Coorespondence, The Short Shadow of U.S. Primacy?
| dc.contributor.author | Lantis, Jeffrey S. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Sauer, Tom | |
| dc.contributor.author | Wirtz, James J. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Lieber, Keir A. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Press, Daryl G. | |
| dc.contributor.department | National Security Affairs | |
| dc.date | Winter 2006 / 07 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2014-09-04T23:06:35Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2014-09-04T23:06:35Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2007 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Keir Lieber and Daryl Press’s recent article presents a compelling case for the rise of U.S. nuclear primacy in the twenty-ªrst century. The authors, however, fail to address what they maintain is a central question in international relations scholarship: “Does nuclear primacy grant the superior side real coercive leverage in political disputes?”1 Their passing discussion of the theme does little justice to the merit of the question, and as a result the article seems incomplete. In fact, the United States already enjoys primacy in the vast majority of its relations with other countries, but recent events suggest that this preponderance of power has not led to coercive leverage. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | International Security, Vol. 31, No. 3 (Winter 2006/07), pp. 174–193 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10945/43265 | |
| dc.rights | This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States. | en_US |
| dc.title | Coorespondence, The Short Shadow of U.S. Primacy? | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication |
