Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 9
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Kettell, Steven and Sutton, Alex 2013. New Imperialism: Toward a Holistic Approach. International Studies Review, Vol. 15, Issue. 2, p. 243.

    Badie, Dina 2010. Groupthink, Iraq, and the War on Terror: Explaining US Policy Shift toward Iraq. Foreign Policy Analysis, Vol. 6, Issue. 4, p. 277.

    Power, M. 2009. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography.

    Tunç, Hakan 2009. Preemption in the Bush Doctrine: A Reappraisal. Foreign Policy Analysis, Vol. 5, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    Dodds, Klaus and Hemmings, Alan D. 2008. The United States 2002 Unified Command Plan: Antarctica and the areas of responsibility of military commanders. Polar Record, Vol. 44, Issue. 02,

    Lawson, George 2008. A Realistic Utopia? Nancy Fraser, Cosmopolitanism and the Making of a Just World Order. Political Studies, Vol. 56, Issue. 4, p. 881.

    Sterling-Folker, Jennifer 2008. The Emperor Wore Cowboy Boots. International Studies Perspectives, Vol. 9, Issue. 3, p. 319.

    Cox, Michael 2007. Still the American Empire. Political Studies Review, Vol. 5, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    O'REILLY, MARC J. and RENFRO, WESLEY B. 2007. Evolving Empire: America's "Emirates" Strategy in the Persian Gulf. International Studies Perspectives, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, p. 137.


Empire, imperialism and the Bush doctrine


It is an empire without a consciousness of itself as such, constantly shocked that its good intentions arouse resentment abroad. But that does not make it any the less of an empire, with a conviction that it alone, in Herman Melville's words, bears ‘the ark of liberties of the world.

If all history according to Marx has been the history of class struggle, then all international history, it could just as well be argued, has been the struggle between different kinds of Empire vying for hegemony in a world where the only measure was success and the only means of achieving this was through war. Indeed, so obvious is this fact to historians – but so fixated has the profession of International Relations been with the Westphalian settlement – that it too readily forgets that imperial conquest, rather than mere state survival, has been the principle dynamic shaping the contours of the world system from the sixteenth century onwards. Empires, however, were not just mere agents existing in static structures. They were living entities that thought, planned, and then tried to draw the appropriate lessons from the study of what had happened to others in the past.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Review of International Studies
  • ISSN: 0260-2105
  • EISSN: 1469-9044
  • URL: /core/journals/review-of-international-studies
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *