşünmesem de alandışı kişilerin de bu kitabı okurken keyif alacağı kanaatindeyim.
September 15, 2022
Organization wise, it was a little hard to input all of the abundant information, but in overall I believe it was intriguing and educational to a great enough measure to keep me wanting to read and learn more. Gratitudes to my prof. who recommended this as an introductory text on the field of international politics.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
September 19, 2022Giriş düzeyinde teori-tarih kitabı okumak için güzel yazılmış ders kitabı niteliğinde bir çalışma. Diğer kitaplardan farklı olarak 'tarihi olaylar başka şekilde yaşansaydı acaba nasıl olurdu' (iffy history) şeklinde bir alternatif sunarak ve ayrıca geleneksel Uİ literatürü içinde 'Analiz Düzeyleri' olarak isimlendirilen üç düzey üzerinden olayları inceleyerek okuyucu için güzel bir deneyim sunmaktadır.
September 9, 2020
Çevirmenin günümüz Türkçesinde gayet de karşılığı olan kelimeler yerine eski Türkçe kelimeleri kullanmasından rahatsız olsam da çok akıcı bir kitap.
Bütün uluslararası ilişkiler öğrencilerinin okumasında fayda var ;)
(Hoş, büyük ihtimalle hocalarının vereceği okuma listesinde zaten vardır :D )
Bütün uluslararası ilişkiler öğrencilerinin okumasında fayda var ;)
(Hoş, büyük ihtimalle hocalarının vereceği okuma listesinde zaten vardır :D )
September 18, 2018
Một cuốn sách cơ bản nhưng đầy đủ về chính trị quốc tế. Cuốn sách nên được in ấn rộng rãi và trở thành kiến thức nền tảng cho mọi người.
November 8, 2019
Good for people at entry level
October 6, 2020
The information is a bit biased, so you might want to read other sources on this topic, but in general, it is pretty helpful.
May 22, 2021
It is all about the wars and conflicts that happened in the previous century. It may help the readers understand theoretical concepts of wars and causes which ultimately led to the wars.
April 14, 2022
IN page 171
July 23, 2022
Really repetitive. Meh I read it
September 29, 2023
A very well written and easy read history book, outlining theory as well historical events.
Read
May 18, 2024Look I read it for school and I read this entire damn book so I'm counting it for my yearly report
January 13, 2017
An introduction to international relations theory that I found easy to read, yet offering the discipline the respect it deserves. Unlike most textbooks, the theoretical presentation of the different IR schools is very brief. Only the first 80 pages are dedicated to basic theory of the discipline, yet the authors still find space to discuss the ethics of IR theory, a segment I personally really enjoyed. Joseph Nye, perhaps best known as a co-founder of the school of neoliberalism, does a surprisingly good job of highlighting the positive aspects of the different schools (mainly realism, liberalism and constructivism), showing how they could/should be used as supplements.
The following 200 pages or so is a historical account of the period from the Peace of Westphalia to the present, from the point of view of the great Western powers. The authors make sure to apply the different schools when interpreting historical events, hence repeating and exemplifying the basic theory of the first few chapters.
The last part of the book attempts to adress the present and future changes to international politics, driven by technological change and globalization. Though my edition is from 2013, it feels kind of outdated and misinformed with regards to some issues (e.g. climate change), but the basic drivers of change and the governance-problems they bring about are anyhow presented.
The following 200 pages or so is a historical account of the period from the Peace of Westphalia to the present, from the point of view of the great Western powers. The authors make sure to apply the different schools when interpreting historical events, hence repeating and exemplifying the basic theory of the first few chapters.
The last part of the book attempts to adress the present and future changes to international politics, driven by technological change and globalization. Though my edition is from 2013, it feels kind of outdated and misinformed with regards to some issues (e.g. climate change), but the basic drivers of change and the governance-problems they bring about are anyhow presented.
June 1, 2015
There's a reason grad schools (full disclosure--I taught from it, too) use this text to give students a grasp on international relations. Nye's use of the 3 big lenses--Constructivism, Liberalism, and Realism (more disclosure; if you put a jug of CLR cleaner on the podium in front of your class, they'll remember them forever)--to explain how nation-states have got along from the Peloponnesian War forward, is the best and most accessible method going, in my opinion. Nye's application of this method to the World Wars, Cold War, and the Arab-Israeli Wars puts the varnish on the deck. This is, however, the Ninth Edition, updated to embrace oil, al Qaeda, and climate change, as well as Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" and Fukuyama's "End of History". I would definitely put this work up next to Robert Putnam, Barbara Tuchman, and John Lewis Gaddis on my shelf for solid geopolitical analyses of the 20th Century. Recommend.
November 6, 2008
Sebuah buku pengantar yang bahasanya jernih. Kupasannya untuk sebuah pengantar sangat baik dari seorang akademisi yang pernah menjadi penasihat Presiden AS. Namun untuk topik international conflicts sebaiknya jangan puas hanya dengan buku ini.
Menurut Nye sendiri, buku ini merupakan bagian dari upayanya menjawab polemik seputar dokumen yang dibuatnya ketika menjabat sebagai staff penasihat Presiden Bill Clinton. Saya menemukan sejumput informasi di "The ‘Nye Report’: Six Years Later”, (International Relations of the Asia Pacific, Volume 1, 2001).
Sepertinya perlu membuka buku ini untuk mencari tahu jawaban itu.
Menurut Nye sendiri, buku ini merupakan bagian dari upayanya menjawab polemik seputar dokumen yang dibuatnya ketika menjabat sebagai staff penasihat Presiden Bill Clinton. Saya menemukan sejumput informasi di "The ‘Nye Report’: Six Years Later”, (International Relations of the Asia Pacific, Volume 1, 2001).
Sepertinya perlu membuka buku ini untuk mencari tahu jawaban itu.
May 23, 2020
Como é difícil achar um teórico de RI que escreva bem. Nye tem uma escrita agradável e coerente, uma linha de raciocínio clara, mesmo intercalando com relatos e exemplos históricos (o que muitos autores de RI fazem de maneira meio bagunçada nos textos). É um bom livro e fundamental pra compreensão das dinâmicas internacionais no século XXI. Inaugura a distinção dos conceitos de soft/hard power, pois, eles já eram historicamente aplicados. O livro também traz a teoria da interdependência complexa e conceitos de globalização muito relevantes e menos econômicos. Como num quebra cabeça, todas as globalizações se complementam de alguma forma.
February 14, 2014
Head and shoulders the best IR textbook and will remain so well into the future. While accessible to less able students, it can stretch and challenge the very best of them at all levels. I still after over 10 years of assigning it and knowing the book like the back of my hand have students cite passages that teach me things. Not sure how Nye managed to pull this off. Pity about all the editions though. First edition was the best!
July 12, 2011
This is [still:] one of the best introduction to the study International Relation. It discusses many wars of the world from Peloponessian era up to Bush's War of Iraq. By learning these stuff, definitely one will acquire horizon of ideas and grasp the complexity of international politics. It will launch you to study more about IR. Readble & Indispensable.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews