1.
Carr EH, Cox M. The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations. 2nd ed. Palgrave; 2001.
2.
Mearsheimer JJ. E.H. Carr vs. Idealism: The Battle Rages On. International Relations. 2005;19(2):139-152. doi:10.1177/0047117805052810
3.
Paul TV. Recasting Statecraft - International Relations and Strategies of Peaceful Change. 2016;Presidential Address International Studies Association (ISA), 57th Annual Convention. http://www.tvpaul.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ISA_Presidential_Address.pdf
4.
Howe P. The Utopian Realism of E. H. Carr. Review of International Studies. 1994;20(3):277-297. doi:10.1017/S0260210500118078
5.
Morgenthau H. The Political Science of E. H. Carr. World Politics. 1948;1(1):127-134. doi:10.2307/2009162
6.
Wilson, P. The Myth of the ‘First Great Debate’. Review of International Studies. 1998;24(4):1-15. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20097558
7.
Ikenberry GJ. Liberal Internationalism 3.0: America and the Dilemmas of Liberal World Order. Perspectives on Politics. 2009;7(1):71-87. doi:10.1017/S1537592709090112
8.
Keohane RO, Nye JS. Power and Interdependence. 2nd ed. HarperCollins; 1989.
9.
Keohane RO, Nye JS. Power and Interdependence Revisited. International Organization. 1987;41(04). doi:10.1017/S0020818300027661
10.
Doyle MW. Liberalism and World Politics. American Political Science Review. 1986;80(04):1151-1169. doi:10.2307/1960861
11.
Deudney D, Ikenberry GJ. The Nature and Sources of Liberal International Order. Review Of International Studies. 1999;25(2):179-196. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20097589
12.
Doyle MW. Liberalism and World Politics. American Political Science Review. 1986;80(04):1151-1169. doi:10.2307/1960861
13.
Fukuyama F. The End of History? The National Interest. 1989;(16):3-18. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24027184
14.
Ikenberry GJ. Liberal Internationalism 3.0: America and the Dilemmas of Liberal World Order. Perspectives on Politics. 2009;7(01):71-87. doi:10.1017/S1537592709090112
15.
Slaughter AM. A New World Order. Princeton University Press; 2004.
16.
Moravcsik A. Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. International Organization. 1997;52(1). http://www.jstor.org/stable/2601333
17.
Zacher MW, Matthew RA. Liberal International Theory: Common Threads, Divergent Strands. In: Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realism and the Neo-Liberal Challenge. Macmillan; 1995:107-150.
18.
Wilson W. The World Must be Made Safe for Democracy: The Fourteen Points. In: Mingst KA, Snyder (eds.) JL, eds. Essential Readings in World Politics. Vol The Norton series in world politics. Fifth Edition. W.W. Norton & Company; 2014:4-6.
19.
Kant I. An Answer to the Question: ‘What is Enlightenment?’. In: Kant’s Political Writings. Vol Cambridge studies in the history and theory of politics. Cambridge University Press; 1970.
20.
Kant I. Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch. In: Kant’s Political Writings. Vol Cambridge studies in the history and theory of politics. Cambridge University Press; 1970.
21.
Grieco JM. Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism. In: Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. Vol New Directions in World Politics. Columbia University Press; 1993:116-142.
22.
Baldwin DA. Neoliberalism, Neorealism, and World Politics. In: Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. Vol New Directions in World Politics. Columbia University Press; 1993:3-28.
23.
Hoffmann S. Liberalism and International Affairs. In: Janus and Minerva: Essays in the Theory and Practice of International Politics. ; 1987:394-417.
24.
Doyle MW. Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs. Philosophy & Public Affairs. 1983;12(3):205-235. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2265298
25.
Genest MA. Conflict and Cooperation: Evolving Theories of International Relations. 2nd ed. Thomson/Wadsworth; 2004.
26.
Kegley CW, Blanton SL. World Politics: Trend and Transformation. Wadsworth Cengage Learning; 2011.
27.
Jackson R, Sorensen G. Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches. Rev. and expanded 2nd ed. Oxford University Press; 2003.
28.
Morgenthau HJ. A Realist Theory of International Politics. In: Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 7th ed. McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2006.
29.
Morgenthau HJ. The Balance of Power. In: Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 7th ed. McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2006.
30.
Morgenthau HJ. Different Methods of the Balance of Power. In: Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. 7th ed. McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2006.
31.
Forde S. Varieties of Realism: Thucydides and Machiavelli. The Journal of Politics. 1992;54(2):372-393. doi:10.2307/2132031
32.
Waltz KN. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New ed. Columbia University Press; 2001.
33.
Morgenthau HJ. Scientific Man vs. Power Politics. Vol Midway reprint. University of Chicago Press; 1974.
34.
Niebuhr R. Moral Man and Immoral Society: A Study in Ethics and Politics. Vol Continuum impacts. Continuum; 2005.
35.
Claude IL. Power and International Relations. Random House; 2012.
36.
Aron R. Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations. Weidenfeld & Nicolson; 1966.
37.
Palan RP, Blair BM. On the Idealist Origins of the Realist Theory of International Relations. Review of International Studies. 1993;19(04). doi:10.1017/S0260210500118273
38.
Viotti PR, Kauppi MV. Realism: The State, Power and the Balance of Power. In: International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond. 3rd ed. Allyn and Bacon; 1999:35-67.
39.
Carr EH. The Nature of Politics. In: International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond. 3rd ed. Allyn and Bacon; 1999:562-566.
40.
Dougherty JE, Pfaltzgraff RL. Contending Theories of International Relations: A Comprehensive Survey. 5th ed. Longman; 2001.
41.
Vasquez JA. The Power of Power Politics: From Classical Realism to Neotraditionalism. Vol Cambridge studies in international relations. Cambridge University Press; 1998.
42.
Haslam J. No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations Since Machiavelli. Yale University Press; 2002.
43.
Smith MJ. Realist Thought From Weber to Kissinger. London; 1986.
44.
Doyle MW. Thucydidean Realism. Review of International Studies. 1990;16(03). doi:10.1017/S0260210500112483
45.
Garst D. Thucydides and Neorealism. International Studies Quarterly. 1989;33(1):3-27. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2600491
46.
Bagby LMJ. The Use and Abuse of Thucydides in International Relations. International Organization. 1994;48(01). doi:10.1017/S0020818300000849
47.
Thucydides. The Melian Dialogue. In: History of the Peloponnesian War. Vol Penguin classics. Penguin; 1954:400-408.
48.
Thucydides. The Melian Dialogue. In: Classics of International Relations. 3rd Edition. Prentice Hall; 1996:84-90.
49.
Thucydides, Crawley R. History of the Peloponnesian War. http://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/Courses/texts/thucydi1.html
50.
Macchiavell N. Excerpts from ‘The Prince’ in Classics of International Relations. In: Classics of International Relations. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall; 1996:15-20.
51.
Machiavelli N, Marriott WK. The Prince. Published 1505. https://web.archive.org/web/20060101054818/http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/publications/machiavelli.html
52.
Hobbes T. The Natural Conditions of Mankind. In: International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond. 3rd ed. Allyn and Bacon; 1999:94-98.
53.
Gilpin RG. The Richness of the Tradition of Political Realism. International Organization. 1984;38(02). doi:10.1017/S0020818300026710
54.
Gilpin RG. No One Loves a Political Realist. Security Studies. 1996;5(3):3-26.
55.
Herz JH. Power Politics and World Organization. The American Political Science Review. 1942;36(6). doi:10.2307/1949064
56.
H. Herz J. Rise and Demise of The Territorial State. World Politics. 1957;9(4):473-493. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2009421?sid=primo&origin=crossref&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
57.
Hoffmann S. An American Social Science: International Relations. Daedalus. 1977;106(3):41-60. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20024493
58.
Hoffmann S. An American Social Science: International Relations. In: Janus and Minerva: Essays in the Theory and Practice of International Politics. Westview; 1987:219-221.
59.
James A. The Realism of Realism: The State and the Study of International Relations. Review of International Studies. 1989;15(03). doi:10.1017/S0260210500112847
60.
Wolfers A. Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics. Johns Hopkins University Press; 1962.
61.
Waltz KN. Theory of International Politics. McGraw-Hill; 1979.
62.
Keohane RO. Neorealism and Its Critics. Vol New directions in world politics. Columbia University Press; 1986.
63.
Rosecrance R. Long Cycle Theory and International Relations. International Organization. 1987;41(2):283-301. doi:10.1017/S0020818300027478
64.
Dunne T, Kurki M, Smith S, eds. International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. Fourth edition. Oxford University Press; 2016.
65.
Powell R. Anarchy in International Relations Theory: The Neorealist-Neoliberal Debate. International Organization. 1994;48(02). doi:10.1017/S0020818300028204
66.
Modelski G. The Long Cycle of Global Politics and the Nation-State. Comparative Studies in Society and History. 1978;20(02). doi:10.1017/S0010417500008914
67.
Krauthammer C. The Unipolar Moment. In: Rethinking America’s Security: Beyond Cold War to New World Order. 1st ed. Norton; 1992:313-344.
68.
Mastanduno M. Preserving the Unipolar Moment: Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy After the Cold War. International Security. 1997;21(4). doi:10.2307/2539283
69.
Keohane RO. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press; 2005. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/rhul/detail.action?docID=5543821
70.
Keohane RO. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press; 1984.
71.
Mearsheimer JJ. The False Promise of International Institutions. International Security. 1994;19(3). doi:10.2307/2539078
72.
Legro JW, Moravcsik A. Is Anybody Still a Realist? International Security. 1999;24(2):5-55. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2539248
73.
Jervis R. Realism, Neoliberalism, and Cooperation: Understanding the Debate. International Security. 1999;24(1):42-63. doi:10.1162/016228899560040
74.
Gilpin R. The Rise of American Hegemony. In: Britain 1846-1914 and the United States 1941-2001. Ashgate Pub Ltd; 2002.
75.
Gilpin R. The Rise of American Hegemony. In: Two Hegemonies: Britain 1846-1914 and the United States 1941-2001. Ashgate Publishing Ltd.; 2002:165-182. https://web.archive.org/web/20130323092826/https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/ipe/gilpin.htm
76.
Grunberg I. Exploring the "Myth” of Hegemonic Stability. International Organization. 1990;44(04). doi:10.1017/S0020818300035372
77.
Ruggie JG. International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order. International Organization. 1982;36(02). doi:10.1017/S0020818300018993
78.
Milner H. International Theories of Cooperation Among Nations: Strengths and Weaknesses. World Politics. 1992;44(03):466-496. doi:10.2307/2010546
79.
Simmons BA, Hopkins DJ. The Constraining Power of International Treaties: Theory and Methods. American Political Science Review. 2005;99(04). doi:10.1017/S0003055405051920
80.
Kindleberger CP. Dominance and Leadership in the International Economy: Exploitation, Public Goods, and Free Rides. International Studies Quarterly. 1981;25(2). doi:10.2307/2600355
81.
Snidal D. The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory. International Organization. 1985;39(04). doi:10.1017/S002081830002703X
82.
Lake DA. Leadership, Hegemony, and the International Economy: Naked Emperor or Tattered Monarch With Potential? International Studies Quarterly. 1993;37(4). http://www.jstor.org/stable/2600841
83.
McKeown TJ. Hegemonic Stability Theory and 19th Century Tariff Levels in Europe. International Organization. 1983;37(01). doi:10.1017/S0020818300004203
84.
Bull H. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. 4th ed. Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.
85.
Edkins J, Zehfuss M. Generalising the International. Review of International Studies. 2005;31(03). doi:10.1017/S0260210505006583
86.
Dunne T. International Society: Theoretical Promises Fulfilled? Cooperation and Conflict. 1995;30(2):125-154. doi:10.1177/0010836795030002002
87.
Bellamy AJ. International Society and Its Critics. Oxford University Press; 2005. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13397529850002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
88.
Bellamy AJ. International Society and Its Critics. Oxford University Press; 2004. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13397721050002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
89.
Bull H. Order vs. Justice in International Society. Political Studies. 1971;19(3):269-283. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1971.tb00674.x
90.
Hurrell A. Order and Justice in International Relations: What is at Stake? In: Order and Justice in International Relations. Oxford University Press; 2003.
91.
Bellamy AJ. International Society and Its Critics. Oxford University Press; 2005. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13397720990002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
92.
Bellamy AJ. International Society and Its Critics. Oxford University Press; 2004. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13397655180002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
93.
Brown C. International Theory and International Society: The Viability of the Middle Way? Review of International Studies. 1995;21(02). doi:10.1017/S0260210500117619
94.
Brown C. International Theory and International Society: The Viability of the Middle Way? Review of International Studies. 1995;21(02). doi:10.1017/S0260210500117619
95.
Linklater, A. The Transformation of Political Community: E. H. Carr, Critical Theory and International Relations. Review Of International Studies. 1997;23(3).
96.
Lynch C. E.H. Carr, International Relations Theory, and the Societal Origins of International Legal Norms. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 1994;23(3):589-619. doi:10.1177/03058298940230030801
97.
Vincent RJ. Hedley Bull and Order in International Politics. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 1988;17(2):195-213. doi:10.1177/03058298880170020701
98.
Buzan B. From International to World Society?: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Vol Cambridge studies in international relations. Cambridge University Press; 2004. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13397655150002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
99.
Buzan B. From International to World Society?: English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge University Press; 2004. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13397655140002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
100.
Grotius H, Neff SC. Hugo Grotius on the Law of War and Peace. Student ed. Cambridge University Press; 2012.
101.
Grotius H, Campbell AC. On the Laws of War and Peace.; 1814. https://web.archive.org/web/20171020013519/http://www.constitution.org/gro/djbp.htm
102.
Bull H. The Importance of Grotius in the Study of International Relations. In: Hugo Grotius and International Relations. Clarendon; 1990:65-94. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13407032680002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
103.
Linklater A. Marxism. In: Theories of International Relations. 3rd Edition. Palgrave Macmillan; 2005:110-136. http://lib.myilibrary.com/Open.aspx?id=85685
104.
Gilpin R, Gilpin JM. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton University Press; 1987.
105.
Gills BK. Historical Materialism and International Relations Theory. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 1987;16(2):265-270. doi:10.1177/03058298870160020301
106.
Marx K, Engels F, Tucker RC. Economic and Philosophic Manuscript of 1844. In: The Marx-Engels Reader. 2d ed. Norton; 1978:66-125.
107.
Marx K, Engels F, Tucker RC. Wage, Labour and Capital. In: The Marx-Engels Reader. 2d ed. Norton; 1978:203-217.
108.
Linklater A. Realism, Marxism and Critical International Theory. Review of International Studies. 1986;12(04). doi:10.1017/S0260210500113865
109.
Maclean J. Marxism and International Relations: A Strange Case of Mutual Neglect. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 1988;17(2):295-319. doi:10.1177/03058298880170021201
110.
Burnham P. Open Marxism and Vulgar International Political Economy. Review of International Political Economy. 1994;1(2):221-231. doi:10.1080/09692299408434277
111.
Marx K, Tucker RC. Economic and Philosophic Manuscript of 1844. In: The Marx-Engels Reader. 2d ed. Norton; 1978:66-125.
112.
Marx K, Engels F, Tucker RC. Wage, Labour and Capital. In: The Marx-Engels Reader. 2d ed. Norton; 1978:203-217.
113.
Marx K, Tucker RC. Theories of Surplus Value. In: The Marx-Engels Reader. 2d ed. Norton; 1978:443-468.
114.
Lenin VI. Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism : A Popular Outline. Foreign Languages Press; 1973.
115.
Rosenberg J. Isaac Deutscher and the Lost History of International Relations. New Left Review. 1996;(215). https://newleftreview.org/issues/I215/articles/justin-rosenberg-isaac-deutscher-and-the-lost-history-of-international-relations
116.
Berki RN. On Marxian Thought and the Problem of International Relations. World Politics. 1971;24(01):80-105. doi:10.2307/2009707
117.
Burnham P. The Communist Manifesto as International Relations Theory. In: The Communist Manifesto: New Interpretations. Edinburgh University Press; 1998.
118.
Halliday F. A Necessary Encounter: Historical Materialism and International Relations. In: Rethinking International Relations. Macmillan; 1994.
119.
Gamble A. Marxism After Communism: Beyond Realism and Historicism. Review Of International Studies. 1999;25(5):27-144.
120.
Cutler C. Locating ‘Authority’ in the Global Political Economy. International Studies Quarterly. 1999;43(1):59-81.
121.
MacLean J. Marxist Epistemology, Explanations of ‘Change’ and the Study of International Relations. In: Change and the Study of International Relations: The Evaded Dimension. St. Martin’s Press; 1981:46-67.
122.
Linklater A. Realism, Marxism and Critical International Theory. Review of International Studies. 1986;12(4):301-312. doi:10.1017/S0260210500113865
123.
Wallerstein I. The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis. Comparative Studies in Society and History. 1974;16(4):387-415. doi:10.1017/S0010417500007520
124.
Gill S, Law D. Marxism and the World System. In: The Global Political Economy: Perspectives, Problems, and Policies. Johns Hopkins University Press; 1988:54-70.
125.
Gill SR, Law D. Global Hegemony and the Structural Power of Capital. International Studies Quarterly. 1989;33(4):475-199.
126.
Cox RW. Social Forces, States and World Order. In: Neorealism and Its Critics. Vol New directions in world politics. Columbia University Press; 1986:204-254.
127.
Lenin VI. Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism : A Popular Outline. Foreign Languages Press; 1973.
128.
Lenin VI. Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism: A Popular Outline. Published 1963. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/
129.
Wallerstein I. The Modern World-System Vol. 1: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Vol Studies in Social Discontinuity. Academic; 1974.
130.
Wallerstein I. The Three Instances of Hegemony in the History of the Capitalist World-Economy. Comparative Sociology. 1983;24(1):100-108. doi:10.1163/156854283X00071
131.
Chase-Dunn C. Interstate System and Capitalist World-Economy: One Logic or Two? International Studies Quarterly. 1981;25(1):19-42. doi:10.2307/2600209
132.
Santos TD. The Structure of Dependence. American Economic Review. 1970;60(2):231-236.
133.
Merrington J. Theory and Practice in Gramsci’s Marxism. In: Western Marxism: A Critical Reader. Verso; 1978:140-175.
134.
Cox RobertW. Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations : An Essay in Method. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 1983;12(2):162-175. doi:10.1177/03058298830120020701
135.
Germain RD, Kenny M. Engaging Gramsci: International Relations Theory and the New Gramscians. Review Of International Studies. 1998;24(1).
136.
Murphy CN. Understanding IR: Understanding Gramsci. Review Of International Studies. 1998;24(3).
137.
Gale F. Cave ’Cave! Hic Dragones’ : A Neo-Gramscian Deconstruction and Reconstruction of International Regime Theory. Review of International Political Economy. 1998;5(2):252-283. doi:10.1080/096922998347561
138.
Gill S. Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations. Vol Cambridge studies in international relations. Cambridge University Press; 1993.
139.
Gill S. Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations. Vol Cambridge Studies in International Relations. Cambridge University Press; 1993. http://eu.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=13397720900002671&institutionId=2671&customerId=2670
140.
Rupert M. Producing Hegemony: The Politics of Mass Production and American Global Power. Vol Cambridge studies in international relations. Cambridge University Press; 1995.
141.
Morton, Adam David B Andreas ;, Bieler A, Morton AD. The Gordian Knot of Agency-Structure in International Relations: A Neo-Gramscian Perspective. European Journal of International Relations. 2001;7(1).
142.
Reus-Smit C. Constructivism. In: Theories of International Relations. 3rd Edition. Palgrave Macmillan; 2005:188-212. http://lib.myilibrary.com/Open.aspx?id=85685
143.
Wendt A. Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization. 1992;46(2):391-425. doi:10.1017/S0020818300027764
144.
Hopf T. The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory. International Security. 1998;23(1):171-200. doi:10.2307/2539267
145.
Katzenstein PJ. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. Vol New directions in world politics. Columbia University Press; 1996.
146.
Sterling-Folker J. Competing Paradigms or Birds of a Feather? Constructivism and Neoliberal Institutionalism Compared. International Studies Quarterly. 2000;44(1):97-119. doi:10.1111/0020-8833.00150
147.
Krebs RR, Jackson PT. Twisting Tongues and Twisting Arms: The Power of Political Rhetoric. European Journal of International Relations. 2007;13(1):35-66. doi:10.1177/1354066107074284
148.
Hobson JM. The Enduring Place of Hierarchy in World Politics: Tracing the Social Logics of Hierarchy and Political Change. European Journal of International Relations. 2005;11(1):63-98. doi:10.1177/1354066105050137
149.
Ruggie, JG. What Makes the World Hang Together? Neo-Utilitarianism and the Social Constructivist Challenge. International Organization. 1998;52(4).
150.
Adler E. The Spread of Security Communities: Communities of Practice, Self-Restraint, and NATO’s Post--Cold War Transformation. European Journal of International Relations. 2008;14(2):195-230. doi:10.1177/1354066108089241
151.
Autesserre S. Hobbes and the Congo: Frames, Local Violence, and International Intervention. International Organization. 2009;63(02). doi:10.1017/S0020818309090080
152.
Price R, Reus-Smit C. Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism. European Journal of International Relations. 1998;4(3).
153.
Devetek R. Critical Theory. In: Theories of International Relations. 3rd Edition. Palgrave Macmillan; 2005:137-160. http://lib.myilibrary.com/Open.aspx?id=85685
154.
Edkins J. Poststructuralism & International Relations: Bringing the Political Back In. Vol Critical perspectives on world politics. Lynne Rienner Publishers; 1999.
155.
Foucault M. What Is An Author? In: The Foucault Reader. Penguin; 1991:101-120.
156.
Epstein C. The Power of Words in International Relations: Birth of an Anti-Whaling Discourse. Vol Politics, science, and the environment. MIT Press; 2008.
157.
Grovogui SN. Regimes of Sovereignty: International Morality and the African Condition. European Journal of International Relations. 2002;8(3):315-338.
158.
Said E. The Scope of Orientalism. In: Orientalism. Penguin; 1991.
159.
Gusterson H. Nuclear Weapons and the Other in the Western Imagination. In: People of the Bomb: Portraits of America’s Nuclear Complex. University of Minnesota Press; 2005:21-47.
160.
Milliken, Jennifer. The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and Methods. European Journal of International Relations. 1999;5(2).
161.
ÓTuathail G. Theorizing Practical Geopolitical Reasoning: The Case of the United States’ Response to the War in Bosnia. Political Geography. 2002;21(5):601-628. doi:10.1016/S0962-6298(02)00009-4
162.
Campbell D. Political Prosaics, Transversal Politics and the Anarchical World. In: Challenging Boundaries: Global Flows, Territorial Identities. Vol Borderlines. University of Minnesota Press; 1996.
163.
Doty RL. Foreign Policy as Social Construction: A Post-Positivist Analysis of U.S. Counterinsurgency Policy in the Philippines. International Studies Quarterly. 1993;37(3). doi:10.2307/2600810
164.
Ashley RK. The Poverty of Neorealism. International Organization. 1984;38(02). doi:10.1017/S0020818300026709
165.
Campbell D. Politics Without Principle: Sovereignty, Ethics, and the Narratives of the Gulf War. Vol Critical perspectives on world politics. Lynne Rienner Publishers; 1993.
166.
der Derian J. ‘The Boundaries of Knowledge and Power in International Relations’ In: International/Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics. In: International/Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics. Vol Issues in world politics series. Lexington Books; 1989.
167.
Neumann IB. The Body of the Diplomat. European Journal of International Relations. 2008;14(4):671-695. doi:10.1177/1354066108097557
168.
De Goede M. The Politics of Preemption and the War on Terror in Europe. European Journal of International Relations. 2008;14(1):161-185. doi:10.1177/1354066107087764
169.
Darby P. Pursuing the Political: A Postcolonial Rethinking of Relations International. Millennium: Journal of International Studies. 2004;33(1).
170.
Krishna S. Race, Amnesia, and the Education of International Relations. Alternatives. 2001;26(4).
171.
Fanon F, Philcox R, Sartre JP, Bhabha HK, West C. The Wretched of the Earth. 60th anniversary edition. Grove Press; 2021.
172.
Darby P. Reconfiguring ‘The International’ Knowledge Machines, Boundaries, and Exclusions. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political. 2003;28(1).
173.
Barkawi T, Laffey M. Retrieving the Imperial: Empire and International Relations. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 2002;31(1):109-127. doi:10.1177/03058298020310010601
174.
Callinicos A. The Actuality of Imperialism. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 2002;31(2):319-326. doi:10.1177/03058298020310020601
175.
Shaw M. Post-Imperial and Quasi-Imperial: State and Empire in the Global Era. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 2002;31(2):327-336. doi:10.1177/03058298020310020701
176.
Slater D. Post-Colonial Questions for Global Times. Review of International Political Economy. 1998;5(4):647-678. doi:10.1080/096922998347417
177.
Ling LHM. Hegemony and the Internationalizing State: A Post‐colonial Analysis of China’s Integration Into Asian Corporatism. Review of International Political Economy. 1996;3(1):1-26. doi:10.1080/09692299608434343
178.
McClintock A. The Angel of Progress: Pitfalls of the Term ‘Post-Colonialism’. Social Text. 1992;(31/32). doi:10.2307/466219
179.
Goldgeier JM, McFaul M. A Tale of Two Worlds: Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era. International Organization. 1992;46(02). doi:10.1017/S0020818300027788
180.
Aydinli E, Mathews J. Periphery Theorising for a Truly Internationalised Discipline: Spinning IR Theory Out of Anatolia. Review of International Studies. 2008;34(04). doi:10.1017/S0260210508008231
181.
True J. Feminism. In: Theories of International Relations. 3rd Edition. Palgrave Macmillan; 2005:213-234. http://lib.myilibrary.com/Open.aspx?id=85685
182.
Tickner JA. You Just Don’t Understand: Troubled Engagements Between Feminists and IR Theorists. International Studies Quarterly. 1997;41(4):611-632. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2600855?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
183.
Enloe C. Are Un Peacekeepers Real Men? and Other Post-Cold War Puzzles. In: The Morning After: Sexual Politics at the End of the Cold War. University of California Press; 1993:10-37.
184.
Enloe C. Bananas Militarized and Demilitarized. In: The Morning After: Sexual Politics at the End of the Cold War. University of California Press; 1993:102-141.
185.
Stern M, Zalewski M. Feminist Fatigue(s): Reflections on Feminism and Familiar Fables of Militarisation. Review of International Studies. 2009;35(03). doi:10.1017/S0260210509008675
186.
Skjelsbæk I. Sexual Violence and War: Mapping Out a Complex Relationship. European Journal of International Relations. 7(2). http://findit.royalholloway.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/openurl?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft.jtitle=European+Journal+of+International+Relations&rft.atitle=Sexual+Violence+and+War%3A+Mapping+Out+a+Complex+Relationship&rft.volume=7&rft.issn=13540661&rft.issue=2&rft.aufirst=Inger&rft.aulast=Skjelsb%C3%A6k&vid=44ROY_Services_page&institution=44ROY&url_ctx_val=&url_ctx_fmt=null&isSerivcesPage=true
187.
Enloe CH. Bananas, Beaches and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. University of California Press; 2000.
188.
Jones A. Does ‘Gender’ Make the World Go Round? Feminist Critiques of International Relations. Review of International Studies. 1996;22(04). doi:10.1017/S0260210500118649
189.
Carver T, Cochran M, Squires J. Gendering Jones: Feminisms, IRs, Masculinities. Review Of International Studies. 1998;24(2). http://www.jstor.org/stable/20097523
190.
Tickner JA. Hans Morgenthau’s Principles of Political Realism: A Feminist Reformulation. Millennium - Journal of International Studies. 1988;17(3):429-440. doi:10.1177/03058298880170030801
191.
Brown W. Finding the Man in the State. Feminist Studies. 1992;18(1). https://www.jstor.org/stable/3178212
192.
Youngs G. Feminist International Relations: A Contradiction in Terms? Or: Why Women and Gender Are Essential to Understanding the World ‘We’ Live In*. International Affairs. 2004;80(1):75-87. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2004.00367.x
193.
Linklater A. Dominant and Destructive Masculinities. International Affairs. 2004;80(1). http://findit.royalholloway.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/openurl?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft.jtitle=International+Affairs&rft.atitle=Dominant+and+Destructive+Masculinities&rft.volume=80&rft.issn=00205850&rft.issue=1&rft.date=2004&rft.aufirst=Andrew&rft.aulast=Linklater&vid=44ROY_Services_page&institution=44ROY&url_ctx_val=&url_ctx_fmt=null&isSerivcesPage=true
194.
Carver T. War of the Worlds/Invasion of the Body Snatchers. International Affairs (Royal Institute Of International Affairs 1944-). 2004;80(1).
195.
Enloe C. ‘Gender’ Is Not Enough: The Need for a Feminist Consciousness. International Affairs. 2004;80(1). http://findit.royalholloway.ac.uk/primo_library/libweb/action/openurl?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft.jtitle=International+Affairs&rft.atitle=%27Gender%27+Is+Not+Enough%3A+The+Need+for+a+Feminist+Consciousness&rft.volume=80&rft.issn=00205850&rft.issue=1&rft.date=2004&rft.aufirst=Cynthia&rft.aulast=Enloe&vid=44ROY_Services_page&institution=44ROY&url_ctx_val=&url_ctx_fmt=null&isSerivcesPage=true
