Državanaspoljna politika su ciljevi i aktivnosti vezani za interakcije sa drugim državama, bilo bilateralno ili putem multilateralnih platformi.[2]Enciklopedija Britanika primećuje da na spoljnu politiku neke zemlje mogu uticati „domaća razmatranja, politika ili ponašanje drugih država ili planovi za unapređenje određenih geopolitičkih rešenja”.[2]
Dyvik, Synne L., Jan Selby and Rorden Wilkinson, eds. What's the Point of International Relations (2017)
Reus-Smit, Christian, and Duncan Snidal, eds (2010). The Oxford Handbook of International Relations.CS1 одржавање: Вишеструка имена: списак аутора (веза)CS1 одржавање: Текст вишка: списак аутора (веза)
Angell, Norman (1910). The Great Illusion. London: Heinemann.
Bull, Hedley (1977). Anarchical Society. New York: Columbia University Press.
E. H. Carr The Twenty Years' Crisis (2001) [1939] (New York: Perennial)
Robert Cooper. The Post-Modern State
Enloe, Cynthia. "'Gender' Is Not Enough: The Need for a Feminist Consciousness". International Affairs 80.1 (2004): 95–97. Web. 17 Sept. 2013.
Goodin, Robert E., and Hans-Dieter Klingemann, eds. A New Handbook of Political Science (1998) ch 16–19 pp. 401–78
Charlotte Hooper "Masculinities, IR and the 'Gender Variable': A Cost-Benefit Analysis for (Sympathetic) Gender Sceptics." International Studies 25.3 (1999): 475–491.
James C. Hsiang Anarchy & Order: The Interplay of Politics and Law in International Relations 1555875718, 9781555875718 Lynne Rienner Pub 1997
Baylis, John, Steve Smith, and Patricia Owens (2011). The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations.CS1 одржавање: Вишеструка имена: списак аутора (веза)
Mingst, Karen A., and Ivan M. Arreguín-Toft. Essentials of International Relations (5th ed. 2010)
Calvocoressi, Peter. World Politics since 1945 (9th Edition, 2008) 956pp
E. H. Carr. Twenty Years Crisis (1940), 1919–39
Kennedy, Paul (1987). The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers Economic Change and Military Conflict From 1500–2000., stress on economic and military factors
Kissinger, Henry (1995). Diplomacy., not a memoir but an interpretive history of international diplomacy since the late 18th century
Krasner, Stephen D.: "Westphalia and All That" in Judith Goldstein & Robert Keohane:, ур. (1993). Ideas and Foreign Policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. стр.235—264.
New Cambridge Modern History (13 vol 1957–79), thorough coverage from 1500 to 1900
Ghervas, Stella (2017), „Balance of Power vs Perpetual Peace: Paradigms of European Order from Utrecht to Vienna, 1713-1815”, The International History Review, 39 (3): 404—425, S2CID157658557, doi:10.1080/07075332.2016.1214613
Christensen, Thomas J.; Snyder, Jack (1990), „Chain Gangs and Passed Bucks: Predicting Alliance Patterns in Multipolarity”, International Organization, 44 (2): 138—140, doi:10.1017/s0020818300035232
Gilbert, Felix (1949). „Bernardo Rucellai and the Orti Oricellari: A Study on the Origin of Modern Political Thought”. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes. Warburg Institute. 12: 101—131. JSTOR750259. doi:10.2307/750259.
Howard, Sir Esme (мај 1925), „British Policy and the Balance of Power”, The American Political Science Review, 19 (2): 261—267, JSTOR2938920, doi:10.2307/2938920CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)
Kegley, Charles W.; Wittkopf, Eugene R. (2005), World Politics: Trends and Transformation (10th изд.), стр.503
Mearsheimer, John (2010), „Structural Realism”(PDF), Ур.: Dunne, Tim; Kurki, Milja; Smith, Steve, International Relations Theories, New York: Oxford University Press, стр.79—85
Mearsheimer, John (2001), The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, New York: Norton, стр.139—161
Pirenne, J. (1963), The Tides of History: From the Expansion of Islam to the Treaties of Westphalia, II, London, стр.429
Sheehan, Michael (2000), The Balance of Power: History & Theory, Routledge, стр.35
Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979), Theory of International Politics, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, стр.118, 121
Walt, Stephen M. (1987), The Origins of Alliances, New York: Cornell University Press, стр.5, 17—29
Wendt, Alexander (1992), „Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of international Politics”, International Organization, стр.397
Wohlforth, W.C.; Little, R.; Kaufman, S.J.; . (2007), „Testing Balance-Of-Power Theory in World History”, European Journal of International Relations, 13 (2): 155—185, S2CID145419574, doi:10.1177/1354066107076951
Waltz, K. N (1979). Theory of International Politics.. New York: Random House. Waltz described IR in a systemic way, consisting of an anarchic structure and interacting units. His BOP-theory says that (smaller, weaker) states will balance the power or preponderance of more powerful ones to ensure that the latter do not become too powerful and dominate all other. For Waltz, a bipolar structure, as given in the Cold War, seems to be the best, i.e. the most peaceful one. Most relevant for his theory are Chapters 1 and 4–6.
Walt, S (1987). The Origins of Alliances.. Walt puts the BOP-theory on a new basis and calls it balance-of-threat (BOT) theory, since some states do not balance each other, because they do not perceive one another as threats (e.g. the West in the Cold War, worked together against the Warsaw Pact, but didn't balance each other).
Mearsheimer, J. J (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.. New York: W. W. Norton. Mearsheimer tries to mend BOP theory after it was unable to predict or explain the end of the Cold War. He describes himself as an "offensive realist" and believes that states do not simply balance, but because they want to survive in an anarchical system they get frequently aggressive. This is in contrast to Waltz, whom he describes as "defensive realist", who says that states primarily seek survival through balancing. Mearsheimer is an ardent critic of other IR theories (such as neoliberalism, constructivism etc.) and warns heavily of the Chinese rise in their relative power position.
T. V. Paul; Michel Fortman, and James J. Wirtz (2004). Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century. Stanford: Stanford University Press. ISBN0-8047-5016-5.. Balance of power theory has been severely criticized since the end of the Cold War. Regions where BOP dynamic would have been expected, Central Asia for example after the Soviet left, did not experience it. This book analysis the theoretical and historical criticisms of balance of power theory and test whether the theory is still valid in the 21st century.
Virginia.eduАрхивирано на сајту (9. септембар 2006) – 'Balance of Power', Dictionary of the History of Ideas
Bull, Hedley (1977). Anarchial Society. United States of America: Macmillan Ltd..
Paul W. Schroeder, "The Nineteenth century system: balance of power or political equilibrium?", Review of International Studies, 15, (1989), pp. 135–153. Schroeder argues that the BOP system is inherently unstable and conflict-prone because particular nations tend to have differing conceptions of what constitutes a "balance"; he contends that the equilibrium achieved in Europe between 1815 and 1854 rested not upon a BOP but upon a generally recognized system of British and Russian hegemonies.
Sheehan, Michael (2000). The Balance of Power: History and Theory. London: Routledge..
Baylis, John; Steve Smith; and Patricia Owens (2008). The Globalisation of World Politics (4th изд.). Oxford University Press.CS1 одржавање: Вишеструка имена: списак аутора (веза)..
Braumoeller, Bear (2013). The Great Powers and the International System: Systemic Theory in Empirical Perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Burchill, et al. eds. (2005) Theories of International Relations (3rd изд.). ISBN1-4039-4866-6.., Palgrave.
Guilhot Nicolas, ed (2011). The Invention of International Relations Theory: Realism, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory.CS1 одржавање: Текст вишка: списак аутора (веза).
Jackson, Robert H., and Georg Sørensen (2013) Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 5th ed.
