04601nam 2200865 a 450 991082458940332120200520144314.01-282-86156-597866128615670-7735-7154-X10.1515/9780773571549(CKB)1000000000521348(EBL)3331202(SSID)ssj0000280724(PQKBManifestationID)11214289(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000280724(PQKBWorkID)10299728(PQKB)10430359(CaPaEBR)400426(CaBNvSL)jme00326169 (Au-PeEL)EBL3331202(CaPaEBR)ebr10141875(CaONFJC)MIL286156(OCoLC)929121545(DE-B1597)657060(DE-B1597)9780773571549(VaAlCD)20.500.12592/rvp14c(schport)gibson_crkn/2009-12-01/1/400426(MiAaPQ)EBC3331202(MiAaPQ)EBC3245534(EXLCZ)99100000000052134820041004d2004 uy eengur|n|---|||||txtccrInauspicious beginnings principal powers and international security institutions after the Cold War, 1989-1999 /edited by Onnig Beylerian and Jacques Levesque1st ed.Montreal McGill-Queen's University Pressc20041 online resource (324 p.)Foreign policy, security, and strategic studiesDescription based upon print version of record.0-7735-2626-9 0-7735-2625-0 Includes bibliographical references.""Contents""; ""Preface""; ""Abbreviations""; ""Introduction: Security Institutions after the Cold War""; ""1 Contradictory or Complementary? Defensive Realism, Structural Liberalism, and American Policy towards International Security Institutions""; ""2 Failing to Join the West: Russian Institutional Security Strategy during the Yeltsin Years""; ""3 France: International Security Institutions as an Alternative to Power Politics""; ""4 Becoming a ""Normal"" Actor in World Affairs: German Foreign Policy and International Security Institutions since Unification""""5 Refusing to Play by the Rules? Japan's ""Pacifist"" Identity, Alliance Politics, and Security Institutions""""6 The Institutional Security Policy Reorientation of China""; ""7 Looking for New Voice Opportunities: Canada and International Security Institutions after the Cold War""; ""Conclusion: Minimalism and Self-interest: Comparing Principal-Power Performance in Security Institutions""; ""Notes""; ""Bibliography""; ""Index""; ""NAMES""; ""A""; ""B""; ""C""; ""D""; ""F""; ""G""; ""H""; ""I""; ""J""; ""K""; ""L""; ""M""; ""N""; ""O""; ""P""; ""R""; ""S""; ""T""; ""V""; ""W""; ""X""; ""Y""""Z""""SUBJECTS""; ""A""; ""B""; ""C""; ""D""; ""E""; ""F""; ""G""; ""H""; ""I""; ""J""; ""K""; ""L""; ""M""; ""N""; ""O""; ""P""; ""R""; ""S""; ""T""; ""U""; ""V""; ""W""; ""Y""The authors detail how the Bush and Clinton administrations relied on catering to allies and building large coalitions to deal with major international security challenges, while other principal powers were either pre-occupied with their domestic problems or deferred to the United States. As a consequence, on the eve of 11 September 2001 the United Nations Security Council remained an older, outmoded power configuration incapable of responding efficiently to the with novel challenges besetting it. Its relevance has been further questioned by the unilateral occupation of Iraq by the United States.Foreign policy, security, and strategic studies.Security, InternationalBalance of powerWorld politics1989-World politics1995-2005Securite internationaleEquilibre des puissancesPolitique mondiale1989-Security, International.Balance of power.World politicsWorld politicsSecurite internationale.Equilibre des puissances.Politique mondiale327/.09/049Beylerian Onnig1947-1545802Levesque Jacques0MiAaPQMiAaPQMiAaPQBOOK9910824589403321Inauspicious beginnings4086231UNINA