This complex, ambitious, and large book seeks to question,reformulate, and enhance the scope (and methods) of inter-national relations theories, particularly those formulatedwithin a realist framework. The authors question that frame-work, the Westphalian model of putatively unitary nation-states, quantitative methods of empirical investigation, andthe levels-of-analysis paradigm. The breadth of their critiqueis extensive and, consequently, highly ambitious. Rather thanapproach international relations as a system of unitarynation-states inspired by realist principles, which is arguablya partial and simplified portrayal of contemporary research,the authors favor a complex system of "overlapping, layered,and linked polities" that have both horizontal and verticaldimensions. The latter dimension is particularly important, asit concerns patterns of authority, identity (including ethnic-ity), and institutions that compete for the loyalty of individ-uals.

Hein Goemans develops and tests a rationalist model of wartermination that incorporates domestic politics, focusing onleader tenure and survival in expected postwar politicalenvironments. The book is one of a growing number of worksthat look beyond the initiation of conflict to its conclusion,examine the dynamics of conflict over time, and incorporatedomestic political factors through a multimethod analysis.

Andrew Geddes provides a European analysis of Europeanmigration policy. He asks two questions: To what degree hasthe European Union (EU) garnered control over migrationpolicies of member states? What is the policy outcome? Inanswering these questions, the author makes two contribu-tions to the literature.

The salience of supranational structures of governance in-creased dramatically during the last decade. The WorldTrade Organization (WTO) and North American Free TradeAgreement (NAFTA), for example, not only establish de-tailed norms, rules, and decision-making procedures but alsoendow supranational governing boards with sweeping powersof enforcement. The European Monetary Union (EMU)greatly constrains national sovereignty by eliminating na-tional currencies and allowing the European Central Bank toplay a key role in national economic policymaking. In hisstudy of NAFTA and the European Monetary System(EMS), Lloyd Gruber contends that international relationsscholars have had difficulty coming to grips with the trendtoward global governance because the dominant theoreticalapproaches-neoliberalism and neorealism-tend to assumeincorrectly that international cooperation produces mutualbenefits for all contracting parties.

The central theme of this book is that U.S. strategy in theMiddle East is fundamentally flawed but not irreparable. Thismay be the result of the inherent mismatch between strategyand policy and, more significantly, between America's prin-ciples and interests. In particular, the author argues that theU.S. approach toward Islam is "beset with ambiguities andtensions" (p. 3). Furthermore, he stresses that there is asomewhat dangerous growing gap between the Americanpeople and their representatives in Congress, on the onehand, and presidential administrations, on the other, when itcomes to dealing with "islamists" (those who espouse greaterreligious activism in politics). The former lean toward aconfrontational attitude that is fed by cultural differences,stereotyping, and negative images of Muslims, whereas thelatter strive to accommodate or tolerate a majority of mod-erate or pro-West Islamic forces and states.

The 1990s were characterized by a substantial increase in thenumber of ethnic conflicts within states. The internationalcommunity, especially the United Nations, responded byintervening to prevent or resolve violence but frequentlyfailed to do so. Mary Kaldor attempts to explain whyidentity-based violence has increased and why the interna-tional community's actions have so often failed.

Social scientific interest in "social Europe" pales in compar-ison with the attention that has been directed toward theeconomic and political dimensions of the European Union(EU). This is perhaps hardly surprising; for much of itsrelatively short history, the system that is today the EU hasbeen almost exclusively economic in its focus. Only since the1980s has the project of European integration acquired asignificant social dimension. Given this imbalance, RobertGeyer provides a welcome and timely addition to the litera-ture.

In the past ten years there has been a burst of theoretical andempirical research on the topic of learning in internationalrelations. Russell J. Leng's new book is the latest addition tothis body of scholarship, and it builds on his past research onlearning and crisis bargaining. Leng examines the role oflearning in crisis bargaining strategies within ongoing, inter-national rivalries. He asks a series of questions, including: Dopatterns of crisis behavior repeat from one crisis to the next?

This book has an admirable goal: to present policy-relevantresults of past academic research to "a wide audience ofstudents, practitioners, policy makers and researchers whowant a modern treatment of NATO" (p. xii). To directfruitfully the results of scholarly work to less academicaudiences is a difficult task, because many theoretical as-sumptions and methodological issues must be skimmed overand criticisms of the work summarized or ignored. Nonethe-less, the goal is a good one, and the authors are wellpositioned to accomplish their purpose, which they do to alarge extent. For more than two decades Todd Sandler hasbeen the primary proponent of the "joint product" model ofalliances. This model is possibly the most prominent chal-lenge to (or modification of) the public-goods approach tothe study of alliances that was pioneered by Mancur Olsonand Richard Zeckhauser. Keith Hartley, director of theCentre for Defence Economics at the University of York, haswritten extensively on defense procurement, disarmament,and conversion.

The word globalization first appeared in the second half of the1980s and now has become the most ubiquitous in thelanguage of international relations. It has spawned a newvocabulary: globaloney (Why all the hype when the globaleconomy was more integrated in the age of Queen Victo-ria?): globaphobia (the new, mainly mistaken, backlash);globeratti (the members of the international nongovernmen-tal organizations [INGOs] who travel around the world fromconference to conference, except when they are on theInternet mobilizing for the next conference), and so on. ForRobert Gilpin, among the world's most eminent scholars ofinternational relations, globalization is insightfully defined asthe deepening and widening integration of the world econ-omy by trade, financial flows, investment, and technology.

Space is a seductive place, where technology-induced vistasoften blur the policy vision of earthbound military planners,scientific explorers, or commercial entrepreneurs. This is themessage that beams down from Roger Handberg's book onspace militarization. He leads the reader through the twistsand turns of technology, law, and policy, through the bureau-cratic labyrinth of the U.S. military and space industrialcomplexes. In the end, one is faced with the same imponder-ables that confronted President Clinton in deciding whetherto deploy the National Missile Defense (NMD) system. Likean astute player on fourth down, he punted that spacefootball to his successor, and the Handberg volume gives youthe Monday morning quarterback advantage.