| Description |
x, 236 pages ; 25 cm |
| Series |
Cornell studies in security affairs |
|
Cornell studies in security affairs.
|
| Contents |
1. Reputation and Deterrence Theory -- 2. Reputation and Psychology -- 3. The First Moroccan Crisis -- 4. The Bosnia-Herzegovina Crisis -- 5. The Agadir Crisis -- 6. Conclusion |
| Summary |
By approaching an important foreign policy issue from a new angle, Jonathan Mercer comes to a startling, controversial discovery: a nation's reputation is not worth fighting for. He presents the most comprehensive examination to date of what defines a reputation when it is likely to emerge in international politics, and with what consequences. Mercer examines reputation formation in a series of crises before World War I. He tests competing arguments, one from deterrence theory, the other from social psychology, to see which better predicts and explains how reputations form. He extends his findings to address contemporary crises such as the Gulf War, and considers how culture, gender and nuclear weapons affect reputation. Throughout history, wars have been fought in the name of reputation. Mercer rebuts this politically powerful argument, shows that reputations form differently than we thought, and offers policy advice to decision-makers |
| Analysis |
Foreign relations |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references and index |
| Subject |
International relations.
|
|
Reputation (Law)
|
|
Security, International.
|
| SUBJECT |
United States -- Foreign relations http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85140058 -- 1993-
|
|
United States -- Foreign relations -- 1993-2001.
http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh92006414
|
| LC no. |
95035449 |
| ISBN |
0801430550 |
|
