Political Studies Books

POLITICAL THEORY

It was Bernard Mandeville who in 1724 said that moral virtues are ‘the political offspring which flattery begot upon pride‘. The target of Mandeville's satirical attack was the view of virtue as self-denial, which according to him was a paradox since all actions spring from self-interest. Mandeville's cynical views remind us that the tug-of-war between self-interest and benevolence has been around for centuries, yet this debate remains as fascinating and significant today as it was in the eighteenth century. The two books being reviewed here are important contributions to this body of literature.

The principal virtue of Political Altruism? is that it moves the debate on altruism towards empirical case studies, in this case solidarity movements and voluntary organizations within both the national and the transnational context. This does not mean that the book is devoid of theoretical concerns. Quite the contrary. The introductory chapters by Florence Passy and Charles Tilly, and the concluding chapter by Marco Giugni, address the difficulty of defining the concept of altruism. Yet those of us who have a tendency to approach altruism from a philosophical perspective are reminded that there is much to be learnt from exploring examples of altruism in action.

Whether self-interest plays any role in acts of altruism is a recurring theme throughout the book, so much so that Mancur Olson's seminal study of collective action finds its way into almost every chapter. The fact that the editors resist the temptation of giving one definition of altruism at the outset is also to be praised. As they explain, this open-ended approach was deliberately intended to avoid determining ex ante something that must be assessed after careful examination of facts and explanations. This explains why the book's main title deliberately ends with a question mark.

While the contributors to this volume may disagree on the relationship between self-interest and altruism, one important thesis that seems to be widely shared is that social relations rather than individual motivations should be the ground on which we judge altruistic actions, since altruistic behaviour is the product of situations and circumstances. This is perhaps the single most important lesson we learn from reading this book.

Concern over the all-pervading appeal to self-interest as the dominant explanatory paradigm in contemporary politics is the backdrop for John Kane's impressive The Politics of Moral Capital. In this beautifully written book, John Kane wants to convince us that so-called political realists and other methodological cynicists are fundamentally wrong. That is because there is an inevitable and ineradicable moral dimension to life, political life included.

Kane claims he has found the moral dimension of politics in the concept of moral capital. Basically, the idea is that moral reputation inevitably represents a resource for political agents and institutions. It is not so much the ethical dimensions of decision-making that define moral capital, but people's moral perceptions of political actors, causes, institutions and organizations. By stressing the ubiquity and effect of people's moral judgement in political life, Kane is able to reject overly cynical views that typically suppose politics to be an inherently amoral realm.

The great virtue of this book is that Kane does not restrict his analysis to ostentatious theoretical speculations. Instead, he supports his thesis with a number of fascinating historical examples. In order to show how moral capital can be acquired during times of crisis, the stories of Abraham Lincoln and Charles de Gaulle are retold with an original moral twist. Moral capital can also be accumulated during periods of persecution – as the tragic stories of Nelson Mandela and Aung San Suu Kyi's long incarceration testify. The latter case is particularly interesting as it reveals the potential transmissibility of moral capital (from her famous father Aung San, the martyred hero of Burmese independence). Finally, because moral capital is not exclusively attached to notable individuals fighting for high causes, but may also institutionally reside in a respected political office, Kane takes us through the American presidency from Kennedy to Clinton.

The case studies of different leaders make for fascinating reading, and at the end of the book one is left with the feeling that moral capital deserves to be taken at least as seriously as Robert Putnam's more famous idea of social capital. In order to pursue the idea of moral capital even further, perhaps the next step is to explore in greater detail what is ‘moral’ in moral capital. After all, there are many paradigms of morality (Kantian, utilitarian, contractarian, etc.), therefore there are many conflicting views on moral judgements, moral choices, moral values and moral ends. Further research in the idea of moral capital should move in the direction of moral philosophy in general, and moral psychology in particular.

Collecting one's previously published articles in a single volume might legitimately arouse pessimism among the cynical. Gathering them under the name of Gramsci, however, gives some cause for optimism. Sassoon's work on Gramsci is important and, although this is a book with many different themes, the first three substantial chapters focus directly on his thought, are certainly worthy of republishing, and ought to be read by those interested in the application of Gramsci's ideas today. These chapters investigate Gramsci's discussion of intellectuals and language as indices in gauging social and political transformations. Sassoon's Gramsci is an independent thinker willing to revise his analysis in light of rapidly changing circumstances; his lesson is both methodological and substantial, pointing us to the reorganization of power and conflict in industrialized societies, and to the need to examine the way our categories constrain the interpretation of phenomena.

The remaining chapters vary in their relative distance from Gramsci's ideas but they develop his insights in relation to selected issues in contemporary politics: citizenship, New Labour, civil society, education policy amongst others. As Sassoon confesses herself, this is an eclectic mix of debates and issues linked primarily by their author's interest in Gramsci. Unfortunately, there is no real engagement with wider debates on Gramsci's thought and its application in fields such as cultural studies or political economy. Thus the broader issue of what it means to ‘apply’ Gramsci is not contextualized. Nevertheless, readers would be recommended to dip into this book for insights, if not a specific thesis.

This large-format book is comprised of some forty selections from touchstone texts in democratic theory. Its main sections and samples of authors represented are: Liberalism and Republicanism (Locke, Mill, Aristotle, Rousseau); Contemporary Theories (Hayek, Dahl, Schumpeter, Dewey); and Critiques (Bobbio, Foucault, Habermas, Young). Each of these broad sections is further subdivided, for instance, the Critiques section into Realism, Postmodernism, Discourse theory, Inclusion (i.e., anti-racist and anti-sexist) theories, and Non-Western views (e.g., of Gandhi and Bishop Tutu). With the exception of rational choice literature and treatments of the voters’ paradoxes and the like, the mainstream traditions of democratic theory are covered, and the editors have done as good a job as can be expected in striking a balance between providing enough different readings to cover the terrain and including enough material from each reading for it to be meaningful.

The book would be a useful text in an introductory-level course on democratic theory, since it blends classic and contemporary texts and its readings are less sophisticated than those in other standard collections, for example, as edited in David Held's Prospects for Democracy, or The Idea of Democracy by David Copp et al. Because the editors’ introductions to sections are short and mainly of a summary nature, it would make sense to use the book in conjunction with one of the several basic surveys and explications in this area, such as Robert Dahl's On Democracy or Ross Harrison's Democracy.

This book by the distinguished French sociologist Alain Touraine grows out from and rests firmly in the context of French political culture. Nevertheless the topic resonates well with the concerns of a British academic audience, not least because he attacks in the latter part of the book the incoherence and ideological drift of the ‘Third Way’ propagated across Europe by Blair and Schroeder.

Conventional responses to modernity have taken, so Touraine says, mainly two forms: neoliberalism (the invitation to surrender politics to the forces of the market) or state management (by which the author means more than just state regulations but the peculiar form of French mercantilism, i.e. the control of the economy and society by a small state elite). His central argument is that France faces a politics of cultural identities, for which these conventional approaches are ill-suited. Resorting to either of them in the face of new social movements (immigrants, homosexuals) exacerbates the feeling of powerlessness of new social actors and reinforces their ideological and confrontational potential rather than the formation of meaningful social agency. France thus faces the problem of reframing politics to incorporate the newly emerging movements that are informed by identity politics and Touraine sketches four exit strategies from the unfavourable ideological juxtapositions of neoliberalism and state management. The fourth strategy which the author presents as a solution remains vague and borders on political decisionism. And it is here that the author's political leanings for the Jospin/Strauss-Kahn camp show through most clearly. Touraine's book is insightful, at times polemic, but the core argument fails. His attempt to translate a theoretical analysis of new social movements into a political agenda is a shot too far and lacks argumentative sustenance. The book addresses issues that are of interest to students of French politics, new social movements, and theorists of the ‘Third Way‘.

In this book Andrew Jamison, who is both an academic and an environmental activist, offers his fellow environmentalists and other interested parties what he refers to as a ‘progress report’ on humanity's journey towards a sustainable society. It comprises a historically oriented and strongly contextualized account of what he sees as an emerging ecological culture. This, he argues, is growing out of the interactions of a variety of environmental actors from different social and cultural backgrounds with the various social, political and economic facets of the hegemonic culture of liberal capitalism.

The account uses a theoretical perspective inspired by the work on social movements of the social theorist Alain Touraine and the sociologist Alberto Melucci. The theory posits a cyclical process of growth and stagnation in the scientific/technological field in which cultural forces radically reconstruct social processes during the crisis phase.

Jamison examines, firstly, historical examples of oppositional social movements and their reconstructive effect – complex and indirect, but palpable – on mainstream society, before considering the recent history of environmentalism. Themes and issues discussed include the different national styles of environmentalism, the nature and importance of ecological modernization and the forms of radical environmentalism. In conclusion, some ruminations are proffered on the importance of keeping open a public space for the strategic reflection needed to push the dominant culture further in the direction of sustainability.

The book is a valuable source of perspectives on what Jamison refers to as the ‘actual historical trajectory of environmentalism’ (p. 2). It does full justice to the immense complexity of the interactions between different theoretical, cultural, historical and practical forces and processes in the development of environmentalism. The theoretical perspective employed is not as convincing or useful as the rich examples drawn from the history of green movements that make the book well worth reading.

First published in 1984, this new edition of Gloria Vivenza's book on Adam Smith has just been translated into English. There are no substantive changes (except for a long postscript that reviews more recent readings of Smith) but the book holds up well as an expert exercise in tracing sources, influence and filiation. Though it is now commonplace to read about Smith's antique sources, it was not in 1984. Smith was lucky to have been taught by Francis Hutcheson, who revitalized the study of classical teaching at Glasgow; Hutcheson's enthusiasm extended beyond Smith to radiate throughout the whole Scottish Enlightenment.

Vivenza's scholarly and carefully detailed account of the intricate weave of classical influences within Smith's thought is an achievement, not least because many of Smith's most important ideas were a composite of a number of, often quite disparate, sources. Smith would then complicate this mix with his own modern twists, sometimes becoming quite muddled himself about the sources and even the original ideas. Vivenza is aware of this and is ready with the appropriate corrective. She is also sensitive to the fact that Smith was never slavish to his sources but rather used them ‘to form a kind of cultural seed-bed, in which a quite new species of ethics could take root and grow‘.

Adam Smith and the Classics is a close and comprehensive textual study more than an interpretation. Rather than attempting to comprehend Smith's work as a system, the treatment is analytical, organized around topics and their respective pedigrees. Vivenza tells us that her book was written for a non-specialist audience, but scholars of Smith's work should also find it very useful, especially those tired of the steady stream of hagiography coming out of Smith studies.

Simon Tormey's book is intended to be the first introduction and assessment in English of Agnes Heller's work. The goal in itself is ambitious for three main reasons. First, the pupil of Lukács is a very prolific writer and she has more than twenty books published in English; second, her Lukacsian and continental vocabulary is sometimes difficult to follow and translate in an Anglo-Saxon context; and third, the secondary bibliography on Heller is rather scarce. So, this is a much-needed pioneering work of synthesis and assessment, and the very effort of trying to cope with it deserves recognition. The main point of Tormey's book is that Heller is a highly political thinker, and I agree fully with him. Heller's work is, from its inception, a sustained effort to ameliorate our social world and this can be termed political. But, as Tormey's book states, there are dramatic changes in what politics is for Agnes Heller. First, she was a defender of Marxian social or total revolution (in a sense, the end of politics) and now she has less utopian expectations and a much greater recognition of the political institutions of liberalism. The path from one extreme to another is indeed interesting and Tormey narrates it with clarity and precision.

In order to present her work through using this key political orientation, Tormey proceeds classically: a chronological and detailed presentation of Heller's work. This is superbly done in the sense that each work is summarized minutely; the political context in which the works are produced is also presented accurately and briefly and, last but not least, there is a constant counterpoint of Heller's arguments with the relevant and opposed positions of other important contemporary thinkers. Thus, some of Heller's topics like the expectations of the New Left in Hungary; the delusion of the reformability of really existing socialism; the end of the grand narratives and the delineation of a philosophy with political orientation for the contingent world of postmodernity are wonderfully portrayed and well written. To sum up, a very good introductory book for both students and academics of philosophy and politics.

Poggi is a significant scholar of the sociological classics and of theories of the state. In this work these themes are brought together with contemporary power analysis to create a richly textured work in which Weberian and Durkheimian social theory are interwoven with the analysis of state formation and debates on power including, in particular, the work of Mann, Rosinski and Popitz. In the power literature there are those who view power primarily consensually, as ‘power to’ (a position associated with Parsons, Luhmann and Barnes) while others, based upon Weber's definition of power in terms of resistance, take a more conflictual view of power, emphasizing ‘power over‘. Poggi sides with the latter, and uses a nuanced version of Weber's definition which incorporates some of the contextual emphasis found in the work of the consensual theorists.

Poggi's view of power is deeply cynical and, in that respect, he shares much with Machiavelli – Poggi is a kind of Weberian Machiavelli. In many respects this focus is a strength in the sense that it enables him to cut through many of the legitimations which sustain modern society. It is highly instructive (and entertaining!) to see just how far social order can be explained by this classical theoretical framework in combination with a cynical view of power. However, it can be argued that this reductionism is also limiting insofar as Poggi does not attempt to theorize the extent to which ‘power to’ is created by social order in surplus to quantities of power that can be explained coercively.

The purely coercive view of power also has an effect on his analysis of normative/ideological power. While the Durkheimian opening premises of the ideology/normative power argument, in particular with regard to the analysis of meaning, lend themselves to an account of the possibility of increasing social capacity for action (‘power to‘) through the creation of particular interpretive horizons, this possibility is not explored. Such a mode of theorizing would have allowed Poggi to incorporate some of Foucault's, Lukes's and Gramsci's observations into his theoretical framework – these thinkers are largely ignored. This could have been done by theorizing how the realm of truth and knowledge is the modern functional equivalent to the sacred in more traditional societies. However, it can be argued that these are more points of debate rather than criticism. They do not, in any way, detract from the fact that Forms of Power is a significant and original contribution to contemporary debates on power. I would thoroughly recommend this book to anyone interested in power and/or Weberian social theory.

The singular merit of this book is in Seidman's insistence upon the political nature of judicial review decisions. Although now well understood, this question is not yet well established in the literature, and many still function with the conception of the judiciary as benign and neutral. However, Seidman argues that because this is not so, judicial review decisions should unsettle important political questions, else a political settlement will be imposed on many who may oppose it. A settlement, enshrining a partisan view, excludes, and the excluded may feel justified in not obeying that to which they have not consented and, therefore, consider not legitimate. Thus important questions should not be judicially settled so that the political process can produce a solution – which, by his standards, cannot be a settlement! This means that Seidman's ideal society and constitution is one that is perpetually in the making, in flux and change. Incidentally, he is somewhat silent on whether the political process is settled or not.

Seidman uses three strategies. First, he assumes a very harsh, unchanging, set-in-stone view of any settlement, seen as a closed and fixed category, enshrining one exclusionary view, thus creating permanent losers. He contrasts this with the potential inclusiveness of an unsettled condition. But because any settlement would be exclusionary, permanent unsettlement, a continuing conversation in which politics looms very large, is the only desirable condition. The view that any settlement is always marked by periods of unsettlement and change does not get a look-in, although he is constrained to admit that individual cases must be decided and that there is need for some settlement if daily life is to continue. Second he confounds ‘fundamental’ and ‘policy’, the constitutional and the political, and makes quite unwarranted general assumptions (p. 34) that in effect create a bogus concept ready for demolition. Third he criticizes the two contemporary paradigms of liberal constitutionalism and democracy for their inadequacies but ends by accepting that they are relevant to and actually help create unsettlement. Such a volte face also characterizes his conception of unsettlement: his real fear – expressed at the end of the book – is that unsettlement may, after all, be a kind of settlement that many would reject!

‘Excluded middle’, confused concepts and ‘bad metaphysics’ plague this book. Lawyers are notoriously bad at constitutional theory: since Dicey we have suffered at their hands, but Siedman goes further. For him a constitution is not a pre-political and pre-legal matter such that the process of making one would be different from the processes that a constitution thus made engenders. Failing to grasp this leads Seidman to expect the legitimacy of the processes that a constitution engenders necessarily to flow from and correspond to the legitimacy of the processes whereby it was made. And because this is an impossible expectation, the legitimacy of the provisions of any constitution can be thrown into doubt if one disagrees with them.

Finally, Seidman adds to the already difficult problems of the reader by using a number of words and phrases interchangeably but without any adequate explanation: one is hard put to know what he means by constitution, constitutional law, constitutional theory, theory of the constitution etc., but above all constitutionalism. Another problem – amongst many more – is that his analogies are often irrelevant, even bizarre, but he applies them and draws inferences from them.

The Editors record our regrets that since submitting this review, Fred Nash has sadly died. He was a loyal reviewer and supporter of the journal.

Globalization is one of the most pervasive terms in political language; it is employed to explain just about any phenomenon imaginable. This has some positive aspects: for too long political theorists and scientists examined the state in isolation from its international environment. But the sheer promiscuity of the term has led also (and often) to vagueness and conceptual confusion. Although residues of this problem linger in The Globalization of Liberalism, the editors have done an excellent job in producing a coherent and interesting collection.

The book is focused on a relatively neglected area, namely the ideology shaping globalization. The book is split into three parts. Part I consists of three essays which grapple with the meaning of liberalism in globalization theory and practice. In particular there is an interesting exchange between David Long and Robert Keohane, over the value of employing social scientific ‘neo-liberal’ IR theory or a more normatively rich political theoretic form. Part II offers five essays – by Richard Falk, J. G. Ruggie, Stephen Gill, Mervyn Frost, and Tom Young – on various aspects of global liberalism; again, no clear understanding of the nature of ‘liberalism’ emerges, but all of the essays are of high quality. Part III, ‘International Relations beyond Europe,‘ consists of three essays, on China, Egypt and Tunisia, and India. Although stimulating, the section fits uneasily with the rest of the book, which by definition was ‘beyond Europe’ in the first place; nevertheless, the case studies are rewarding. Overall, the book is a useful addition to the literature on both liberalism (which all too often retreats into sterile ideal theorizing) and globalization (which is all too often devoid of serious ideological analysis).

For those with an interest in ‘post‘-ology the title of this book may strike one as odd. Post-Marxism is the ‘thing’ (‘intervention’ perhaps?) invented by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe to describe their theoretical ‘project’ announced in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Thus the notion that post-Marxism has an ‘intellectual history’ requires us to imagine that the rather straightforward equation of ‘post-Marxism’ with their work has to be rethought. What emerges here is that Laclau and Mouffe should be regarded merely as standard-bearers for a kind of critical thinking which is ‘not-quite-Marxism-but-still-in-some-way-radical‘. The existence of such forms of thinking should then in turn allow the discussion of a ‘movement’ (p. 170) that can count on Luxemburg, Adorno, Lukacs, possibly the rest of the Frankfurt School, radical feminists, politically engaged post-structuralists and postmodernists, Žižek, some interesting philosophers of social science (and so on and so forth) as intellectual forebears and supporters.

How exactly this motley collection of thinkers support and sustain a ‘movement’ is never broached here, which in turn points towards the central paradox of the text. All these thinkers and trends can, it seems, offer so much more than ‘orthodox’/‘classical’ Marxism, and yet the world remains in most respects indifferent to ‘it‘. This is a ‘movement’ that does not ‘move’ and for which its chief theoreticians do not speak; which is to say that it is not a movement at all. Lacking any ‘movement’ type characteristics, the rationale of the text is thus, at the very least, questionable. Which leaves us with a set of polemical essays (and none the less enjoyable for that) arguing for the availability of a critical perspective that is not-Marxist. Read on these terms, rather than as a grandiose narration of the ‘intellectual history’ of an imagined post-Marxist ‘movement‘, some readers may find it quite useful.

Social structure is a key concept in social theory, but it is rare to find a clear exposition and discussion of the concept. A good attempt has been made by López and Scott, who take us on a tour around various concepts of social structure in sociological discussions. It is not only an exposition of different conceptualizations of social structure; the authors also have an idea. They organize the exposition and discussion around three ideas of the concept: institutional structure, relational structure and embodied structure. They start by giving a short but interesting overview of the history of the concept of ‘structure’ before it was adopted by social theory. Then comes discussion of the contributions from Spencer and, in particular, Durkheim to the concept of social structure. The authors argue that Durkheim inspired all leading approaches. His two aspects of social structure – collective relationships and collective representations – have inspired many theorists, but have never been brought together in a single theory. In the following chapters, López and Scott demonstrate how Durkheim's collective representations have given rise to the institutional structures and how collective relationships form relational structures. Talcott Parsons is seen as the key representative of the idea of institutional structures. A relational structural approach is to be found in the works of Marx, Radcliff-Brown, Simmel and Tönnies. The two approaches are seen as complementary and, by stressing the embodied structural approach, the authors argue that the two approaches can be brought together in a more fruitful way. Some key thinkers who have made important attempts to this complementary view are Bourdieu and Foucault.

Bourdieu is one of the key figures in another interesting new social theory book – on ‘structuration‘. Bourdieu, along with Giddens, is regarded as the most important representative of a ‘structurationist’ approach to social theory. Parker argues that structuration has two meanings. First, it refers in a very general sense to the generation of structures. This is a central problem to all scientific disciplines. The second meaning concerns a particular kind of solution to the problem of structuration within social sciences. It relates to the problem of the objectivity of social structures and the subjectivity of the human material. The book is essentially a discussion of how two different and more recent social theoretical positions have approached the problem. Parker contrasts Giddens and Bourdieu with the ‘post-structurationists’ M. Archer and N. Mouzelis. Can the character of the relationship between agency and structure be analysed as an identity between the two elements, as Giddens and Bourdieu seem to argue? Or must we characterize it as non-identical, as Archer and Mouzelis claim is necessary? Parker argues in favour of a post-structurationist approach. He supports his argument with a brief illustration of the work of the two historical sociologists M. Mann and W. Runciman. The book starts off with an interesting discussion of the rise of structuration theory in the early 1970s. Here, the term structuration is placed in a cultural and institutional context. Moreover, the book contains very fine expositions of Giddens, Bourdieu, Archer and Mouzelis, and an interesting assessment of the four theorists. The book has its shortcomings: notably, it neglects the more recent tradition that cannot be placed in a structurationist or post-structurationist framework, such as N. Luhmann. Luhmann provides us with a provocative although questionable alternative by arguing that the question of agency-structure is wrong in the first place. Second, he totally abandons the agency-structure problem and redefines the key problem of social theory as a problem of communication and social systems. Both books are well written and very accessible, and they will both work fine for advanced undergraduates and up.

Although now a little dated in its policy detail, this book, published by Princeton University Press in its New French Thought series, retains interest as one of the first and influential efforts to articulate what we would now call a third way philosophy of the welfare state, particularly because it was written in a French, rather than Anglo-American, context. Rosanvallon argues that the French welfare state is rooted in an ‘insurance paradigm’ in which welfare is targeted at equally shared and unpredictable risks. However, this paradigm is increasingly problematic for a variety of reasons: increasing knowledge of risk factors at the individual level, and, not least, the labour market problems caused by social insurance charges on low-wage work and the related phenomenon of entrenched social exclusion. Rosanvallon argues that the welfare state must be refounded on the model of ‘solidarity‘: as a purposefully, explicitly redistributive institution. The appeal to solidarity must be based on the idea of inclusion for mutual utility. This, he argues, points in the direction of programmes that seek to activate the marginalized using measures and supports suited to each individual case – the French Revenue Minimum d'insertion and US-style workfare programmes are analysed as moves in this direction.

At both the empirical and philosophical levels, the argument is at times somewhat loose and impressionistic, and some serious objections to the ‘individualization’ of welfare – notably, the danger of the arbitrary exercise of power by those crafting interventions to suit the individual case – are not adequately dealt with. But, in common with contractualist welfare thinkers in Britain and the USA, Rosanvallon's work poses an interesting question: can solidarity be constructed and maintained under modern conditions without explicit attention to, and insistence on, productive participation as an expression of civic reciprocity?

his is a collection of thirteen of Joseph Raz's essays in moral philosophy. Though some have been published before, the essays illuminate each other and the main themes of a Razian approach to moral philosophy become clearer in the collection. Raz is interested in what it is to engage with value, to give morality a place in one's practical reasoning. He does not believe there is any special problem in explaining moral action. In fact, a lot of the book is devoted to making our engagement with value seem less problematic than philosophers have made it out to be. Of course, it is not less complicated than practical reason in general; but Raz prefers to emphasize complications like incommensurability and play down the alleged problem of the relation between morality and self-interest. People just act for reasons, he says, that is, for what appear to them to be adequate reasons, regardless of whether or not they serve their well-being.

This volume does not explore the political and legal implications of any of this. But those who are familiar with Raz's earlier book, The Morality of Freedom, will be in no doubt about their importance for political philosophy. A lot of political philosophy rests on a rather crude view of the relation between autonomy and value. Raz is gently insistent that we should be less careless about it. One other theme that interests him is the relation between morality and social practice. Like most legal positivists, Raz wants to keep this distinction clear; but, as always, what he gives us is a clear view of complication rather than a simple denial that social practice ever makes a difference to what is right. Like all Raz's work, these essays are forbidding in their density. But the rewards are very high indeed; one comes away with a feeling of having been chided for one's simple-mindedness by a teacher determined to coax one towards a grasp of complicated truth.

Hughes's intention is to challenge the conventional interpretation of the Marxist method (historical materialism) as one that is overly concerned with the development of the ‘forces of production’ and reduction of ‘socially necessary’ labour at the expense of the environment. Indeed, Hughes's contention is not only that there is no necessary division between the development of productivity and the protection of the environment, but that environmental protection must be considered as a ‘need’ in itself (p. 148).

Central to Hughes's argument is the distinction between ‘want’ and ‘desire’, i.e., genuine and false need; Hughes argues that this is an implicit distinction running throughout Marx's writings. Hughes argues that, in order for any future communist society to be ecologically sustainable, there must be a prioritization of human need, and to this end Hughes argues that Marx (certainly in his earlier writings) is committed to an essentialist view of human nature which would not be satisfied by growing productivity (as such), but by having a direct and controlling role in the process of production itself (p. 188).

This book's chief virtue lies in its capacity to present an informed argument in a lucid manner, which is made accessible to those only moderately familiar with Marx's writing by a thorough discussion of human need as found in the ‘Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts’, and the debate in subsequent literature. The attention given to the question of need in Hughes's work represents a serious attempt to elaborate an area of Marx's writings that remains obscure, i.e., ‘the ends’ of a communist society, and by implication is a distinctive contribution to the development of Marxist theory.

This book focuses on the boundary between the public and private in contemporary society. Split into two parts, the chapters of the volume draw from philosophical, political and then legal perspectives. Steiner begins by destabilizing the asymmetry in favour of private over public. The papers that follow, by Castiglione, O’Neill and D'entreves (respectively), engage with Rawls on the limits of public reason to constitutional (as opposed to everyday) politics, with Rorty on the demarcation of private irony and public hope, and with Arendt on the relationship of active citizenship with the public sphere, political agency and political culture. The second section draws from legal perspectives. Sypnowich writes that privacy concerns the abuse of privilege as well as the protection of intimacy, arguing for ‘civility’ in mediating the extremes. Cohen differentiates between the rights to privacy and the duty of privacy, to reveal how the extension of rights can impose unwanted collective identities. The last two chapters highlight the historical significance of notions of privacy – in the strangely uncontroversial demarcation of public and private law (Simmonds) and in the institutionalization of privacy through marriage (Vogel).

The quality of the papers is as impressive as the list of contributors. But the volume's main strength is that it embraces the complexity and contestability of the relationship between public and private to link the multi-disciplinarity of the authors and diversity of their arguments. The volume is inconclusive and so raises many questions, yet the content and presentation of these arguments are both stimulating and generally accessible.

Political Theory

BRITAIN AND IRELAND

This book is essentially a follow-on to the editors’ previous compilation, Ireland and the Politics of Change (1998), and expands many of the arguments in that book. The transformation of independent Ireland's economy since 1987 was rooted, it was argued by some contributors in the earlier work, in a series of decisions made by political leaders and civil servants over the previous thirty years. This book looks more closely at these decisions and their consequences for Irish society and the economy. In an introductory chapter, Crotty declares the crucial event to have been the succession of Sean Lemass to Eamon de Valera in 1959 and the embracing of free trade policies in the Sixties. Foreign investment was encouraged by subsidies and tax holidays. The boom of the 1960–73 period was followed by a difficult period, but the extraordinary expansion of the last fifteen years has been a result of the far-reaching decisions of that time. Investment in education, particularly technical training, and the use of a parastatal agency, the Industrial Development Authority, to target emerging ‘high-tech’ sectors and make Ireland attractive to them in particular have paid off spectacularly. The IDA decided to wager on pharmaceuticals, electronics and food processing very early on. Ireland has become a world leader in all three areas.

Irish foreign policy has evolved, partly as a consequence, from a stance of support for neutralism and the USA to one of enthusiastic support for European integration and more nuanced but quiet support for the USA. The essays in the book examine the economy, multiculturalism, the European connection, Northern Ireland's relationship with Dublin, globalization, security, human rights and the lessons of the country's experience for world development. This writer would have liked to hear more about education and religious culture, but this is an excellent collection by leading scholars touching on universal themes of interest in the context of a small country.

A notion commonly held by scholars of British politics is that New Labour is a Thatcherite political party. This is the subject of Richard Heffernan's engaging and original book. His argument is straightforward and frequently persuasive. Having abandoned social democracy and much of its past, New Labour, he suggests, has been decisively shaped by the Thatcherite agenda, what he characterizes as the prevailing orthodoxy.

Heffernan provides an excellent summary of the extensive literature surrounding Thatcherism, while advancing the view that it was a coherent ideological phenomenon as well as an electorally realistic one. He then looks at some of the ways in which Thatcherism has influenced New Labour's outlook and policy stance. In the final chapter, there is an extended discussion of the party's attitude to privatization. Sandwiched between this empirical material, three theoretical chapters examine party change and competition, and advance a theory of consensus politics. Heffernan focuses on the concept of ‘catch-up’ at an elite level, as one party follows another in adopting policy positions. While the theoretical chapters are rather dry and repetitive, two features are worth highlighting: first, Heffernan's emphasis on the ability of parties to shape the outlook of other parties through the way they define dominant political discourses; and second, the importance of a party's history in shaping its ability to change course. There appeared to be an ambiguity here. At times, Heffernan indicates that Labour has had no option but to ‘catch up’ with Thatcherism through a process of accommodation: the party was ‘unable (and increasingly unwilling) to resist’. At other points, he indicates that the party might have tried to hold on to its traditional identity and so ‘attempt to shift the terms of the political debate’.

Empirically, I was not entirely certain about his conclusion. The privatization case is, in an important sense, a weak one. Given the terms on which concerns were privatized (accessible cheap shares) and the costs of renationalization, it was always going to be hard for Labour to sustain a stance of outright opposition. Once the party could credibly move ground, it did. As Heffernan claims, much of Labour's stance looks Thatcherite. But on some issues, the picture is much less clear. Take the New Deal and Gordon Brown's redistributive budgets. Much of the Blair administration's rhetoric is orientated towards the market, but the substance of some policies less so. However, these are small points about a well-argued, carefully constructed and stimulating volume.

Early in the book, the authors quote Ernest Rutherford saying that ‘science is divided into two categories, physics and stamp collecting’. The book is unashamedly and usefully an exercise in stamp collecting: careful categorization of risk regulation regimes along a number of dimensions. The motivation for the book is the authors’ observation that there are persistent differences in the way particular risks and hazards are chosen for regulation, and in the way regulation works. The differences occur both among types of hazard within the same jurisdiction, and between the way the same hazard is treated in different countries.

The book sets out to categorize these differences in ways that are helpful for policy analysis. It also attempts to test possible explanations for these differences.

The book defines a risk regulation regime as a system of rules, practices and animating ideas associated with the regulation of a particular risk or hazard. Regimes are classified along two dimensions: in terms of different components of control and in relation to the context and the content of regulation. Control components include information gathering (including questions such as how the authorities are alerted to a breach), standard setting (e.g., how strict are the standards?) and behaviour modification (e.g., what are the sanctions?). Regime context is described primarily in terms of public preferences and the structure of organized interests. Regime content is viewed through size (how much regulation is brought to bear), structure and style.

The analytical approach developed to undertake this classification is full of insights. The classification scheme set out in the book will serve anyone involved in practical institutional design well beyond the specific examples it presents. The approach to explaining the differences in the regimes may not survive tests for statistical significance, but it too adds flavour and sparks ideas.

Despite the importance of the subject, this is a rare systematic study of ‘Euroscepticism’. Forster defines this as ‘a negative point of view towards the European Union’. He argues that it constitutes a consistent and important, if divided, tendency in British politics. Its ebb and flow is defined by five factors: party impacts; opportunities; arenas; resources; and information. Using these, he examines it during four periods: the post-war era; the move to membership between 1961 and 1975; the quiet years from 1979 to 1990; and the present, post-1991 phase, focusing on EMU and the eclipse of Euroscepticism of the left. His analysis suggests that Euroscepticism has gradually become stronger, intellectually more rigorous and better informed about the EU. So it has exercised increasing political influence on the parliamentary right and on public opinion at large, even though it has neither achieved legislative impact nor a clear alternative external strategy. This may be because it has also become a quasi-religious faith and consequently fissiparous.

Forster covers this extremely well. He applies his grid consistently, draws on a wide range of sources, and makes sound and thoughtful judgements. Students should find it clearly organized and intellectually stimulating. And most readers will benefit from the new insights it offers into the Eurosceptics and their ideas, often inherited from Enoch Powell. Two questions arise. First, while Forster's analysis of the phenomenon is accurate, his definition is too narrow, because what he shows is opposition to European integration and British participation. Given this negativism, to call it scepticism, as its proponents do, is misleading. Second, he can imply that governments were essentially pro-integration whereas many of them were true ‘sceptics’. This affected their performance, thus encouraging both British opposition and Continental determination.

Britain and Ireland

NORTH AMERICA

Each of these edited volumes seeks to chronicle and analyse the contemporary political scene and to make suggestions about what the future holds. The analyses of US politics at the turn of the century in the Melzer volume focus on two aspects, identity politics and big government, although the final section does look beyond America's shores. Those interested in developments regarding congress, the presidency, the courts and policy-making must look elsewhere. Nevertheless, the editors have brought together some highly respected academics and produced a thorough and incisive review of two central philosophical and political problems facing the USA and, to a lesser extent, the wider world today.

The stated aim of Crotty's volume is to examine how the US polity is responding to globalization and the increasing interdependence of international institutions. Unlike Melzer's, Crotty's book focuses strictly on the USA. The various chapters examine a range of topics, including political parties, Congress, elections, racial politics and policy-making. Individually, there are some interesting chapters (Cathie Jo Martin on healthcare and the power of business groups, Edward Carmines and Paul Sniderman on affirmative action, and Betty Glad on the global economy stand out), but they do not form a coherent whole. They differ markedly in length, style and approach. More importantly, too many chapters fail to engage directly with the response of the US polity to globalization and interdependence.

Moreover, as with many other recently published texts on the USA at the fin de siècle, the book was written pre-9/11 and thus cannot gauge its impact on US politics and institutions. While this is no fault of the authors, it makes talk of declining international terrorism and a more peaceful world seem ill-advised (p. 3). The Melzer volume can be similarly criticized. For example, the otherwise excellent chapter by Atul Kohli and Pratap Mehta on the rise of faith-based identity and Hindu nationalism in India would have benefited greatly from a post-9/11 perspective. None the less, the majority of the chapters in Melzer et al. do not feel dated, perhaps because it is more a work of political philosophy than political science. The three chapters on identity politics in the USA (by Todd Gitlin, Seyla Benhabib and Alan Wolfe) are deeply thoughtful. As Gitlin points out, the left now champions difference in the form of identity politics and particularism where once it championed universal rights. Now it is the right that talks the language of universalism, where it once spoke only of individuals. Benhabib and Wolfe do not have much good to say about identity politics either.

The best section of the Melzer volume comprises the seven chapters on the ‘rest of the world’. Each is a tour de force on politics and society in China, India and Europe. In Vladimir Tismaneanu's outstanding, but disturbing, chapter on the former eastern bloc, he simply states: ‘In the East, the landscape is utterly puzzling … a whole institutional universe has fallen apart’ (pp. 218, 220). Indeed, the fall of communism and its shattering consequences throw into sharp relief the supposedly divisive debate on big government in the USA. There is simply no government to speak of in many states in the east – and, after reading this book, who would wish that for America?

Published over a year before the attack of September 11, this fine study by one of the more nuanced American writers on US foreign policy has assumed even greater importance than before it hit the newsstands. Indeed, it is difficult to think of a more relevant book to read in these difficult and dangerous times when the United States seems dizzy with success after having defeated at least one ‘rogue state’ in the form of Afghanistan, before setting its sights on another in the shape of Iraq. If nothing else, the current American administration seems to be living proof of what Litwak analyses in great detail here: that having lost one enemy to fight between 1989 and 1991, the United States has had no difficulty in finding many others to combat in the post-Cold War era. The real strength of the volume, however, lies in the skilful way in which the author traces the origins and development of US rogue state policy throughout the 1990s, and then seeks to assess its efficacy through detailed case studies of Iraq, Iran and North Korea. But he is no apologist. The rogue state rubric, he argues, is analytically flawed. It also tends to put states of an entirely different character in the same strategic basket. This, he believes, is misconceived and dangerous. A more selective and subtle policy is called for. Wise words indeed, and all written well in advance of the murderous attack of September 11 and Washington's subsequent lumping together as an ‘axis of evil’ of the three states discussed with such care in Litwak's book. One can only hope that, when the dust settles, some people at least will turn to his study and draw some inspiration from his intelligent and sober critique of the sort of simplifications that dominated the American debate about an important security issue before September 11 – and have shaped it even more since.

This volume, which is part of Harvard's BCSIA series, brings together a timely edited review of US defence alternatives that presents objective and detailed assessments of the US defence budget and America's military strategy. The collection is only marred, like other international security studies, by having been published before the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York and on the Pentagon – though homeland defence is contemplated as inter alia needing increased intelligence activities. Notwithstanding this, the chapters still remain germane to the mainstream necessities of forward-looking US defence, being: spending after the Cold War; holding the line on infrastructure spending; the European allies and US defence spending; savings in nuclear deterrence forces; a defence budget for a maritime strategy; flexible ground forces; and exploiting the potential of air power. Its editor and contributors conclude that the USA must shape its military to face the real challenges – rather than embrace priorities anchored in the past of the Cold War. Decision-makers need to take a fresh look at strategy, at the relative contribution of each element of force structure and each item of equipment to the security environment the nation faces. In doing so, the contributors call for smaller forces with more modern weapons suitable for such diversified missions that would include humanitarian and peacekeeping operations. This is excellent advice for a military that needs to close the gap between security requirements and allocated resources. Such advice looking forward is always hard, given the lack of suitable quotable sources on the future. Airing the topic in a heated debate is thus as important as the facts, figures and conclusions. This volume is well written and extremely readable.

This is a collection of previously published essays concerned with the operation and evolution of federalism in the United States. Martha Derthick was until recently a professor of government at the University of Virginia and the director of the governmental studies programme at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC. She has long been an astute observer of American public administration and public policy, with particular interests in federalism, and this collection reflects that practical engagement with intergovernmental relations and their consequences for policy development and implementation.

After a brief introduction, the book consists of eleven essays organized into three sections. The first essay and section provide a broad overview of some basic features of American federalism in the twentieth century. The second section is a loose grouping of six essays. These essays address such topics as the mixed status of states in the twentieth-century federal system, the pressure on Congress to ‘share the burdens of governing’ with states, the political consequences of ‘distributing the work of government among many governments’, and the role of federalism in producing the tobacco settlement. The final section of four essays traces the development of federalism across the twentieth century, focusing on shifts in political thought during the Progressive era, the framing of the Social Security Act during the New Deal (in the one essay written specifically for this volume), the increasing centralization of the 1960s, and the mixed record on federalism in the late 1990s. The volume concludes with a list of other works by the author on related themes.

These essays are short and punchy, which makes the volume quite readable despite its somewhat dry subject matter. Derthick avoids getting bogged down in details, even as her interest in such nuts-and-bolts features of intergovernmental relations as the conditional requirements of federal grants-in-aid to states and localities provides useful insights into basic features of American federalism.

This edited volume of eight essays explores the relationship between the US Supreme Court and the Congress. A number of historical examples help to build a larger context, especially in chapters two and three, but the others focus primarily on the last two decades. A range of issues is covered, including the struggle over slavery, the establishment of a national bank and conflict in both branches regarding the 2000 census, as well as attempts by Congress to curb the Court through the appointment process, judicial impeachment and legislation such as the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), aimed at overturning recent Court decisions. The main argument the authors attempt to develop is that the policy-making responsibilities of the Congress and the Court place the two institutions on a collision course. Moreover, recent experience has found the Court increasingly acting as a legislature; while the Congress has increasingly attempted to assert its own understanding of the constitution in overriding judicial opinions through the legislative process.

For researchers in the field, there is not much new here. But the collection is quite readable and will provide undergraduates and laypeople with a number of issues to think about. The best essays are chapters two and six. In chapter two, ‘Congressional Checks on the Judiciary’, Louis Fisher reviews a number of historically interesting conflicts, including women's right to practise law in the late 1800s, Dred Scott and constitutional amendments (13, 14 and 15), and child labour law in the first half of the twentieth century. It is too short for in-depth coverage, but the chapter notes several fascinating instances of Congressional response to Court opinions. Carolyn N. Long, in chapter six, presents a very good analysis of the history leading up to and the litigation aftermath of the 1993 RFRA.

North America

EUROPE

This is the second book in a series of two, of which the first dealt with the domestic level of the national co-ordination of EU policy. Both books are the result of a research project that sought to lift the lid on a hitherto obscure, but extremely important, dimension of European integration: the interface between the supranational system and the political and administrative systems of the member states. The present volume concentrates on the permanent representations in Brussels – their organization, approaches, styles and effectiveness – with a view to ascertaining whether there is a convergence or divergence in these aspects of their operation. In the introduction, Kassim usefully couches the problematic in terms of the ongoing debate between intergovernmentalists, who tend to view the member states as unitary actors whose preferences are defined primarily by their domestic political situations, and those theories which adopt a more supranational approach and see the EU as a system of governance in its own right that is more than simply a strong international regime.

Eleven countries were chosen (Spain, Denmark and Finland are absent) and a chapter is devoted to each. All of the chapters are excellent, and a particular strength is that each follows a common format, which facilitated the cross-national comparison in the concluding chapter, written by Kassim and Peters. It is true that some of the conclusions are not that surprising. For example, the operation of the permanent representation reflects the size, administrative tradition and type of polity of its member state. More interesting theoretically is the rebuttal of the intergovernmentalist thesis by the conclusion that the permanent representations are not simply representing narrowly defined ‘domestic’ and ‘national’ preferences that they bring to the negotiating table of the Council of Ministers. Rather, the representations are themselves socialized into a European system of governance which gives them a Janus-like quality of defending ‘national’ interests (but these are already ‘European‘) in Brussels and defending and promoting ‘European’ interests in the member states. All in all, this is a useful addition to the theoretical and empirical literature on European integration.

These three books consider European integration from a variety of perspectives. Towards a European Nationality adopts a survey approach. The book's twelve chapters cover all fifteen member states of the European Union case by case (Luxembourg is considered jointly with Belgium; Denmark, Finland and Sweden are covered in a single chapter). Together, they comprise a comprehensive appraisal of the state of citizenship and immigration laws in the various EU member states. In their introduction, the editors argue that a common post-war need to integrate large numbers of immigrants has led to convergence in two areas: extending citizenship entitlements to second-generation migrants, and restrictive immigration policies coupled with more liberal naturalization measures. The rest of the volume may not fully address this convergence thesis, but the individual chapters certainly provide a rich array of useful information and analysis; this book will surely prove to be an indispensable reference work.

From the Nation State to Europe? is likewise an edited collection, though one with intrinsically less similar subject matter. The book's chapters explore the extent to which the EU affects what member states do and how they do it, the implications of European integration for the theories and concepts used to study national politics, and the extent to which those theories and concepts actually explain European integration. Five chapters address the first question. Contending that neofunctionalist and inter- and infragovernmentalist theories fail to explain European Monetary Union, Elie Cohen claims that the conjunction of French and German interests produced the euro. Yves Mény adopts an unabashedly neofunctionalist position, arguing that, although starting from a dynamic deliberately set in motion by the member states, Europeanization continues in ways now often outside their control. Pierre Grémion traces the relationship between state, Europe and republic in the post-war modernization of France; meanwhile, Stanley Hoffmann describes France's Europeanization and the evolution of the French constitutional system. Hugh Berrington and Rod Hague conclude with an examination of British public opinion about Europe. The book's second section, on the implications of the EU for social science concepts, commences with Jeremy Richardson's chapter on policy-making in the EU; Richardson argues that EU policy-making can be partially explained using familiar models, although there is much that requires further theorization. David Hine considers the lessons to be learned from national processes of constitutional change for EU constitutional and treaty reform. Edward C. Page argues that, although traditional bureaucratic theory can explain the EU, the EU differs from states because of its co-ordinated rather than hierarchical mode of production of administrative outputs. Finally, James Forder questions the degree to which the European Central Bank will be able to achieve the dual demands of following the Bundesbank model (keeping down inflation) and managing competing desires. The book's final section, on the extent to which existing theories explain European integration, begins with Bruno Jobert arguing that European state functions have not been eroded; rather, states are open to negotiation within an international system where credible economic norms are produced within a polycentric continental entity. Colin Crouch next examines the implications of European integration for sociological theory, concluding that the confrontation of social forces visible in the as-yet-uncluttered Europolity should prompt sociologists to question their assumptions about units of analysis and return to a focus on class. Peter Hall concludes the section with an analysis of three phases of economic policy-making in post-war Europe; he writes that a key challenge for comparative political economy is to identify and explain cross-national patterns in processes of economic adjustment. Anand Menon's introduction and conclusion usefully frame the debate and honour the memory of his co-editor. The book as a whole assembles an impressive set of contributors who deliver trenchant and cogent analyses.

Finally, Building Europe presents cultural anthropologist Cris Shore's unapologetically sceptical perspective on European integration. The book aims to understand both the role of ‘culture’ in the integration project and the cultural attitudes of European civil servants. Shore first describes the strategies EU officials employ to ‘build’ Europe, focusing on symbols, EU citizenship (which Shore argues was motivated by the need for cultural legitimacy), and the Euro. The second section of the book examines the Commission's administrative culture and provides some good anecdotes and insights, though they too feature a sceptical undertone unusual in EU studies. Taken together, all three books deserve careful consideration.

One of the most important factors for a successful transition and consolidation to democracy is the relationship between citizens and civil servants. The level of trust, efficiency and accountability established between these two actors determines more or less the political culture of the political system. This excellent and thorough study, consisting of nine chapters, undertakes the ambitious task of getting empirical data on what the authors call ‘bureaucratic encounters’ between citizens and state officers in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Ukraine. Although the contextualizing first chapter on the historical development and workings of the political systems of the four countries requires considerable previous knowledge from any reader, the empirical evidence extracted from surveys and focus group meetings undertaken during the 1990s is a major contribution to understanding the quality of democracy in comparative perspective (pp. 4–5).

The concept of ‘quality of democracy’ is brought forward as an alternative to the theories of democratic transition and consolidation. The authors also avoid falling into the fallacy of idealizing Weberian types of bureaucracy (p. 139). Instead, the study attempts to find out the patterns of ‘bureaucratic encounters‘. The authors are not primarily interested in political corruption in the four countries, but they realize the outcome may confirm such behaviour in ‘bureaucratic encounters’ (p. 1). The study finds out that one of the strategies of citizens is really to offer presents and money to be better treated in a hospital, university or by the traffic police (pp. 74–5). Naturally, this is more widespread in some countries than others, but it can be found in all. The authors are aware of the negative environment in which some of the civil servants work, which clearly prevents enduring reforms. A final chapter analyses the empirical evidence against the proposed reforms presented by different authors, including the SIGMA/OECD group. This long-awaited study is an outstanding contribution to political science. As such, it is certainly comparable to the classic Civic Culture by Verba and Almond, and an indispensable source of research and inspiration in any political science library.

With this book, Karen Alter has cemented her position at the forefront of the political science analysis of European Union law. She demonstrates the importance of careful comparative analysis and its contribution to our understanding of a subject that at times seems esoteric, but is central to the history and current functioning of the European Union (and consequently crucial to our understanding of politics when national democracy appears to be challenged). As EU law depends on its relationship with national legal systems for its effectiveness, comparative analysis of the interaction (some might say fusion) of the two levels is the crucial if laborious (and all too rarely undertaken) task for those who wish to understand its dynamics. While some legal scholars may not agree with all Alter's arguments, this book should be essential reading for them as well as scholars in political science and European studies.

Alter's generation of scholars were faced with the puzzle of explaining how a political entity – the EU – that seemed moribund (and that theory appeared to predict should lack dynamism) could suddenly become a locus of dynamism in Europe. The unparalleled phenomenon of a non-state rule of law seemed a prime solution to this puzzle. Alter confirms the importance of the law, but her work also suggests that the assumption that EU law is effective can be made too glibly. Both main cases (Germany and France) give a sense that the achievement of EU legal supremacy is both more recent and more fragile than is usually supposed. As a result, ‘the law’ hardly qualifies as a ‘magic bullet’ solution to the puzzle of explaining European integration.

This book combines theory and application. Kymlicka's lengthy opening essay sets out his theory of ‘liberal pluralism’ and argues that it can be applied to eastern Europe. At the core of his essay is a fivefold typology of cultural groups, each of which requires, Kymlicka argues, a different liberal response. Kymlicka's essay is followed by fifteen chapters from a variety of authors. Some analyse Kymlicka's theoretical arguments in relative abstraction (though implications for eastern Europe are always highlighted). Others describe the situation of a wide range of particular eastern European societies and their cultural groups, comparing them to Kymlicka's typology. Kymlicka responds at the end. The result is somewhat confused. Theorists may question whether the demands of particular groups should dictate principles of justice, and in any case feel that they do not learn enough about each group or society to make an informed judgement. Eastern European specialists may find the analysis of each particular society insufficient, as the wide variety of chapters precludes focus on any one. Readers who want to know a little about a lot are best served.

Kymlicka's essay highlights the problem. He does not provide a fundamental, principle-based account of what we owe to cultural groups and why. Instead, the basic idea behind Kymlicka's ‘liberal pluralism’ seems to be ‘find out what cultural groups want, and give it to them’. Applying this approach to eastern Europe becomes a matter of finding out what eastern European minorities want. This approach is deeply unsatisfying, both philosophically and in particular instances. Kymlicka discusses several ‘hard cases’, such as the Cossacks who, Kymlicka tells us, make unjust demands for the restoration of unjust privileges. Philosophically, the conclusion ought to be clear: liberals should refuse the unjust demands. But Kymlicka resists this conclusion: for the Cossacks and the other hard cases, he tells us, ‘we need completely new models of ethnocultural justice’. Liberal pluralism can be exported to eastern Europe, it seems, because liberal pluralism means whatever minority groups want it to mean.

Janet Mather's book is a detailed and enlightening discussion of the implication for democracy of Britain's membership of the European Union. Mather approaches her subject in a refreshingly counter-intuitive way. Instead of asking how democracy in the UK is compromised by the development of a regime of supranational governance, she contemplates how membership of the EU might enhance the UK's democratic practice. In pursuit of this question, Mather takes a systematic detour into democratic theory before settling on the view that democracy is best measured in terms of outputs. Focusing on the implications for local democracy in Britain, Mather explores the participatory and associative qualities of the EU's institutions and goes some way to thinking seriously about the democratic credentials of ‘multi-level governance’. The study is underwritten throughout by primary research on local governance and constitutional modernization in the UK.

Mather's generally optimistic conclusions stem from her view of the EU as a force for the decentralization, modernization and (thus) democratization of the British state. She is appropriately cautious about the complexity of the EU and the undoubted information deficit that precludes the establishment and mobilization of a genuine European demos. Mather is not the first to argue from such a position, but she provides easily the best evidence-based study to date on behalf of this thesis. The book will be of interest to a wide variety of scholars and students. Those working on the EU, contemporary British politics and local government in the UK are likely to find this of most use.

In many ways, regulation, loosely defined, is at the heart of the process of European integration. Euro-regulation is here to stay, even if the supposed trend is for different forms of regulation and a more flexible approach. The fact that the regulatory process is so central to the process of European integration inevitably leads to the mobilization of interests, at the national and European level, in order to influence regulatory outcomes. Regulation distributes costs and benefits unevenly and creates winners and losers. This volume is a valuable addition to our understanding of the regulatory processes and the roles of different stakeholders in shaping regulatory outcomes.

The introductory chapter presenting an overview of the EU regulatory process is especially useful and reflects the authors’ excellent grasp of the day-to-day reality of EU politics and the differences between the EU regulatory style(s) and those of America and Asia, for example. Individual chapters on vehicle pollution, transport policy and consumer interests are full of detailed insights into the policy processes in these areas, as is the chapter on the effects of the EU regulatory style(s) on new members of the Union and applicant states. Alas, their analysis is forced to conclude that the regulatory process is unpredictable. Thus the authors admit that ‘context, situation, timing – a range of contingent as well as structural factors – condition the process and bear on the outcomes’ (p. 139). Certainly, the EU is complex and messy, as the book so ably demonstrates. The only frustration felt by this reviewer is that, as students of the EU, we manage to formulate relatively few hypotheses on which prediction might be founded.

This edited collection examines the negotiations and conclusions of the 1996/97 Intergovernmental Conferences, the constitutional and institutional reforms in the Amsterdam treaty and the reforms to major policies such as social policy, foreign and security policy, and justice and home affairs. The contributors have sought to analyse how the provisions of the treaty could best be applied to secure their intended outcomes in an effective and legitimate manner. Along the way, contributors have spent more or less time highlighting the inadequacies of the treaty's provisions.

It is an interesting collection of papers from academics, politicians and diplomats, a number of whom were centrally involved in the negotiations leading to the signing of the Treaty of Amsterdam. Some of the personal insights into the treaty deliberations are intriguing in a ‘fly on the wall’ sort of way. Dehousse of the Belgian delegation is quite candid in his remarks about, for example, the British Conservative government's positioning. Saryusz-Wolski of the Polish delegation bemoans the missed opportunity of Amsterdam in a tone somewhat at odds with the more optimistic remarks in Helmut Kohl's introduction to the book, where the former German Chancellor praised Amsterdam as opening the way for the expansion of the EU.

Many contributions uncover a sense of uncertainty, confusion and conflict permeating the deliberations and final agreements on the Treaty of Amsterdam, owing, in part at least, to nation-state sensitivities. Monar concludes that Amsterdam is a milestone, but further progress depends on ‘… whether the member states which remain the masters of the treaties can agree at least on some common answers …’ (p. 333). Perhaps it is worth remembering that the EU is a bold venture that seeks to create, through deliberation and negotiation, a new form of political community. Doubt, resistance and uncertainty seem bound to pervade any such endeavour.

Europe

ASIA-PACIFIC

This collection results from the efforts of researchers associated with the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore; the editor, John Funston, describes it as an ‘in-house product’. It includes chapters on the politics of each of the Southeast Asian countries, presented in a similar format (background; the political system; political practice; suggestions for further reading). The book is meant as an up-to-date overview that describes the primary institutions of government and the way politics operates in the region.

A major shortcoming is that many chapters lack critical discussion. The chapter on Burma (by Tin Maung Than) is regime-friendly, giving little credence to criticisms of the dictatorship. The chapter on Singapore (by John S. T. Quah) lauds Lee Kuan Yew and the PAP. Singapore is described as a ‘controlled democracy’ based on the Westminster system, with just three differences (Singapore has a written constitution and unicameral legislature, but no monarchy). This is remarkably disingenuous, ignoring too much that would be described as authoritarian in any other Southeast Asian state. Critical works are excluded from the references. But one no longer expects critical Singaporean scholarship. Funston's own chapters (Malaysia and Thailand) are better, but he relies on old models when examining Thailand's society and politics. Perhaps this is why civil society is seen not to emerge until the 1970s, ignoring, for example, recent historical work on the 1920s. This will be a useful handbook for those who feel the need for description, although many readers would probably also welcome more critical analysis.

The role of Japan in East Asia and the underlying structures of Japanese society are the focal points of Dominic Kelly's monograph. The author looks at the unfolding process of regionalism and regionalization in East Asia. The book is organized in three main parts. In the first part, on theory, Kelly develops a theoretical framework based on the work of Robert Cox and Susan Strange. In the second part, Kelly analyses the development of Japan from 1945 until today, using Cox's method of historic structures in order to expose the sources of power within Japanese society. In the third part, Kelly tries to map Japan's role in East Asia. He uses Strange's concept of structural power and looks at production, finance, security and knowledge.

Kelly partly succeeds in his ambitious goals. His approach is notable, but he does not manage to provide a satisfying answer to his main question: what role will Japan play in East Asia? The rivalry between China and Japan would deserve more attention. Also, the discussion of financial co-operation in East Asia is too sketchy and uncritical. While the so-called New Miyazawa Initiative of October 1998 is evaluated positively (p. 102), the failed attempt to establish an Asian Monetary Fund in the autumn of 1997 is mentioned only briefly (p. 104). The inability of Japan to use this golden opportunity (Walden Bello) and to provide leadership to East Asia in the event of a severe financial crisis has lasting consequences for Japanese leadership ambitions, which are not discussed.

The individual contributions in Managing the Chinese Environment were originally presented as discussion papers presented at a conference organized by the China Quarterly in 1998. The aim of the collection is to outline the state of China's environment in the People's Republic of China in the closing years of the twentieth century and to highlight the environmental problems the country will face during the first decade of the present century. Each contributor deals with a different topic and these cover all the major environmental issues in China including land and water resources, industrial pollution, forestry and biodiversity. Additional chapters outline the legal and administrative framework within which environmental management operates in the People's Republic of China. The main theme that links all the separate contributions is that China is presently at a turning point in the management of her natural environment.

In keeping with the aims of the collection, the main emphasis of each discussion is the present situation and future prospects for each issue covered. As a result the contributors concentrate on developments during the post-1978 period. However, many of the contributors trace the beginnings of most of the environmental issues covered in the collection to other periods of Chinese history, most notably during the Maoist period between 1949 and 1976 but also during the imperial age.

All the contributors are optimistic about future developments. They point out that while great damage has already been done to China's environment, it is still not too late to save China from environmental meltdown. They argue, quite rightly, that the main problem lies with shortcomings in the legal and political systems and with the general lack of concern among both the political leadership at all levels and the ordinary Chinese people. It remains to be seen if this optimism is well founded.

Asia-Pacific

OTHER AREAS

These essays by a group of US-based younger scholars constitute a challenging examination of the Russian transition to democracy and the market; each is provocative but well argued, displaying a mastery of the author's field of expertise. Michael McFaul questions conventional interpretations of Russian elections, arguing that, until almost the end of the 1990s, shifts in support for individual parties masked a broad debate over returning to the Soviet past. Robert G. Moser identifies an undeveloped party system as a key factor influencing the country's difficult political development. Kathryn Stoner-Weiss draws attention to the erosion of the centre's capacity to fulfill its own developmental goals because of the claims of the federation's constituent elements, while Yoshiko M. Herrera argues that economic reform has failed because too little attention was paid to creating the appropriate political development – the state was too weak.

The dire condition of the Russian armed forces is examined by Zoltan Barany, whose depiction of disarray bears eloquent testimony to the high command's professional restraint in the political arena. Finally, M. Steven Fish portrays Russian democracy in decline in the period since 1992, associated in particular with the state's ‘retreat from law enforcement’. This all indicates the scale of the task facing Vladimir Putin. The collection is well worth reading, and gives much food for thought (plus pithy quotations). It would have benefited from the attentions of a competent copy-editor to standardize style, spelling and transliteration, and perhaps edit out some of the Americanisms (hazing; emblematize).

This is an admirably concise and lucid introductory text on the first decade or so of post-Soviet Russian politics by a distinguished American specialist on Soviet and Russian politics and law. Following a brief exposition of the Soviet system and the circumstances leading to its collapse, and the confrontational politics preceding the crisis of October 1993, subsequent chapters examine key questions that have confronted the peoples and the political elite of post-Soviet Russia. These include the design and adoption of the 1993 constitution, parties and elections (characterized as ‘underdeveloped politics’), the functioning of the principal institutions, and social problems, including those associated with economic reform and collapse; a conclusion assesses ‘Russia's hard road toward democracy’. Two appendices offer a translation of the 1993 constitution and a chronology from the accession of Mikhail Gorbachev to the end of 2001. Barry's style is very accessible, with a minimum of jargon, his interpretations are conventional and his opinions sound; comparisons with other systems (notably the French) illustrate particular aspects of Russian presidential rule. The brevity of the text means that there is little space for presenting controversy, and occasionally corners have been cut: for example, on page 115 the acronym PRES (meaning Party of Russian Unity and Concord) and the identity of Cedar (the ‘green’ party) are not explained. Nevertheless, the book is sufficiently detailed and wide-ranging to give students a sound introduction to post-Soviet Russian politics, and further reading is indicated in the bibliographical sources at the end of each chapter.

This is an impressive work of comparative political history that carries its theoretical inspiration lightly in style but consistently in analytical substance. For those primarily concerned with the path dependence approach, Mahoney's work covers a set of small states that were not treated by the principal study in this field – Shaping the Political Arena: critical junctures, the labor movement and regime dynamics in Latin America (1991) by Ruth Berins Collier and David Collier, the supervisor of the PhD thesis from which this book originates. There are a number of distinctive socio-economic variables here that make this study an excellent complement (and occasionally a quiet corrective) to the Colliers’ work. For those more interested in a historical synthesis of the political development of five Mesoamerican states (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua), this is an admirable starting point, combining a concern for empirical accuracy (at a premium in a region with scanty records) with interpretative judgements that are refreshingly balanced in their tone. Mahoney forms part of a new academic generation that is sure-footed in its inter-disciplinarity and free of both the bombast and the blinkers that marked much of the writing during and immediately following the civil wars of the 1980s and early 1990s.

Between 1975 and 1995, Israel's GDP grew sevenfold. Its growth rate surpassed several European countries, and the IMF graciously elevated it – together with a number of the Asian tigers – to the status of ‘developed country‘. This book of essays examines Israel's economic transformation and looks specifically at the cross-linking and close relationship between economic growth and peacemaking. Shafir and Peled argue that the Israel-Palestine conflict can be reinterpreted as an obstacle in the path of Israel's participation in the international economy. Not the sole factor, but a significant one – and there are quotes from Yossi Beilin and Yossi Sarid, the doyens of the Israeli peace camp, embracing liberalization and globalization. Yet it is the magnitude of the other, often unquantifiable factors, such as the ongoing current intifada, that injects the uncertainty principle into this thesis.

Dov Khenin's essay traces the changes within Mapai back to the 1951 election, when there was an ideological confrontation with the Polish middle class of the fourth aliyah, now assembled as the General Zionist party. Khenin explains that socialism now meant constraining capitalism within ‘responsible’ parameters. Israel's socialist character was emptied of its practical aspects and substituted by an innocuous festive dimension. Utilizing Benjamin Barber's polarized yet apt juxtaposition of McWorld versus jihad, Uri Ramm suggests that this is manifested in Israel by a globalist, civic, post-Zionist agenda versus a localist, ethnic, neo-Zionist agenda. Again, the current intifada may have upset the neatness of that imagery.

Michael Shalev also suggests that there are undoubtedly winners and losers in the fallout from economic liberalization in the context of globalization. In Israel, the beneficiaries are Jewish, Ashkenazi and mainly men. The losers are Mizrachi Jews, Palestinian commuter labourers and Israeli Palestinians. This book offers many challenging insights into both the changing identity of Israel and the peace process – only time will tell whether or not these projections have been nullified by the effects and influences of the current intifada.

Daryl Glaser supplies an illuminating overview of the scholarship since 1970 on South Africa's political history. His emphasis is on the debates between liberals, Marxists and ‘post-structuralists’ about the origins and course of South Africa's racial order. He begins by reviewing the arguments over whether modern institutionalized racism can be explained by peculiar features of South Africa's colonial experience. Though unusually protracted in an African context, the country's colonial history was hardly unique: other nations whose early formation included slavery and frontier conflict did not preserve white supremacy through the twentieth century. Glaser agrees with Marxists that the evolution of modern segregation was substantially the outcome of the mining industry's early dependence on cheap, regimented labour. Marxist insistence that the relationship between capitalism and apartheid remained symbiotic is unconvincing, though. Liberals were correct, Glaser concedes, in predicting that capitalism would help generate forces that would dismantle apartheid. The longevity of racial politics in South Africa reflected the interests and concerns of a wider range of social groups than capitalists.

Much of the Marxist ‘revisionism’ in South African academic writing focused on the character of the South African state. As an academic discipline, political science remained weak in South Africa, and careful studies of the internal workings of South African government and the nature of its social relations remained exceptional. This did not inhibit sharp disagreements about the interests served by the apartheid state. South African scholarship was on surer ground in the study of social movements. In contrast to most of the work on the state and on high politics, the study of popular bases of politics was densely textured through reference to empirical experience. Given the intellectual hegemony of class analysis in the construction of ‘narratives of resistance’, the mobilizing power of nationalism and ethnic movements was rather more persuasively attributed to material concerns than to psychological predispositions.

Glaser suggests that, despite its democratization, contemporary South African politics continues to be profoundly shaped by the forces emphasized in this historiography. In a partially de-racialized political order, class politics may become even more important, and the lively trajectories of militant resistance politics continue to threaten the fragile institutions of an elitist settlement. Glaser's brief concluding analysis of the post-1994 dispensation suggests that, in power, the African National Congress has swiftly mutated into a ‘bourgeois party’, ready to evoke a racist ‘discourse of shared interests’ to condemn its opponents, but in reality serving as a vehicle of narrow middle-class concerns. More optimistically, he believes that the radical veins in South African politics that inspired much of the scholarship surveyed in this volume represent good reasons to keep alive egalitarian hopes.

Yitzhak Rabin led the Israeli Army to victory in the six-day war (1967), not only expanding Israeli territorial control but also signalling a victory for the secular left in enhancing the Israeli state. But a Pyrrhic victory it seems, as Rabin's assassination by a religious nationalist for embarking on the return of this captured land signifies for some the beginning of the twilight of Oslo. This collection of essays from mainly Israeli social and political scientists documents and analyses the cleavage between secular and religious Jews which ‘cultured’ – though did not actively cultivate – the assassin Yigal Amir's behaviour. The collection is well-organized (with a judicious integrating chapter by the editor) and draws together a range of specialists covering the historical, political and comparative aspects of assassination; the response of Arab-Palestinians in Israel; the impact of the media; social psychological and socio-cultural effects on Israeli society, including Israeli youth.

Two criticisms. The ethnic component is under-analysed as Amir – of Yemeni origin – was in the position of the colon or caste facing blocked upward mobility. And his messianic instrumentalism must have in part reflected this position. Secondly, there is scant attention paid to the other key dynamic in Israeli politics – the partnership with the Palestinian Authority during the halting Oslo process.

Peri concludes that the impact of the assassination on the political system and the deeper social system was not profound but merely revealing of the deepening chasm within Israeli society between secular and religious bases of authority and legitimacy. This obstacle to peace is analysed cogently by Ehud Sprinzak in his piece on Israel's radical right. Aviezer Ravitzky's discussion of the political after-effects is slightly more hopeful in documenting shifts in rabbinical thinking which is potentially accepting of territorial compromise. Notwithstanding Ariel Sharon's current championing of settler interests, if Ravitzky is right then liberal nationalists will have some hope that Yagil Amir's ultimate deed will add to Rabin's rather than Sharon's legacy.

Most of the chapters in Naseer Aruri's edited volume were originally presented as papers at a conference on Palestinian refugees organized by the Trans Arab Research Institute, Boston. The chapters are divided into four areas of the refugee issue: the historical context; the interests of the major international actors; the situation of refugees outside Palestine, especially Lebanon; and refugee material claims and proposals for solutions. The book openly advocates the cause of Palestinian refugees, arguing forcefully for their right to return to homes and property lost in the wars of 1948 and 1967. Many of the chapters expose deep divisions between refugees and both the PLO and Palestinian Authority, whom refugee advocates accuse of pursuing their own political goals at the expense of refugee interests. Many of the chapters are also highly critical of Israel and Zionism, and some of the USA.

As with many edited volumes, the editorial quality of the work is uneven. The book benefits from an effort to cover many topics of the refugee issue. Additionally, some of the chapters are well written, accessible and informative, and many are obviously deeply felt pleas for the redress of grievances. However, the effort at comprehensiveness results in a certain lack of coherency from chapter to chapter. Moreover, several chapters are poorly written and/or edited, and others rely much more on political ideology than empirical evidence in making their arguments. In both cases, they detract from a substantive dialogue on how to settle one of the significant problems in the contemporary Middle East.

Avram Bornstein's book is an ethnography of Palestinians in the West Bank. Bornstein views the conflict in Israel-Palestine as driven by political and economic inequality rather than religious hostilities. Specifically, he argues that Israel uses the 1967 Green Line border and policies for crossing it to maintain economic and political control of West Bank Palestinians. The border acts as a form of ‘structural violence‘, depriving Palestinians of economic opportunity and political rights. As an ethnographer, Bornstein weaves subjectivity and theory in his work. He writes candidly that events he witnessed during the first Palestinian intifada ‘broke my heart and shattered my vision of redemption in the reclamation of the Holy Land as claimed by Jewish nationalism’ and ‘increasingly inspired my sympathy for the spirit of the uprising’ (p. 22). He acknowledges that his work ‘is partly meant to fulfil my responsibility as a witness for my Palestinian hosts’ (p. 25). Like many of the authors in Aruri's volume, Bornstein is often highly critical of Zionism and Israel, as well as the Palestinian Authority. Simultaneously, the book is theoretically informed. Bornstein uses the end of each chapter to advance theoretical generalizations from his ethnographic observations. In the concluding chapter, he briefly applies his theoretic framework to other cases, for example the US-Mexican border, and generalizes that modern borders are a mechanism for exploiting labour while denying political rights and social welfare. Indeed, the potential extension of this theoretical framework to other cases in detailed comparative fashion is, without doubt, the book's most promising contribution to scholarly discourse.

Other Areas

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

This is one of the most probing and incisive international relations texts to appear on the 1999 Kosovo conflict and Western security institutions. Canadian scholars in the field of international security have brought together academics who are largely well qualified to provide a comprehensive overview of the broad implications of NATO's first offensive military action.

Part one examines the impact of the conflict on security institutions, with chapters reviewing alternative theoretical perspectives on NATO's future, likely future challenges to Euro-Atlantic security, the debate about the legality of NATO's actions in 1999, and the uncertainty about the roles of the EU and NATO in the post-Cold War world.

A much larger, second section examines national perspectives on ‘Operation Allied Force‘. There is a consensus among most of the contributors that an impressive degree of cohesion was shown, even though the NATO action lacked a UN Security Council resolution in its support. The role of new NATO members in eastern Europe receives timely appraisal and, in one of the most thoughtful contributions, Charles Kupchan argues that a European security order which is less American in inspiration has the best chance of preserving a cohesive transatlantic community.

In The New International Relations, researchers from the Centre d'etudes et de Recherches Internationales (CERI) in Paris have come together to consider changes taking place in contemporary international relations. When I started to read the book, I was excited to get a chance to explore the work of international relations scholars outside the English-speaking world. Most rewarding in this sense was the minimal division constructed between the fields of international relations (IR) and politics. Also, the chapters were truly interdisciplinary, promoting flexible boundaries between different disciplines. Some of them focused on interesting issues, less prominent in IR, such as questions of democracy and space/time dynamics. Disappointingly, however, the collection consists of literature reviews rather than original arguments and it ends up merely summarizing Anglo-American IR debates. Its focus remains traditional and the chapters concentrate on conventional decision-making procedures, foreign policy analysis, power and regime theory. I was left with a sense that the articles look more into the past than to the future. The collection manages to ignore the challenges posed to the discipline by feminists and postmodernist scholars. Indeed, the editors argue that this ‘fourth’ debate has not substantially changed the arguments in international relations (p. 6). In sum, this ‘new’ international relations rests firmly on the theories of mainstream malestream IR. This was all the more evident and ironical when the book was read together with the excellent contributions on gender and IR by Shirin Rai and Catherine Eschle.

Shirin Rai defines her concerns in writing the book as threefold: first, to illustrate the ways in which the political economy is gendered. In particular, she focuses on the ways in which globalization has worked to exacerbate the gendered nature of the world economy. Second, she stresses the differences between women, and the need to integrate an understanding of these differences into all analyses of gender and political economy of development. Finally, she wants to develop a sophisticated notion of structure and agency. The book itself goes beyond these three concerns. On the one hand, it serves as an informative and accessible introduction to the debates on gender, development and globalization. It is an excellent and very readable text for all students of international relations, development studies and politics. Rai illustrates her points with case studies drawing on her knowledge of China and India, and with smaller examples, which make the book very readable. On the other hand, she also develops original and compelling arguments about the current dynamics of development, nationalism and globalization. She argues that, while women remained central to the continuing construction of national identity, they were marginalized in the new discourse of development (p. 15). Rai cautions strongly against nostalgia for the centralized nation state, but also against idealizing the local. The argument is sensitive to both the need for feminists to engage with the institutions of global governance and also the dangers of co-option that this strategy represents.

Catherine Eschle makes a timely and original contribution to the debates on social movements and democracy, drawing on feminist political and social analyses. Her work is based on the argument that feminists are particularly well placed to analyse democracy because of women's traditional marginality and exclusion from democratic practices. Her epistemology is one of modified standpoint feminism and it works well in terms of the arguments she makes. Her aims are twofold: first, to analyse what are the roles and the significance of movements in democracy according to social and political theorists. Second, she wants to discuss the ways in which movements disrupt the assumptions of social and political theorists and point towards alternative understandings and practices of democracy. Reading Eschle's book together with Rai's was rewarding – both share similar concerns but have a different focus.

In developing her analyses, Eschle also overcomes disciplinary boundaries and other divides that constrain social and political analyses. She challenges the division between malestream academia and feminism, brings together political and social thought, and takes issue with the ‘within’ and ‘between the states’ focus. The book provides us with useful surveys on both more traditional social and political thought (liberalism, Marxism, republicanism and social anarchism) and more modern theories about democracy, which Eschle labels ‘new times approaches’ (associative democracy, radical civil society, radical democracy and politics of difference). The final parts of the book provide us with a feminist discussion on globalization. Eschle's focus on new social movements enables her to analyse globalization perhaps more positively than Rai does. Globalization can be seen to have resulted in a proliferation of prodemocracy movements. Like Rai, Eschle explores governance beyond state boundaries. The book strongly promotes democracy both for different polities and for the feminist movement.

In these dark days of ‘war war’ any overt concern with the practice and process of ‘jaw jaw’ comes as a relief. And Martin Ceadel's status as the pre-eminent historiographer and student of peace politics is confirmed (if confirmation were needed) by this latest offering. Bringing together research and writing conducted over three decades, Semi-Detached considers the peace movement's ‘age of maturity’ (i.e. Crimean War to World War Two) in a painstaking and graceful fashion. Ceadel appreciates detail like Sherlock Holmes. An example. I once noted that his Pacifism in Britain (Oxford, Clarendon, 1980) surprised me with its failure to consider the World Alliance for International Friendship through the Churches (an important and not altogether coincidental precursor to the World Council of Churches). Thanks to its inclusion in here, I now see what I took as a sin of omission to be a considered and conscious decision. Elementary really. The Alliance was a pacificist and not a pacifist grouping and thus had no place in the 1980 study. We would all be wiser never to forget the Golden Rule when talking peace: clarify terminology. Not all pacifists are peace activists, not all peace activists pacifist. Conceptual distinctions matter particularly and Ceadel's terminological exactitude – creating no less than a typology of peace in the process – is just one more reason why nobody does it better. Semi-Detached is how it can and should be done in the field of peace studies. It is also about as good as the academy gets.

This edited volume emerged from a symposium in Stockholm, Sweden, in September 1997, which was attended by scholars representing a range of disciplines, including political science, anthropology, sociology and philosophy. Most of the contributions to the book deal at least in part with the important but understudied relationship between ethnicity and nationalism on the one hand, and inter-, trans- or supra-state phenomena and processes on the other, though a few deal exclusively with ethnicity and nationalism as they operate inside states. The chapters cover a broad assortment of issues – perhaps too broad – as indicated by the vague and diverse titles of the four sections of the book: ‘Commitments and Contexts: Ethnicity and Religion’; ‘The Iron Curtain Rising’; ‘Attachments and Arrangements’; and ‘Images of World Order’. Most of the chapters are wide-ranging analytical pieces as opposed to works that empirically evaluate a specific and clearly stated causal hypothesis. Additionally, several of the chapters are primarily normative in nature, while others alternate between empirical and normative analysis.

Generally, the contributions are of good quality. Several of the twelve chapters in particular stand out for their insight and interest to a wide variety of scholars of nationalism. K. J. Holsti creatively evaluates liberal internationalism by looking at group relations within states, rather than by focusing on inter-state relations. Stanley Hoffman analyses how the implications of nationalism for world order depend on which type of nationalism is under discussion. And Yael Tamir presents an unusually strong defence of the notion of a global state. The book is clearly aimed at scholars specializing in nationalism, and is inappropriate for classroom use, at least at undergraduate level.

This book is an anthology of landmark articles from the influential journal International Organization, which has been at the forefront of academic thinking on international regimes and institutions for the past three decades. The articles are grouped into four sections: theories, cases, debates on compliance and critiques. The four sections are preceded by a short editorial introduction, while the final article is a fairly recent literature review from the journal, written by the editors. Hence the book seeks to offer the reader a range of theoretical and empirical studies that present a ‘state of the art’ for this central aspect of international relations.

The selection of articles is judicious, featuring many giants of the field, such as Young, Ruggie and Kratochvil, and representing realist, pluralist and constructivist positions. It is the editors’ contributions, however, that give the volume its real strength, even though many of the articles are undoubted classics of the discipline. The sectional introductions work well in binding together such diverse essays and making some highly theoretical ideas more accessible to less seasoned students of international relations. In this way, International Institutions avoids the pitfall of many multi-author anthologies of its kind – that is, lacking overall coherence. Martin and Simmons are to be commended on their thoughtful editorship, which has produced a work that is, in keeping with the subject matter, more than the sum of its parts.

Triangulating Peace represents the culmination of over a decade's research by Russett and Oneal and, in many ways, of over two centuries of liberal-pluralist thought dating back to Kant. The Kantian proposition that democracy, trade and international co-operation are the basis for a peaceful world is the focus of this work, which examines each of these three corners of the peace ‘triangle’ in turn and expounds the view that they mutually reinforce each other over time. This is, of course, a major proposition, and the reader is referred to more detailed statistical analysis and research articles in support of the book.

As the authors admit, proving the three central propositions is not original, but this book breaks new ground in carefully knitting them together by showing how ‘virtuous circles’ develop in relations between states, aided by INGOs. In doing so, Russett and Oneal present a broad, teleological approach, and have produced a definitive critique of neo-realism's belief in the enduring logic of inter-state rivalry and power balances. Social science methodology is used, for example, to invalidate Huntington's ‘Clash of Civilizations’ thesis by clearly demonstrating that no correlation can be shown between recent conflicts and the civilizational setting of the states concerned. Huntington could contend that his thesis was a prediction for the future which cannot be falsified by empirical analysis of the past, but the speculative and sensationalist nature of his writing stands in stark contrast to this more rigorous, reasoned and optimistic view of the way in which the world is likely to evolve.

Manfred Steger's Globalism is concerned with the ideological underpinnings of contemporary economic globalization, rather than with the nature or mechanisms of the phenomenon itself. Deploying the perspectives of critical theory, Steger contends that ‘globalism’ constitutes an ideology, crafted for the purposes of those economic and political interests that seek a more integrated and less regulated world economy. The core of this ideology rests upon five propositions which are outlined and criticized in detail: that globalization is just about the liberalization and integration of markets world-wide; that such globalization is inevitable and irreversible; that nobody is actually in charge of globalization; that globalization is of universal benefit; and that globalization advances democratization world-wide. The failings of these five propositions are then related to the rise of the anti-globalization movement and its development after the ‘battle of Seattle’ and its future prospects.

Steger's Globalism thus offers an extremely neat and generally effective introduction to many of the core arguments about globalization. Its survey of the anti-globalization movement, particularly its diversity, is especially interesting. Significant omissions, however, are the defeat of the proposals for the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, and its implications for globalism and globalization, the apparent waning of big US business support for further trade liberalization, and the issue over whether contemporary tendencies towards international regionalization constitute a complement or a challenge to globalization (and, hence, the globalism project). Overall, however, this is an effective and valuable contribution to the examination of contemporary globalization and its intellectual underpinnings.

This is a good, well-written basic, textbook covering the main theories of conflict resolution in an international relations framework. The author covers a reasonable range of contemporary case studies in detail, such as South Africa, Northern Ireland/Israel/Palestine, Bosnia and Iraq. He works within a three-type typology – origins of conflicts, ending the fighting and reconciliation. The book particularly benefits from a practical grounding by the author in conflict resolution and peace studies. It also contains useful tables and, for students, website references.

The case studies are prefaced by five chapters that explore the role of passion and argument and how this informs evidence and achieves insight, moving on to look at how theory can inform ethnic fratricide, then examining how we can understand and potentially resolve such conflicts, utilizing both traditional and contemporary IR perspectives. Inevitably, with a subtitle such as ‘international relations for the 21^st century’, the book suffers from having been published before the events of September 11, 2001, which to some analysts have reframed traditional conceptual typologies. Despite this, it largely stands the test of time well and can be warmly recommended to undergraduate students.

International negotiations are driven by the narrow pursuit of self-interest of the nation state, so the realist supporters of international relations theory argue. Cecilia Albin sets out to establish a different argument. The author claims that a normative notion of justice underlies most negotiations, and that disagreements over justice undermine the capacity of negotiators to produce satisfying and durable agreements. She investigates empirically how and to what extent justice and fairness matter in international negotiations, if and when these concepts impact on the bargaining process, and what is the motivation for negotiators to consider these notions. Albin develops an analytical framework, based on Rowly's definition of justice as ‘a balanced settlement of conflicting claims’, which extends the notion to all four stages of negotiations: structure, process and procedure, outcome and post-settlement period. The findings are derived from interviews with senior negotiators in four very different areas of international relations: the processes to combat acid rain; GATT towards the conclusion of the Uruguay Round; the Israel-PLO interim talks; and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. These chapters are easily readable and include a richness of detail, historical data, background information and interpretation.

In spite of its great qualities, the book also has some shortcomings. For instance, Albin fails, in her description of the acid rain process, to link her descriptions back to the analytical framework of justice and fairness she has created. Also, her findings might have been different had she chosen the Framework Convention on Climate Change as an example instead. Sometimes the quotes and examples chosen, such as ‘fairness is dictated by one's own economic interest’ (p. 135), do not necessarily sustain her argument. In conclusion, it has to be said that this book presents a good overview and analysis of four very different areas of international negotiations. Albin creates a thorough model of justice and fairness in different stages of the bargaining process, which represents a novel ground from where to start to evaluate and perhaps improve negotiations. In that sense, she has made an invaluable scientific contribution to the current debate about justice and fairness in international negotiations.

In Strategic Warfare in Cyberspace, Gregory Rattray lays a framework for the analysis of a growing threat to US national security in the twenty-first century, information warfare (IW). While the number of studies on IW has steadily increased over the past five years, Rattray's book is unique in its sober examination of the hurdles that organizations face in dealing with new technologies, as well as in its reference to the history of strategic warfare. Rattray, a lieutenant colonel in the US Air Force, currently commands the 23^rd Information Operations Squadron responsible for information warfare tactics development. In chapter one, he explains key concepts of strategic information warfare. Although experts disagree on how narrowly or broadly to define it, Rattray cites the Joint Staff doctrine published in late 1998, which refers to information operations as ‘actions taken to affect adversary information or information systems while defending one's own information and information systems‘. Information operations, conducted during times of crisis and conflict, ‘apply across all phases of an operation and the range of military operations and at every level of warfare’ (p. 9).

Chapters two and three analyse the dual-edged nature of strategic information warfare tools, the speed of interaction, ambiguities involved in characterizing digital attacks, the crucial role of intelligence, and the requirements for creating organizational technological capability to wage strategic information warfare. Chapter four analyses US efforts in the period between the First and Second World War to develop strategic thinking. Finally, chapter five traces US efforts between 1991 and 1999 to develop the necessary doctrine, organizations and technological capability to conduct strategic information warfare. In short, this volume contributes to the growing literature on information warfare. It differs from other books – such as Abraham Sofaer and Seymour Goodman's The Transnational Dimension of Cyber Crime and Terrorism, Dorothy Denning's Information Warfare and Security and Winn Schwartau's Information Warfare: chaos on the electronic superhighway – in its historical analysis of US strategic thinking in the inter-war period. It should be recommended to graduate and advanced undergraduate students.

This book is a sustained, reflective and timely examination of the issue of humanitarian intervention. Wheeler's aim is to consider whether, particularly in the light of events since the end of the Cold War, ‘a new norm of humanitarian intervention is emerging’. In the process of addressing this question, Wheeler does something quite rare: he combines a sophisticated theoretical discussion of the legitimacy and place of humanitarian interventions in international politics with a detailed analysis of a broad range of case studies. The result is a real contribution to the literature on this topic.

The core of Wheeler's theoretical contribution lies in his attempt to rebut the realist framework within which the development of a language of humanitarian intervention in recent decades reflects little more than new garb for the self-interested motivations of powerful states. In contrast, Wheeler offers an account of legitimacy and rule-following by states that attaches independent weight to the role of language and the norms of international society. He argues that states are always to some extent constrained and enabled by the language they use: they are never able to use language simply as a neutral tool in the service of their more self-interested ends. This discussion, with its emphasis on the intersubjectivity of state relations, chimes well with Wheeler's attempt to locate his arguments about humanitarian intervention within a solidarist account of international society.

The empirical chapters aim to show how ‘pluralist and solidarist conceptions of international society [have] shaped diplomatic dialogue over humanitarian intervention’. They are novel in providing a sustained analysis of the features of, and justifications for, interventions both before and since the end of Cold War. Wheeler dedicates a great deal of time to the prehistory of the interventions of the 1990s (in Iraq, Somalia and Kosovo), as well as the international community's failure to intervene in Rwanda. He does this through insightful discussions of India's intervention in Pakistan in 1971, Vietnam's in Cambodia in 1979, as well as the Tanzanian intervention in Uganda in the same year. The historical scope of the interventions discussed enables the author to trace how the justifications for unilateral (and multilateral) interventions have evolved over the past few decades.

Saving Strangers is a lucid, well-argued work that explicitly links its discussion of the circumstances under which intervention might be legitimate to its account of the nature of international society. The book is highly controversial in places, and is unlikely to close down many of the debates in the contested area of scholarship. However, if widely read, it will ensure that future discussions proceed at a higher level.

Despite some shortcomings, this is undoubtedly one of the most important and original collections of writing by experts from both north and south on labour internationalism to have emerged in the last decade. Co-edited by two well-respected radical labour scholars from different generations and backgrounds of the left, and also published as a special edition of the radical geography journal Antipode, New Labour Internationalisms brings together contributions from both international labour activists and internationally minded academics based in a variety of labour-oriented fields. It is guided by the belief that the increasingly hegemonic processes of neoliberal globalization, and in particular the interaction between the disciplining power of transnational production networks and the disciplinary powers of international capitalist institutions such as the WTO and IMF, have unleashed a new imperative for international worker solidarity.

However, several authors argue that recently resurgent international labour activities have remained over-shadowed, dominated and even displaced by the ‘old’, bureaucratic, top-down, northern-centric, male-oriented internationalism of the institutionalized international trade unions, which are seen here as ideologically and organizationally outmoded in relation to a global capitalism characterized by changing labour markets and class structures, regional integration, competitive subcontracting and the phenomenon of informal work. This analysis is reinforced by other contributions providing positive examples of ‘new’ initiatives and modes of international solidarity such as horizontal cross-border networking, alliance-building with NGOs and other social movements, and geographically intuitive localized struggle. Somewhat inevitably, the collection sets up an often explicit binarism between institutions/bureaucracies/trade unions = bad, and networks/grassroots/workers/others = good, when a more sophisticated examination of the complexities of international labour organizing is required. Overall, though, this is a must-read for anyone interested in how labour movements can regain power and influence in the face of globalization.

Safran and Máiz have brought together a collection of essays examining the obstacles faced by regional and ethnic minorities in their struggle for autonomy within multinational states. Safran proposes that autonomy is possible in a society where minorities are already involved in the national government, but that secession is a possibility where the concentration of a national minority next to a ‘parent’ state allows such a move to be viable (p. 31). Máiz criticizes the ‘monocultural’ type of state that is based upon a primordial myth that is predisposed towards exclusive national identities; these antagonistic identities of ‘insider/outsider’ groups reinforce any tendencies towards political extremism (p. 49). Instead, he favours forms of federalism as means of enabling co-operation within multinational states. These studies draw upon a wide range of material: indeed, the studies dealing with the various experiments of regional autonomy in Spain (Beramendi in particular) are complemented by an informative overview of that country's constitutional history – especially useful for those unacquainted with the subject.

What is most significant in the studies is that the normative framework used to assess the utility of the displacement of national by local identities has received far less critical attention than the data related in them. The study by Moreno provides a succinct overview of the paradigm implicit in the studies by Safran and Máiz: i.e., the effective sovereignty of the nation state has been eroded, but this has allowed local government to emerge as a new point of political organization and leverage (p. 69). For Safran, autonomy is not a good in itself, but has to be contextualized by setting the realization of territorial autonomy against the minority culture's commensurability with liberal democratic values (p. 14). Máiz defends federalism on the grounds that it will lead to the enhancement of economic competition between federal units (p. 54). It is apparent that these studies share an approach that regards itself as strongly orientated towards a scientific approach, and could therefore not be expected to hold a hermeneutic appreciation of national culture; however, these studies would have been greatly enhanced by some attempt to substantiate the presumed redundancy of the nation state, or the assumed triumph of ‘globalization‘.

The academic literature on International Relations contains very few classics, that is texts, which are regarded by successive generations of students as essential reading, regardless of whether they approve their content or argument. The so-called ‘English School’ has contributed two books that have achieved this kind of canonic status – Hedley Bull's Anarchical Society (1977) and Martin Wight's International Theory: the three traditions, which was published posthumously in 1991. Robert Jackson's Global Covenant is in a sense a tribute to Bull and Wight, whose basic approach to the subject he endorses but it also seeks to extend their analysis to respond to the events of the post cold war world and to evaluate their impact on the society of states. The book is divided into three parts. The first retraces the history and theory of international society, which the second then applies to some of the most pressing contemporary problems of international relations such as humanitarian intervention, state failure and democracy. The third part surveys the future of the covenant on which international society is based and concludes that while it may change it is unlikely to wither away.

Jackson's passionate defence of pluralism as a major normative and civilizing achievement will not necessarily win him friends among the new global idealists who saw the end of the cold war as signalling the retreat of the state in the face of a new international solidarism. But his reasoned defence of the sovereign state and its continuing relevance, and his scepticism about the prospects for international progress is an important corrective to the enthusiastic tendency in much political writing since the end of the cold war. It is also much needed because disappointed enthusiasts – and little seems more certain than that they will be disappointed – all too often change into conspiratorial cynics, for whom no values are worth defending. This is a magisterial volume and will not be quickly superseded as an account of the enduring normative principles on which international society rests.

International Relations

COMPARATIVE

As its title suggests, this book looks at the origin and ideological development of Hindu nationalism in contemporary India. Bhatt argues that, although the hindutva movement can be seen as a recent occurrence, the Hindu nationalist ideology has a past that goes back to the nineteenth century. The author thus traces the growth of the Hindu nationalist ideology as he examines the intellectual and historical forces that influenced its development. The book follows two central premises. First, that the ideologies of primordialism form the core of Hindu nationalism, and here the centrality of Aryanism stands out. Second, that the ‘primordialist’ thinking of European orientalists contributed influentially to the Hindu nationalist primordialism. Here, Bhatt also indicates a thematic convergence between the Hindu nationalist and the anti-colonial, ‘secular’ nationalist projects, though the former has been unable to overcome the latter. The author weaves his arguments around these two premises, taking the case of Dayananda Saraswati's Arya Samaj movement, Bankimchandra Chattopadhyaya's affective configuration of Hindu nationalism, Tilak's nationalization of regional Brahminical symbols and devotionalism, Savarkar's call for the militarization of Hindudom, the RSS's vision of a Hindu nation and the VHP's aim of Hindu globalization and militant hindutva.

The novelty of Bhatt's research on Hindu nationalism lies in examining the non-linear ideological appendages to Hindu nationalism across the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, in a comprehensively argued, coherent and lucid style. The work stands as a useful and compact handbook for students and a ready reference for researchers of Hindu nationalism.

Periodically, academics attempt to give a tidy account of the process of development and to provide neat explanations backed by carefully constructed models that offer all the answers. I admit to having grave misgivings about such explanations. Of course, academia is a broad church that even includes a few mosques and temples, and I respect the work of those who seek such solutions. But I do not share their optimism about finding the right answer or ever hoping to implement them. This book is yet another attempt at evaluating whether economic development is conducive to political democracy. Like the solution that it seeks to negate – that strong states secure development – I think of this approach as semantically interesting. But as someone who is firmly rooted in practicality, I have reservations about the findings.

Essentially, the authors in this volume seek to disprove the earlier views expressed by De Schweinitz (1959), La Palombara (1963) and Huntington and Nelson (1976), among others, who have argued that economic growth is best achieved in the absence of democratic participation and the presence of a strong state. The authors use a variety of data-based evidence to dig ‘a cemetery for the old theories’ (p. 7) and to argue that democracies ‘encourage investment’, safeguard property and promote the efficient allocation of resources, and are therefore good for development. The authors then review the possibility of democracies emerging as a result of economic development (p. 88) or dictatorships falling as a result of economic crisis. Their findings indicate that dictatorships are not very sensitive to economic crisis, whereas democracies are more vulnerable to long-term crisis.

Sadly, this volume sets out to prove a hypothesis that does not lend itself easily to such a process, and the authors resort to building models. Given the strict limitation of these models, they fail to dig the graveyard of the strong state. On the other hand, given the dramatic decline of the Asian miracle, history has already done the deed and proved that alternative theories are equally untenable. The authors come to the conclusion that, if ‘countries are observed across the entire spectrum of conditions’, then ‘political regimes have no impact on the growth of total income’ (p. 270). Thus development remains a problematic process that does not lend itself to simple theorization.

This is a well-written, short, concise and clear primer on development studies, mainly from a critical perspective. It covers economic, financial, political, social, environmental and feminist aspects of what is described as a ‘prevailing orthodoxy’ in this field. Essentially, the authors seek to challenge that orthodoxy through examining alternative ways of conceptualizing development. This involves an examination of key areas of contemporary study, such as globalization, governance, social development, civil society, the role of NGOs, widening and deepening participation, and post-colonialism. The introductory chapter by Kothari and Minogue is keen to displace what is described as a ‘dominant neoclassical ideology of development within the USA and most of western Europe’ (p. 8). However, given that almost all the authors are based in the UK, and all bar one are connected with the University of Manchester, one sometimes wishes for ‘developing world’ voices from Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Middle East to be heard directly in the text.

Leading Asian critics such as Vandana Shiva, Martin Khor and Walden Bello, for instance, could have considerably enlivened and rebalanced what is largely a questioning of the dominant discourse from a Western academic elitist perspective. Instead, Shiva gets one brief mention as an ‘ecofeminist’ (p. 144). Does this do full justice to her work on poverty, nuclear weapons, GM crops, dams and water supplies?

This is a wide-ranging volume, with contributions covering Europe, the USA, Scandinavia, Australasia and Japan, marking the apparently inexorable spread of the ‘new public management’. As individual contributions show, rhetoric and reality are often quite far apart; national traditions and cultures have had a strong mediating effect upon the real change that has occurred. Nevertheless, the contract and consumer-orientated new public administration now has a virtually global endorsement. The editors’ argument is that analysis of these changes to date has focused on outputs and outcomes – have they produced ‘efficiencies’? Peters and Pierre have no quarrel with this, but argue that this neglects an important dimension – the changes in the relationship between politicians and bureaucrats. Their thesis is that reform has produced more conflict between politicians and bureaucrats, and increased the power of non-political actors. It is a little frustrating that, while noting that such non-political actors may not be bureaucrats, the changing role and influence of interest groups is not examined. But that is not the authors’ intention – their concern is solely with the politico-administrative dimension.

Not all the contributors are so clearly focused. While some do make the relationship between politicians and bureaucrats their focus, others tend to provide overviews of administrative reform, with politico-administrative relations tacked on as an additional feature – even the concluding chapter has more to say about bureaucrats than it does about politicians. This does not detract from the value and interest of the book – its real strength is the breadth of its coverage, and the different perspectives adopted by authors around the world are inherently interesting. The common story that emerges from the case studies is that administrative structures, personnel and procedures have all changed to varying degrees, but political arrangements remain much as they were. The book falls short of offering us much in the way of the ‘new concepts and new language’ that it suggests may be needed to comprehend properly a post-Weberian model of political/bureaucratic relations, but it offers some fascinating insights into the impact of national cultures and elites on global trends.

Emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse’ gases may be changing the global climate with possibly unpleasant consequences for large parts of human-kind, but emissions from motor vehicles cause pollution at ground level that has demonstrable effects upon human health. This book is focused on the problems faced by effective formation and, especially, implementation of policy to deal with problems of urban air quality in various parts of western Europe and Canada.

The central problem, as the authors see it, is the prevailing conception of roads as a public good. Better outcomes would be achieved, they suggest, if urban mobility were reconceived in terms of competing private property rights. Successful policy demands recognition of the rights of mobility as well as the right to breathable air, scrupulous fairness in balancing the interests of all parties, and consideration of urban transport problems in the widest possible geographical and policy context. ‘Soft’ institutions may help pave the way, but they are inadequate for the hard solutions that will be required. These require centralized authority with the territorial jurisdiction and the authority to adjudicate among competing claims in pursuit of the public interest. Authority requires legitimacy, and the experiences of Swiss and Italian cities with direct democracy are cited approvingly. Yet democracy is scarcely a panacea; the most effective policies (road tolls) are also those most unpopular with the public.

This book offers insights but no easy answers. The sustainable mobility policies the authors propose do not yet exist, and the institutional arrangements that might make them possible will likely only emerge from a period of experimentation. In the end, redistributive policies will require social learning if desirable outcomes are to be achieved. Yet, as on other issues, we desire the environmental good but are mostly unwilling to change the lifestyles that directly and indirectly produce the bad. On the evidence presented here, citizens are so wedded to the automobile that they are more concerned about congestion than clean air. Changing that will require more than twitters from the owl of Minerva.

Patricia Lee Sykes has observed, correctly, that not all political leaders are leaders. Most of those who occupy leadership positions are content to manage and conciliate, to keep the show on the road without worrying over much about where the show is going. However, a few leaders, ‘conviction politicians‘, actually try to take their countries in new directions.

Presidents and Prime Ministers is a study of conviction politicians in the USA and the UK since the mid-nineteenth century. The author develops four pair-wise comparisons of conviction presidents and prime ministers – Jackson/Peel, Cleveland/Gladstone, Wilson/Lloyd George and Reagan/Thatcher – and then reflects on how these unusual men and women have related to their party, the media of their time, their own administrations, the wider world and the Anglo-American political tradition. Sykes's central concern is to elaborate a ‘wave’ theory to the effect that pairs of conviction leaders appear more or less simultaneously on both sides of the Atlantic and then go on to pursue similar ideological and policy objectives.

Embedded in Sykes's analysis are many useful observations (for example, that conviction politicians typically work round their parties rather than through them). But her analysis, taken as a whole, ultimately fails to convince. Her selection of conviction politicians will strike most readers as arbitrary. So will some of her ‘waves‘. Conviction politicians who failed are largely written out of the script. The author's exclusive focus on the US-UK connection loses sight of other important connections (for example, Lloyd George's with pre-1914 Germany).

Mac Laughlin's study of the conceptualization of Ireland initially by English settlers primarily as a physical entity, and latterly by Irish nationalists as a political entity, provides some innovative starting points for thinking about nationalism in general. Mac Laughlin's work is significant in that there is an intelligent grasp of the socially based nature of nationalism, i.e., nationalism is rooted in the historically specific activity of social and economic groups (p. 34).

Mac Laughlin's study takes as its subject matter the role played in nation-building by the rural middle class in nineteenth-century Irish society. In order to explain the contribution this class made to the development of national consciousness, Mac Laughlin adopts what he describes as a ‘Gramscian model of nation-building’ in which the intelligentsia (in the case of Ireland, Mac Laughlin includes the clergy) is credited with a key role in mobilizing other social classes (most notably the peasantry) into political action, not solely through economic control of a society, but through strategic control of the sources of cultural power; in Ireland, this could be seen as the pulpit and the printing press (p. 193).

It is perhaps the stress upon the local in the development of Irish nationalism that proves unsatisfactory in the work: in its desire to address cultural narratives of nationhood, this ultimately leads to an apparent autonomization of the ‘high’ political arena from the local. While the rural middle class may have provided the Land League with its bedrock of support in the 1870s, this class was not at the vanguard of events from 1916–21.

Comparative