1. Gress, David, ‘A Turn Toward Utopia’, Commentary, Ixxxiv (July 1987), pp. 70–72Google Scholar; Black, Naomi, review of Mastny, V. (ed.), Power and Policy in Transition, International Journal, xlii (1987), pp. 395–398Google Scholar.

2. Gilpin, Robert, ‘The Richness of the Tradition of Political Realism’, International Organization, xxxviii (1984), pp. 287–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Reprinted in Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations: The Strugglefor Power and Peace, fifth edition (revised) (New York, 1973)Google Scholar (henceforth Politics Among Nations), p. xvii. In the third edition, published six years later, Morgenthau recalled his appeal, and lamented the fact that he still was being taken to task for opinions to which he had never subscribed. It seems that he resigned himself to his ‘fate’, since the third edition marks the end of the published complaints.

4. Ibid., pp. 3–25; Morgenthau, Scientific Man Versus Power Politics (Chicago, 1946), pp. 37–40Google Scholar; 75–121; 204–23; ‘The Nature and Limits of a Theory of International Relations’, in Fox, William T. R. (ed.), Theoretical Aspects of International Politics (Notre Dame, 1959), pp. 15–28Google Scholar; ‘Common Sense and Theories’, in Morgenthau, , Truth and Power: Essays of a Decade, 1960–1970 (New York, 1970), pp. 241–248.Google Scholar

5. Carr, E. H., The Twenty Years Crisis, 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations (London, 1939)Google Scholar; Wight, Martin, Power Politics (London, 1946)Google Scholar; Butterfield, Herbert, Christianity, Diplomacy, and War (London, 1953)Google Scholar; Aron, Raymond, Peace and War (Garden City, 1966)Google Scholar; Kissinger, Henry A., World Restored—Europe After Napoleon: The Politics of Conservatism in a Revolutionary Age (New York, 1964)Google Scholar; Lippmann, Walter, U.S. Foreign Policy: Shield of the Republic (Boston, 1943)Google Scholar; Niebuhr, Reinhold, Moral Man and Immoral Society (New York, 1947)Google Scholar. That Morgenthau's thinking was influenced (as were Aron's and Kissinger's) by his experience as a Jewish refugee from the Nazis and as an observer of the disastrous efforts of the European democracies to appease Hitler is evident in late as well as early writings. See his ‘Fragment of an Intellectual Autobiography: 1904–1932’, in Thompson, Kenneth W. and Myers, Robert J. (eds.), Truth and Tragedy: A Tribute to Hans J. Morgenthau (Washington, DC, 1977), pp. 1–17Google Scholar.

6. Morgenthau, Scientific Man Versus Power Politics, op. cit., pp. 122–3.

7. Ibid., pp. 129–30.

8. , Morgenthau and Thompson, Kenneth W. (eds.), Principles and Problems of International Politics (New York, 1950), p. 3Google Scholar.

9. Zimmern, Sir Alfred, The Study of International Relations (Oxford, 1931)Google Scholar, passim.; see also Markwell, D. J., ‘sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited: Fifty Years On’, Review of International Studies, xii (1986), pp. 279–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10. Zimmern, Sir Alfred, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law (London, 1936)Google Scholar, passim; see also Ceadel, Martin, Pacificism in Britain, 1914–1945: TheDefining of a Faith (Oxford, 1980), pp. 147–192Google Scholar.

11. Morgenthau, , ‘International Law and International Politics: An Uneasy Partnership’, Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law (1974), p. 333Google Scholar.

12. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 511.

13. Morgenthau, Scientific Man Versus Power Politics, op. cit., pp. 95–105.

14. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 559. An elaborated argument can be found in ‘Remarks on the Validity of Historical Analogies’, Social Research, xxxix (1972), pp. 360–364.Google Scholar

15. Morgenthau's writings objecting to the fallacy of monolithic communism are numerous. Exemplary are: In Defense of the National Interest (New York, 1951), pp. 201–220Google Scholar; Vietnam and the United States (Washington, 1965)Google Scholar, passim; A New Foreign Policyfor the United States (New York, 1969), pp. 23–29.Google Scholar

16. The scholarly interest in international ‘regimes’ as well as norms of, and games involving, cooperation n i conditions of international anarchy often reflects a considerable hopefulness in the degree to which competition among states might be managed, if not tamed. See International Organization, xxxvi (1982)Google Scholar, a special issue devoted to regimes, but especially Donald Puchala and Raymond Hopkins, ‘International Regimes: Lessons from Inductive Analysis’, pp. 245–76, and Oran Young, ‘Regime Dynamics: The Rise and Fall of International Regimes’, pp. 277–97. See also Stein, Janice Gross, ‘Detection and Defection: ‘security Regimes’ and the Management of International Conflict’, International Journal, xI (1985), pp. 599–627Google Scholar; Axelrod, Robert and Keohane, Robert O., ‘Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions’, World Politics, xxxviii (1985), pp. 226–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Axelrod, Robert, ‘An Evolutionary Approach to Norms’, American Political Science Review, Ixxx (1986), p. 1110.Google Scholar

17. See Morgenthau, , ‘Human Rights and Foreign Policy’, Council on Religion in International Affairs Distinguished Lecture (New York, 1979)Google Scholar; ‘The Pathology of American Power’, International Securuty, i (1977), pp. 3–20Google Scholar. These arguments are incorporated in the sixth edition of Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York, 1985)Google Scholar, edited by Kenneth W. Thompson.

18. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 12.

19. Ibid.

20. Morgenthau, Scientific Man Versus Power Politics, op. cit., p. 189. See also Morgenthau, , ‘The Evil of Power’, Review of Metaphysics, iii (1950), pp. 507–517.Google Scholar

21. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 30.

22. Morgenthau, , ‘Love and Power’, Commentary, xxxiii (1962), p. 248.Google Scholar

23. Raymond Aron, Peace and War, op. cit., pp. 47–71.

24. See Waltz, Kenneth N., Theory of International Politics (Reading, 1979)Google Scholar, chapters five and six; Krasner, Stephen D., ‘structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables’, International Organization, xxxvi (1982), pp. 185–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 197; Robert Gilpin, op. cit., p. 290; and Gilpin, , War and Change in World Politics (New York, 1981), pp. 13–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 30–4. That these and other new realists have repudiated an important dimension of Morgenthau's argument was recognized by Richard Ashley, though the implications he draws from his insight are open to dispute. See his ‘The Poverty of Neorealism’, International Organization, xxxviii (1984), pp. 225–287Google Scholar.

25. Thucydides, , History of the Peloponnesian War (London, 1969)Google Scholar, Book VI, chapters 53.3–60.5; cf. III. 61.1–68.2. See also Forde, Steven, ‘Thucydides on the Causes of Athenian Imperialism’, American Political Science Review, Ixxx (1986), pp. 433–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26. Keohane, Robert O. and Nye, Joseph S. Jr, Power and Interdependence (Boston, 1977), pp. 23–24Google Scholar.

27. Russett, Bruce and Starr, Harvey, World Politics: The Menu for Choice (New York, 1985), p. 129Google Scholar.

28. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 211.

29. Morgenthau, , ‘The Problem of the National Interest’, in Politics in the Twentieth Century (Chicago, 1962), vol. one, p. 90.Google Scholar

30. Ibid., pp. 91–2.

31. Ibid., p. 93.

32. Ibid., p. 90.

33. Raymond Aron, Peace and War, op. cit., pp. 6–7.

34. Ibid., p. 178.

35. Bull, , ‘society and Anarchy in International Relations’, in Butterfield, Herbert and Wight, Martin (eds.), Diplomatic Investigations (London, 1967)Google Scholar; and Bull, , The Anarchical Society (New York, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, especially part one.

36. Ibid., p. 4.

37. On the difficulties posed by conflicting aims, see Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., pp. 221–48, 248–63, and 337–47; Morgenthau, , ‘The Danger of Detente’, New Leader, Ivi (October 1973), pp. 5–7Google Scholar; ‘The Tragedy of German-Jewish Liberalism’, in Morgenthau, Politics in the Twentieth Century, op. cit., vol. one, pp. 247–56.

38. Rothstein, Robert L., ‘On the Costs of Realism’, Political Science Quarterly, Ixxxvii (1972), pp. 347–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tucker, Robert W., ‘Professor Morgenthau's Theory of Political ‘Realism’’, American Political Science Review, xlvi (1952), pp. 214–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Joynt, Carey B. and Corbett, Percy E., Theory and Reality in World Politics (London, 1978), pp. 8–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39. Morgenthau, , The Purpose of American Politics (New York, 1960), p. 22.Google Scholar

40. Morgenthau, , ‘The Mind of Abraham Lincoln’, in Morgenthau, and Hein, David, Essays on Lincoln's Faith and Politics, Kenneth W. Thompson (ed.) (Lanham, 1983), p. 84.Google Scholar

41. Morgenthau, The Purpose of American Politics, op. cit., p. 309. Inis L. Claude, Jr., makes a strong case for Morgenthau's ambivalence towards the notion of great power responsibility to other states, arguing that in Morgenthau's view, ‘concerns such as global peace and security and the general welfare of humanity were distinctly secondary to national interests and were not to be pursued at the expense of the latter’. Still, Morgenthau's accentuation of national purpose in formulating American foreign policy introduces—albeit in a discussion restricted to the United States—much of the concern which Claude argues ‘Realists’ are unwilling to admit. In Morgenthau's words: ‘Thus it will be as it was at the beginning: what America does for itself it does for mankind, and political experimentation on a worldwide scale in order to save mankind will be in direct line of succession to the political experiment as which at its inception America offered itself to the world’ (Ibid., p. 310). Claude, Compare, ‘The Common Defence and Great-Power Responsibilities’, Political Science Quarterly, ci (1986), pp.719–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Morgenthau, The Purpose of American Politics, op. cit., pp. 177–89; 307–11.

42. See Morgenthau, A New Foreign Policy for the United States, op. cit., pp. 32–56; 73–6; and ‘The Fortieth Anniversary of the Bolshevist Revolution’, in Politics in the Twentieth Century, op. cit., vol. two, pp. 139–51.

43. Morgenthau made this statement as part of congressional testimony. See Hearings before the Subcommittee on Europe of the House of Representatives, Ninety-Third Congress, Second Session, June 10, 1974, p. 147. Valery Panov, the lead dancer for the Kirov Ballet, sought permission to emigrate to Israel, and was dismissed. His wife, also a dancer, lost her job as well. Two years later, Panov was given a visa conditional on leaving his pregnant wife behind. After considerable international criticism, the Soviet government relented, and allowed both to leave.

44. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 237; see also pp. 236 44.

45. Ibid., p. 238.

46. ‘Review of Dilemmas of Polities’, International Affairs, xxxv (1959), pp. 199–200Google Scholar.

47. Morgenthau, In Defense of the National Interest, op. cit., p. 34.

48. Morgenthau, letter of 22 April 1959, Morgenthau Papers (Alderman Library, University of Virginia).

49. Cited in Morgenthau, Scientific Man Versus Power Politics, op. cit., p. 202.

50. See Morgenthau, ‘Danger of Detente’, op. cit., p. 7.

51. Politics in the Twentieth Century, op. cit., vol. three, p. 11.

52. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 226.

53. See Morgenthau, , ‘Death in the Nuclear Age’, Commentary, xxxiii (1962), pp. 231–234.Google Scholar

54. Morgenthau, A New Foreign Policy for the United States, op. cit., p. 225. These arguments are elaborated in Morgenthau, , ‘The Four Paradoxes of Nuclear Strategy’, American Political Science Review, Iviii (1964), pp. 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

55. At the height of the war in Indo-China, Morgenthau's zeal in criticizing American policy led him into conflict with his own arguments. See for example his remarkably generous treatment of cold war revisionism in ‘Historical Justice and the Cold War’, New York Review of Books, xiii (10 July 1969), pp. 10–17Google Scholar. That these and other polemics probably represent contradictions rather than a change of course is strongly suggested by contemporaneous publications in which Morgenthau maintained long established positions. See Morgenthau, A New Foreign Policyfor the United States, op. cit., passim; Morgenthau, et al, The Origins of the Cold War (Waltham, 1970), pp. 79–102Google Scholar and ‘Mr Nixon's Foreign Policy’, The New Republic, clxii (21 March 1970), pp. 23–25Google Scholar.

56. See Raymond Aron, Peace and War, op. cit., pp. 591–600; Claude, Inis L. Jr, Power and International Relations (New York, 1962), pp. 25–37.Google Scholar

57. Morgenthau, The Purpose of American Politics, op. cit., pp. 8–9; and ‘Epistle to the Columbians on the Meaning of Morality’, in Ibid., pp. 351–9.

58. Morgenthau, ‘The Intellectual and Political Functions of a Theory-of International Relations’, Politics in the Twentieth Century, op. cit., pp. 72–3; ‘Human Rights and Foreign Policy’, op. cit., passim.

59. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, op. cit., p. 560.

60. The Federalist Papers, Clinton Rossiter (ed.) (New York, 1961), p. 423.

61. Holsti, K. J., ‘Along the Road to International Theory’, International Journal, xxxix (1984), p. 341.Google Scholar