Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T18:38:37.640Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comments on R. Harrison Wagner’s War and the State: The Theory of International Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2010

James D. Fearon
James D. Fearon*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium on War and the State
Information
International Theory , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , July 2010 , pp. 333 - 342
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acemoglu, D.Robinson, J.A. (2001), ‘A theory of political transitions’, American Economic Review 91(4): 938–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, J.D. (1995), ‘Rationalist explanations for war’, International Organization 49(Summer): 379–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, J.D. (2004), ‘Why do some civil wars last so much longer than others’, Journal of Peace Research 41(3): 275–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fearon, J.D. (2008), ‘Fighting rather than bargaining’, unpublished manuscript, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Glaser, C.L. (1995), ‘Realists as optimists: cooperation as self-help’, International Security 19(3): 50–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaser, C.L. (1997), ‘The security dilemma revisited’, World Politics 50(1): 171–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaser, C.L.Kaufmann, C. (1998), ‘What is the offense–defense balance and how can we measure it?’, International Security 22(4): 44–82.Google Scholar
Mearsheimer, J.J. (2001), The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Myerson, R. (1992), ‘On the value of game theory in social science’, Rationality and Society 4(1): 62–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, R. (1993), ‘Guns, butter, and anarchy’, American Political Science Review 87(1): 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, R. (1999), In the Shadow of Power, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, R. (2004), ‘The inefficient use of power: costly conflict with complete information’, American Political Science Review 98(2): 231–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, R. (2006), ‘War as a commitment problem’, International Organization 60(1): 169–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A.Stam, A.C. (2004), ‘Bargaining and the nature of war’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 48(6): 783–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, R.H. (1993), ‘What was bipolarity?’, International Organization 47(1): 77–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, R.H. (2007), War and the State: The Theory of International Politics, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walter, B. (2002), Committing to Peace, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltz, K.N. (1979), Theory of International Politics, New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar