MARC Record from harvard_bibliographic_metadata

LEADER: 02616cam a2200349Ia 4500
001 009532456-9
005 20061117115421.0
008 050111s2004 enka b 000 0 eng d
020 $a019856841X
035 0 $aocm57403540
040 $aSNM$cSNM
050 00 $aU162$b.A3 no. 370
090 $aU162$b.A3 no.370
100 1 $aWalker, William,$d1946-
245 10 $aWeapons of mass destruction and international order /$cWilliam Walker.
246 30 $aWMD and international order
260 $aOxford, U.K. ;$aNew York :$bOxford University Press,$c2004.
300 $a90 p. :$bill. ;$c24 cm.
490 1 $aAdelphi paper ;$v370
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references.
505 0 $aConcepts of international order: the antidote to enmity -- Weapons of mass destruction and international order to 1990 -- Post-Cold War WMD order: two divergent paths -- The breakdown of WMD order -- The Iraq War and afterwards.
520 $aHow should the 'problem of order' associated with weapons of mass destruction be understood and addressed today? Have the problem and its solution been misconceived and misrepresented, as manifested by the problematic aftermath of Iraq War? Has 9/11 rendered redundant past international ordering strategies, or are these still discarded at our own peril? These are the questions explored in this Adelphi Paper. It opens by focusing attention on the linked problems of enmity, power and legitimacy, which lie at the root of the contemporary problem of order. The paper shows how the 'WMD order' that was constructed during and after the Cold War was challenged from various directions in the late 1990s and early 2000s. It shows how the growing disorder was a cause and effect of a potent 'double enmity' that arose in the US against both 'rogue states' and the international constitutionalism that had been espoused by previous US governments and bound states to a common purpose. An ordering strategy that is imperious and places its main emphasis on counter-proliferation and the threat of preventive war cannot be successful.The recovery of order must entail the pursuit of internaitonal legitimacy as well as efficacy. It will require all states to accept restraint and to honour their mutual obligations.
650 0 $aUnilateral acts (International law)
650 0 $aWeapons of mass destruction.
650 0 $aBalance of power.
650 0 $aInternational relations.
650 0 $aWorld politics$y1989-
650 0 $aCold War.
710 2 $aInternational Institute for Strategic Studies.
830 0 $aAdelphi papers ;$vno. 370.
988 $a20050113
906 $0OCLC