المراجع وقراءات إضافية
David Reynolds’s observation on the origins of diplomacy is in Summits: Six Meetings That Shaped the Twentieth Century (Basic Books, 2007). The Toynbee and Kissinger quotes are found in Daniel M. Smith and Joseph M. Siracusa, The Testing of America, 1914–1945 (Forum Press, 1979) and Henry Kissinger, Diplomacy (Simon and Schuster, 1994), respectively.
To begin at the beginning, see Harold Nicolson’s faded—and fading—classic, Diplomacy (Harcourt Brace, 1939), which is not to be confused with Henry Kissinger’s otherwise brilliant diplomatic history, Diplomacy (Simon and Schuster, 1994), which, Kissinger assures us, is quite different in scope, intentions, and ideas. Indispensable is M. S. Anderson’s treatise on the evolution of diplomacy to 1919, The Rise of Modern Diplomacy, 1450–1919 (Longman, 1993). The history of diplomacy is admirably covered in G. R. Berridge, Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, 4th edn. (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009); Keith Hamilton and Richard Langhorne, The Practice of Diplomacy: Its Evolution, Theory and Administration, 2nd edn. (Routledge, 2010); and Adam Watson, Diplomacy: Dialogue between States (Routledge, 1982). For a critique of the culture of traditional diplomatic services, see Shaun Riordan, The New Diplomacy (Polity Press, 2002).
How diplomats represent state institutions in a complex relationship of facts designed to bring order to international society is explored in The Diplomatic Corps as an Institution of International Society, ed. Paul Sharp and Geoffrey Wiseman (Palgrave Macmillan, 2008). G. R. Berridge has much to say in Return to the United Nations: UN Diplomacy in Regional Conflicts (Palgrave Macmillan, 1991). For the emerging diplomacy of civil society, see Paul Battersby and Joseph M. Siracusa, Globalization and Human Security (Rowman and Littlefield, 2009). Quotes on public diplomacy are taken from Charles Wolf, Jr, and Brian Rosen, Public Diplomacy: How To Think About It and Improve It (RAND, 2004). Also useful is Walter R. Roberts, ‘The Evolution of Diplomacy’, Mediterranean Quarterly, 17 (Summer 2006): 55.
For the history and significance of treaties, see Charles L. Philips and Alan Axelrod (eds.), Encyclopedia of Historical Treaties and Alliances, 2 vols (Facts on File, 2001); J. A. S. Grenville, The Major International Treaties, 1914–1973: A History and Guide with Texts (Methuen, 1974); Mario Toscano, The History of Treaties and International Politics (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1966); and Eileen Denza, Diplomatic Law, 3rd edn. (Oxford University Press, 2008).
The best summary of the diplomacy of the American Revolution is Samuel Flagg Bemis, The Diplomacy of the American Revolution (D. Appleton-Century, 1935). Bemis skilfully exploits archives in offering a Whig interpretation of an innocent America dealing with corrupt Europe. This interpretation has been challenged, but not the coverage and detailed analysis. Also useful are Jonathan R. Dull, A Diplomatic History of the American Revolution (Yale University Press, 1985); Reginald Horsman, The Diplomacy of the New Republic (Harlan Davidson, 1985); and Robert R. Palmer, The Age of the Democratic Revolution: A Political History of Europe and America, 1760–1800, Vol. 1: The Challenge (Princeton University Press, 1959).
Arthur M. Schlesinger’s The Colonial Merchants and the American Revolution, 1763–1776 (Longmans, 1918) is a landmark study of the origins of the American Revolution, showing the role merchants played in staving off radical measures of Parliament and colonials until 1776.
The best general account of British ministerial politics and the American question for 1773 to 1775 is Bernard Donoughue, British Politics and the American Revolution, the Path to War, 1773–75 (Macmillan, 1964). For a description of British military objectives and successes, see Piers Mackesy, The War for America, 1775–1783 (University of Nebraska Press, 1993). William C. Stinchcombe, The American Revolution and the French Alliance (Syracuse University Press, 1969) analyses the domestic reaction to the French alliance in America, making the case that colonial Americans suspended their traditional anti-French and anti-Catholic beliefs to make it a success. For a discussion of domestic and international factors and influences, consult Richard W. Van Alstyne, Empire and Independence: The International History of the American Revolution (John Wiley, 1965).
Benjamin Franklin was the most important diplomat of the American Revolution and because of this has attracted much scholarly attention. The best studies of Franklin and his times are Claude A. Lopez and Eugenia W. Herbert, The Private Franklin: The Man and His Family (Norton, 1975); Gerald Stourzh, Benjamin Franklin and American Foreign Policy (University of Chicago Press, 1954); and Carl Van Doren, Benjamin Franklin (Viking, 1938).
The standard account of Henry Laurens, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and particularly John Jay, who negotiated the peace with Great Britain in 1782, is Richard B. Morris, The Peacemakers: The Great Powers and American Independence (Harper and Row, 1965). This well-researched work is marred only by the author’s excessive distrust of Vergennes and Europeans in general. Valuable insights are found in Lawrence S. Kaplan, ‘The Treaty of Paris 1783: A Historiographical Challenge’, International History Review, 5 (August 1983): 431–42; and Ronald Hoffman and Peter J. Albert (eds.), Peace and Peacemakers: The Treaty of 1783 (University of Virginia Press for the United States Capitol Historical Society, 1986). The Royal Instructions to the Peace Commission of 1778 are conveniently located in S. E. Morison (ed.), Sources and Documents Illustrating the American Revolution, 1764–1788 (The Clarendon Press, 1923).
The best general introductions to European history covered by this chapter are Norman Rich, Great Power Diplomacy, 1814–1914 (McGraw-Hill, 1992); A. J. P. Taylor, The Struggle for Mastery in Europe, 1848–1918 (Oxford University Press, 1954); Christopher J. Bartlett, The Global Conflict: The International Rivalry of the Great Powers, 1880–1990 (Longman, 1994); Norman Stone, Europe Transformed, 1878–1919 (Oxford University Press, 1999); and James Joll, Europe since 1870, 4th edn. (Penguin, 1990). Nineteenth-century diplomacy is treated in Christopher J. Bartlett, Peace, War and the European Powers, 1814–1914 (Palgrave Macmillan, 1996); and F. R. Bridge and Roger Bullen, The Great Powers and the European States System, 1815–1914 (Longman, 1980). Useful access to primary source material is provided by Ralph R. Menning (ed.), The Art of the Possible: Documents on Great Power Diplomacy, 1814–1914 (McGraw-Hill, 1996).
For the breakdown of Bismarck’s alliance system, see Richard Langhorne, The Collapse of the Concert of Europe: International Politics, 1890–1914 (Palgrave Macmillan, 1981); William L. Langer, The Franco-Russian Alliance, 1890–1894 (Harvard University Press, 1929) and The Diplomacy of Imperialism, 2nd edn. (Knopf, 1968); and George F. Kennan, The Decline of Bismarck’s European Order: Franco-Russian Relations, 1875–1890 (Princeton University Press, 1979). James Joll and Gordon Martel’s The Origins of the First World War, 3rd edn. (Oxford University Press, 2006) remains the best general introduction to the subject, while the best military history of World War I is B. H. Liddell Hart, History of the First World War (Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1970). For the harm done on the ground level, see Alan Kramer, Dynamic of Destruction: Culture and Mass Killing in the First World War (Oxford University Press, 2007); and Alexander Watson, Enduring the Great War: Combat, Morale and Collapse in the German and British Armies, 1914–1918 (Cambridge University Press, 2008).
For the entry of the United States into the war and its subsequent rejection of the Treaty of Versailles, see Thomas J. Knock, To End All Wars: Woodrow Wilson and the Quest for a New World Order (Princeton University Press, 1995); Daniel M. Smith, The Great Departure: United States and World War I, 1914–1920 (Wiley, 1965); and Arthur S. Link, Wilson, the Diplomatist (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1957).
For Germany’s ‘September Program’, see Fritz Fischer, Germany’s War Aims in the First World War (Norton, 1967). Fischer lays the blame for war squarely on Berlin. John A. Moses’s The Politics of Illusion: The Fischer Controversy in German Historiography (Barnes and Noble, 1975) presents a detailed review of Fischer’s revisionist thesis. Jay Winter and Antoine Prost’s The Great War in History: Debates and Controversies, 1914 to the Present (Cambridge University Press, 2006) is an important comparative study, analysing a multitude of books on World War I written by French, British, and German scholars in order to show patterns of themes and methods over time.
For the historical debate surrounding the course and consequences of the Treaty of Versailles, see Manfred F. Boemeke, Gerald D. Feldman, and Elisabeth Glaser (eds.), The Treaty of Versailles: A Reassessment after 75 Years (Cambridge University Press, 1998). Quotes by David Lloyd George, Winston Churchill, and John Maynard Keynes in this chapter are found in David Lloyd George, British War Aims (George H. Doran, 1917) and War Memoirs (Little Brown, 1932–7); Winston Churchill, The World Crisis (Butterworth, 1923–31), vol. 5; and John Maynard Keynes, The Economic Consequences of the Peace (Harcourt, Brace and Howe, 1920), respectively.
Before all else, I should like to pay tribute to John Lukacs, whose ‘The Night Stalin and Churchill Divided Europe’, The New York Times Magazine, 5 October 1969, 37–50, inspired a generation of scholarship, including my own. See Joseph M. Siracusa, Into the Dark House: American Diplomacy and the Ideological Origins of the Cold War (Regina Books, 1998) and ‘The Meaning of TOLSTOY: Churchill, Stalin, and the Balkans, Moscow, October 1944’, Diplomatic History, 3 (Fall 1979), 443–63, which is a discussion of the source material for this meeting located in the Public Record Office. Also useful are Albert Resis, ‘The Churchill-Stalin Secret “Percentages” Agreement on the Balkans, Moscow, October 1944’, American Historical Review, 85 (1981), 368–87, and ‘Spheres of Influence in Soviet Diplomacy’, Journal of Modern History, 53 (1981), 417–39; and Vojtech Mastny, Russia’s Road to the Cold War: Diplomacy, Warfare, and the Politics of Communism, 1941–1945 (Columbia University Press, 1979).
Recommended overviews of the war years include the first volume in Norman A. Graebner, Richard Dean Burns, and Joseph M. Siracusa, America and the Cold War, 1941–1991: A Realist Interpretation, 2 vols (Praeger Security International, 2010); Gerhard L. Weinberg, A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II (Cambridge University Press, 1994); William H. McNeill, America, Britain and Russia: Their Cooperation and Conflict, 1941–1946 (Oxford University Press, 1953); Herbert Feis, Churchill, Roosevelt, Stalin: The War They Waged and the Peace They Sought (Princeton University Press, 1957); and John L. Snell, Illusion and Necessity: The Diplomacy of Global War, 1939–1945 (Houghton Mifflin, 1963). On the British side, see Sir Lleywellyn Woodard, History of the Second World War: British Foreign Policy in the Second World War, 5 vols (HMSO, 1970–6) and John Charmley, Churchill’s Grand Alliance: The Anglo-American Special Relationship, 1940–57 (Hodder and Stoughton, 1995). The best reference work for the period is The Oxford Companion to the Second World War, ed. I. C. B. Dear (Oxford University Press, 1995).
Winston Churchill’s recollection of events is found in Chapter 15, ‘October in Moscow’, in The Second World War, vol. 6, Triumph and Tragedy (Houghton Mifflin, 1953). Also useful are The Diaries of Sir Alexander Cadogan, 1939–45, ed. David Dilks (Cassell, 1971); Anthony Eden, The Memoirs of Anthony Eden, Earl of Avon: The Reckoning (Houghton Mifflin, 1965); W. Averell Harriman and Elie Abel, Special Envoy to Churchill and Stalin, 1941–1946 (Random House, 1975); R. E. Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History (Putnam’s, 1977); Charles E. Bohlen, Witness to History, 1929–1969 (Norton, 1973); and George F. Kennan, Memoirs, 1925–1963 (Little, Brown, 1967).
That Australian scholars have been talking and writing about the United States far more than American scholars have been talking and writing about Australia should come as no surprise. See Joseph M. Siracusa, ‘The United Sates, Australia, and the Central Pacific’, in Guide to American Foreign Relations since 1700, ed. Richard Dean Burns (ABC-CLIO, 1983). Also see Joseph M. Siracusa and Yeong-Han Cheong, America’s Australia/Australia’s America: A Guide to Issues and References (Regina Books, 1997); and Joseph M. Siracusa and David G. Coleman, Australia Looks to America: Australian-American Relations since Pearl Harbor (Regina Books, 2006).
For general background, see C. Hartley Grattan, The United States and the Southwest Pacific (Harvard University Press, 1961); Warner Levi, American-Australian Relations (University of Minnesota Press, 1947); and Gordon Greenwood, Early Australian-American Relations (Melbourne University Press, 1944).
Trevor R. Reese’s Australia, New Zealand, and the United States (Oxford University Press, 1969) provides a broad survey of the conclusion and operation of the ANZUS Treaty, while Joseph G. Starke’s ANZUS Treaty Alliance (Melbourne University Press, 1965) remains the classic treatment of the subject.
Also useful are Harry C. Gelber, The Australian-American Alliance: Costs and Benefits (Penguin, 1968); Henry S. Albinski, ANZUS, the United States and Pacific Security (University Press of America, 1987); and Coral Bell, Dependent Ally: A Study in Australian Foreign Policy (Oxford University Press, 1988).
Memoir literature includes D. Dilks (ed.), The Diaries of Sir Alexander Cadogan, 1938–45 (Cassell, 1971); Walter Millis (ed.), The Forrestal Diaries: The Inner History of the Cold War (Cassell, 1952); and P. C. Spender, Exercises in Diplomacy: The ANZUS Treaty and the Colombo Plan (Sydney University Press, 1969). Primary documents for ANZUS may be found in The ANZUS Documents, ed. A. Burnett (Australian National University, 1991) and Australian-American Relations since 1945, ed. Glen St J. Barclay and Joseph M. Siracusa (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976).
Portions of this chapter have been adapted from my recent study, with Paul Battersby, Globalization and Human Security (Rowman and Littlefield, 2009).
The concept of globalization has gathered a rich bibliography in a relatively short period of time and become embedded in the social science lexicon. A good general and brief study of globalization is Manfred Steger’s Globalization: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2003). For a comprehensive and multi-layered introduction, see John Baylis and Steve Smith (eds.), The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (Oxford University Press, 2001). Baylis and Smith bring together authored chapters on history, political theory, conflict and security, international institutions, environmental politics, and human rights.
For the economic dimensions of globalization, see Jurgen Osterhammel, Niels Petersen, and Donna Geyer, Globalization: A Short History (Princeton University Press, 2005); Niall Ferguson, The Cash Nexus: Money and Power in the Modern World (Basic Books, 2001); and Erich Rauchway, Blessed among Nations: How the World Made America (Hill and Wang, 2006).
The processes of what we recognize as globalization span several centuries. For different historical perspectives, see David Held, Anthony McGrew, David Goldblatt, and Jonathan Perraton, Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, and Culture (Stanford University Press, 1999). Also useful are Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity (Polity Press, 1990) and Runaway World (Routledge, 2000); Frederic Jameson and Massao Mioyshi (eds.), The Cultures of Globalization (Duke University Press, 1998); and James H. Mittleman (ed.), The Globalization Syndrome (Princeton University Press, 2000).
For critical perspectives on human security, see Giorgio Shani, Makoto Sato, and Mustapha Kamal Pasha (eds.), Protecting Human Security in a Post 9/11 World: Critical and Global Insights (Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). Also see International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect (International Development Research Center, 2001); and Andrew Mack, The Human Security Report 2005: War and Peace in the 21st Century (Oxford University Press, 2005).
The quotes in this chapter may be found in Nicholas Stern, The Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change (HM Treasury, 2006); Roland Paris, ‘Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?’, in New Global Dangers: Changing Dimensions of International Security, ed. M. E. Brown, O. R. Cote, Jr, S. M. Lynn-Jones, and S. E. Miller (MIT Press, 2004); Jim Whitman, The Limits of Global Governance (Routledge, 2005); Manuel Mejido Costoya, Toward a Typology of Civil Actors: The Case of the Movement to Change International Trade Rules and Barriers (United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, 2007); and Nina Graeger and Alexandra Novosseloff, ‘The Role of the OSCE and the EU’, in The United Nations and Regional Security: Europe and Beyond, ed. Michael Pugh and Waheguru Pal Singh Sidhu (Lynne Rienner, 2003).