Visionas sobre la hegemonía en el orden internacional actual

Referencias bibliográficas

• ADLER, E. y BARNETT, M. (1998), Security Communities, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
• BACEVlCH, A. J. (2002), American Empire: The Realities and Consequences of U.S. Diplomacy, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
• BELLAMY, A. (Ed.) (2005), lnternational Society and its Critics, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• BROOKS S. G. y WOHLFORTH, W. C. (2008), World Out of Balance, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
• BUZAN, B. (2004), From lnternational to World Society: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
• CALHOUN, C., COOPER, F. y MOORE, K. W. (Eds.) (2006), Lessons of Empire: lmperial Histories and American Power, New York, New Press.
• CLARK, l. (2009a), "Bringing hegemony back in: the United States and international order", lnternational Affairs, Vol. 85, nº 1.
• CLARK, l. (2009b), "Towards an English School Theory of Hegemony", European Journal of lnternational Relations, Vol. 15.
• COLÁS, A. (2002), "The Class Politics of Globalisation", en M. RUPERT y H. SMlTH (Eds), Historical Materialism and Globalisation: Essays on Continuity and Change, London, Sage.
• COX, M. (2006), "ls the United States in Decline Again?: An Essay", lnternational Affairs, Vol. 83, nº 4,
• COX, R. W. (1987), Production, Power and Wold Order: Social Forces in the Making of the History, Nueva York, Columbia University Press.
• DUNNE, T. (2003), "Society and Hierarchy in lnternational Relations", lnternational Relations, Vol. 17, nº 3.
• FERGUSON, N. (2004), Colossus: The Price of America's Empire, New York, Penguin Press.
• FERGUSON, Y. H. (2008), "Approaches to Defining Empire and Characterizing United States lnfluence in the Contemporary World", lnternational Studies Perspectives, Vol. 9.
• FUKUYAMA, F. (1992), The End of History and the Last Man, New York, Avon Books.
• GERMAIN, R. y KENNY, M. (1998), "Engaging Gramsci: International Relations Theory and the Neo-Gramscians", Review of lnternational Studies, Vol. 24, nº 2.
• GILPIN, R. (1981), War and Change in World Politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
• GILPIN, R. (1988), "The Theory of Hegemonic War", Journal of lnterdisciplinary History, Vol. XVIII, nº 4.
• GLASER, C. L. (1997), "The Security Dilemma Revisited", World Politics, Vol. 50.
• GLASER, C. L. (1995), "Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-Help," lnternational Security, Vol. 19, nº 3.
• GOLDSTEIN, J. S. (1988), Long Cycles: Prosperity and War in the Modern Age, New Haven, Yale University Press.
• HARDT, M. y NEGRI, A. (2000), Empire, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
• HARVEY, D. (2003), The New lmperialism, New York, Oxford University Press.
• HE, K. (2008), "Institutional Balancing and International Relations Theory: Economic Interdependence and Balance of Power Strategies in Southeast Asia European", Journal of lnternational Relations, Vol. 14.
• HELD D. y KOENIG-ARCHIBUGI, M. (2004), "Introduction: Whither American Power?" en D. HELD y M. KOENIG-ARCHIBUGI, (Ed.), American Power in the Twentieth-First Century, Cambridge, Polity Press.
• HOFFMANN, S. (2004), Gulliver Unbound: America's lmperial Temptation and the War in lraq, Lanham, Rowman and Littlefield.
• HUNTINGTON, S. P. (1996), The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York, Simon and Schuster.
• HURD, I. (2007), After anarchy, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
• HURRELL, A. (2005), "Hegemony and Regional Governance in the Americas", en L. FAWCETT y M. SERRANO (Eds.), Regionalism and Governance in the Americas Continental Drift, Basingstoke, Palgrave.
• HURRELL, A. (2006), "Hegemony, Liberalism and Global Order: What Space for Would-be Great Powers?", lnternational Affairs, nº 82, nº 1.
• IKENBERRY, G. J. (2003), "American Multilateralism in Decline?", Perspectives on Politics, nº 1.
• IKENBERRY, G. J. (Ed.) (2002), America Unrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power, Ithaca, Cornell University Press.
• IKENBERRY, G. J. (2001), After Victory: lnstitutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order After Major Wars, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
• JERVIS, R. (2006), "The Remaking of a Unipolar World", Washington Quarterly, Vol. 29.
• KAGAN, R. (1998), "The Benevolent Empire", Foreign Policy.
• KAPLAN, R. D. (2000), The Coming Anarchy. Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War, New York, Random House.
• KENNEDY, P. (1994), Auge y Caída de las Grandes Potencias, Barcelona, Plaza y Janés.
• KEOHANE, R. (1984), After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy Princeton, Princeton University Press.
• KINDELBERGER, C. P. (1996), World Economic Primacy: 1500 to 1990, New York, Oxford University Press.
• KRAUTHAMMER, C. (1991), "The Unipolar Moment", Foreign Affairs, Vol. 70, nº 1.
• KRAUTHAMMER, C. (2003), "The Unipolar Moment Revisited", The National lnterest, Vol. 70.
• KUPCHAN, C. A. (1998), "After Pax Americana: Benign Power, Regional lntegration, and the Sources of a Stable Multipolarity", lnternational Security, Vol. 23, nº 2.
• LAKE, D. A. (2008), "The New American Empire?", lnternational Studies Perspectives, Vol. 9.
• LAYNE, C. (1993), "The Unipolar lllusion: Why New Great Powers Will Arise", lnternational Security, Vol. 17, nº 4.
• LAYNE, C. (2006), "The Unipolar lllusion Revisited: The Coming End of the United States' Unipolar Moment", lnternational Security, Vol. 31, nº 2.
• LENTNER, H. H. (2006), "Hegemony and Power in lnternational Politics", en M. HAUGAARD y H.H. LENTNER (Eds.), Hegemony and Power: Consensus and Coercion in Contemporary Politics. Lanham, Lexington Books.
• LlEBER, K. A. y ALEXANDER, G. (2005), "Waiting for Balancing: Why the World ls Not Pushing Back", lnternational Security, Vol. 30, nº 1.
• LlNKLATER A. y SUGANAMl, H. (2006), The English School of lnternational Relations: A Contemporary Assessment, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
• MANDELBAUM, M. (2005), The Case for Goliath: How America Acts as the World's Government in the 21st Century, New York, Public Affairs.
• MASTANDUNO, M. (2002), "lncomplete hegemony and security order in the Asia-Pacific", en G. J. lKENBERRY (Ed.), American Unrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power, Cornell Studies in Security Affairs.
• MEARSHElMER, J. J. (1995), "Back to the Future: lnstability in Europe after the Cold War", en M. E. BROWN, S. M. LYNN-JONES y S. E. MlLLER (Eds.), The Peril of Anarchy: Contemporary Realism and lnternational Security, Cambridge, The MlT Press.
• MEARSHElMER, J. J. (2001), The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York, Norton.
• MlYAOKA, l. (2004), Legitimacy in lnternational Society: Japan's reaction to global wildlife preservation, New York, Palgrave McMillan.
• MODELSKl, G. (1987), Long Cycles in World Politics, London, MacMillan.
• MORGAN, l. (2008), "The lndebted Empire: America's Current-Account Deficit Problem", lnternational Politics, Vol. 45.
• MOURE, L. (2009), El Programa de lnvestigación Realistas ante los Nuevos Retos lnternacionales del siglo XXl, Leioa, Servicio Editorial UPV/EHU.
• ORGANSKl, A. F. K. (1965), World Politics, New York, Alfred A. Knopf.
• ORGANSKl, A. F. K. y KUGLER, J. (1980), The War Ledger, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
• PEDERSEN, T. (2002), "Cooperative Hegemony. Power, ldeas and lnstitutions in Regional lntegration", Review of lnternational Studies, nº 28.
• REUS-SMlT, C. (2004), American Power and World Order, Cambridge, Polity Press..
• ROUSSEAU, D. L. y GARCÍA-RETAMERO, R. (2009), "Estimating Threats: The lmpact of lnteraction of ldentity and Power", en A. T. THRALL y J. K. CRAMER (Ed.), American Foreign Policy and the Politics of Fear, New York, Routledge.
• SAULL, R. (2008), "Empire, lmperialism, and Contemporary American Global Power", lnternational Studies Perspectives, Vol. 9.
• SCHWELLER, R. L. (2006), Unanswered Threats: Political Constraints on the Balance of Power, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
• SODUPE, K. (2002), La Estructura de Poder del Sistema lnternacional: Del Final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial a la Posguerra Fría, Madrid, Fundamentos.
• SPRUYT, H. (2008), American Empire as an Analytic Question or a Rhetorical Move?", lnternational Studies Perspectives, Vol. 9.
• TALlAFERRO, J. W. (2001), "Security Seeking under Anarchy: Defensive Realism Revisited," lnternational Security, Vol. 25, nº 3.
• VAN EVERA, S. (1984), "The Cult of the Offensive and the Origins of the First World War", lnternational Security, Vol. 9, nº 3.
• VAN EVERA, S. (1999), Causes of War: Power and the Roots of Conflict, lthaca, Cornell University Press.
• WALT, S. M. (1987), The Origins of Alliances, lthaca, Cornell University Press.
• WALT, S. M. (2005), Taming American Power: The Global Response to U.S. Primacy, New York, W.W. Norton & Company.
• WALTZ, K. N. (1993), "The Emerging Structure of lnternational Politics", lnternational Security, Vol.18, nº 2.
• WALTZ, K. N. (2000a), "Globalization and American Power", The National lnterest, nº 59, 2000.
• WALTZ, K. N. (2000b), "Structural Realism after the Cold War", Vol. 25, nº 1, 2000.
• WENDT, A. (1999), Social Theory of lnternational Politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
• WOHLFORTH, W. C. (1999), "The Stability of the Unipolar World", lnternational Security, Vol. 24, nº 1.