As one of the most enduring and bitter struggles we have seen in over 100 years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a powder keg, always on the verge of exploding and drawing in the wider region, the international community at large, and, in particular, the U.S. Although the conflict is of far-reaching importance, among college students and the general public there is a dearth of knowledge about it. Many of the conversations in these audiences are animated by ongoing myths and problematic talking points. This book fills in the gaps of understanding while puncturing false dichotomies and tearing down walls of ideology or indifference. It addresses perennial questions including: When and why did the conflict start? What exactly are the claims of the contending sides? Why does peace seem unattainable? What is a likely long-term outcome and how can it be brought about in a peaceful way, doing justice to both sides? Finally, this book maintains that historic Palestine, the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, must become a home for both Palestinians and Jews, with equal standings for both and without exclusive claims for either. For students, scholars, and citizens of the world, this book provides a concise and level-headed way to understand one of the most complex and vexing conflicts of our time.

As one of the most enduring and bitter struggles we have seen in over 100 years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a powder keg, always on the verge of exploding and drawing in the wider region, the international community at large, and, in particular, the U.S. Although the conflict is of far-reaching importance, among college students and the general public there is a dearth of knowledge about it. Many of the conversations in these audiences are animated by ongoing myths and problematic talking points. This book fills in the gaps of understanding while puncturing false dichotomies and tearing down walls of ideology or indifference. It addresses perennial questions including: When and why did the conflict start? What exactly are the claims of the contending sides? Why does peace seem unattainable? What is a likely long-term outcome and how can it be brought about in a peaceful way, doing justice to both sides? Finally, this book maintains that historic Palestine, the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, must become a home for both Palestinians and Jews, with equal standings for both and without exclusive claims for either. For students, scholars, and citizens of the world, this book provides a concise and level-headed way to understand one of the most complex and vexing conflicts of our time.

Stephen G. Walker, Akan Malici, and Mark Schafer present a definitive, social-psychological approach to integrating theories of foreign policy analysis and international relations—addressing the agent-centered, micro-political study of decisions by leaders and the structure-oriented, macro-political study of state interactions as a complex adaptive system. The links between the internal world of beliefs and the external world of events provide the strategic setting in which states collide and leaders decide.

The first part of this ground-breaking book establishes the theoretical framework of neobehavioral IR, setting the stage for the remainder of the work to apply the framework to pressing issues in world politics. Through these applications students can see how a game-theoretic logic can combine with the operational code research program to innovatively combine levels of analysis. The authors employ binary role theory to demonstrate that relying only on a state-systemic level or an individual-decision making level of analysis leads to an incomplete picture of how leaders steer their ships of state through the hazards of international crises to establish stable relations of cooperation or conflict.

Stephen G. Walker, Akan Malici, and Mark Schafer present a definitive, social-psychological approach to integrating theories of foreign policy analysis and international relations—addressing the agent-centered, micro-political study of decisions by leaders and the structure-oriented, macro-political study of state interactions as a complex adaptive system. The links between the internal world of beliefs and the external world of events provide the strategic setting in which states collide and leaders decide.

The first part of this ground-breaking book establishes the theoretical framework of neobehavioral IR, setting the stage for the remainder of the work to apply the framework to pressing issues in world politics. Through these applications students can see how a game-theoretic logic can combine with the operational code research program to innovatively combine levels of analysis. The authors employ binary role theory to demonstrate that relying only on a state-systemic level or an individual-decision making level of analysis leads to an incomplete picture of how leaders steer their ships of state through the hazards of international crises to establish stable relations of cooperation or conflict.

U.S.-Iran relations continue to be an international security problem in the Middle East. These two countries could have been friends, but instead they have become enemies. Stating this thesis raises the following questions: Why are the United States and Iran enemies? How and when did this relationship come to be? When the relationship began to deteriorate, could it have been reversed? What lessons can be learned from an analysis of past U.S.-Iranian relations and what are the implications for their present and future relations?

Akan Malici and Stephen G. Walker argue that the dynamics of U.S.-Iran relations are based on role conflicts. Iran has long desired to enact roles of active independence and national sovereignty in world politics. However, it continued to be cast by others into client or rebel roles of national inferiority. In this book the authors examine these role conflicts during three crucial episodes in U.S.-Iran relations: the oil nationalization crisis and the ensuing clandestine coup aided by the CIA to overthrow the Iranian regime in 1950 to 1953; the Iranian revolution followed by the hostage crisis in 1979 to 1981; the reformist years pre- and post- 9/11 under Mohammad Khatami from 1997 to 2002. Their application of role theory is theoretically and methodologically progressive and innovative in illuminating aspects of U.S.-Iran relations. It allows for a better understanding of the past, navigating the present, and anticipating the future in order to avoid foreign policy mistakes.

Role Theory and Role Conflict in U.S.-Iran Relations is a useful resource for international relations and foreign policy scholars who want to learn more about progress in international relations theory and U.S. relations with Iran.

U.S.-Iran relations continue to be an international security problem in the Middle East. These two countries could have been friends, but instead they have become enemies. Stating this thesis raises the following questions: Why are the United States and Iran enemies? How and when did this relationship come to be? When the relationship began to deteriorate, could it have been reversed? What lessons can be learned from an analysis of past U.S.-Iranian relations and what are the implications for their present and future relations?

Akan Malici and Stephen G. Walker argue that the dynamics of U.S.-Iran relations are based on role conflicts. Iran has long desired to enact roles of active independence and national sovereignty in world politics. However, it continued to be cast by others into client or rebel roles of national inferiority. In this book the authors examine these role conflicts during three crucial episodes in U.S.-Iran relations: the oil nationalization crisis and the ensuing clandestine coup aided by the CIA to overthrow the Iranian regime in 1950 to 1953; the Iranian revolution followed by the hostage crisis in 1979 to 1981; the reformist years pre- and post- 9/11 under Mohammad Khatami from 1997 to 2002. Their application of role theory is theoretically and methodologically progressive and innovative in illuminating aspects of U.S.-Iran relations. It allows for a better understanding of the past, navigating the present, and anticipating the future in order to avoid foreign policy mistakes.

Role Theory and Role Conflict in U.S.-Iran Relations is a useful resource for international relations and foreign policy scholars who want to learn more about progress in international relations theory and U.S. relations with Iran.

As one of the most enduring and bitter struggles we have seen in over 100 years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a powder keg, always on the verge of exploding and drawing in the wider region, the international community at large, and, in particular, the U.S. Although the conflict is of far-reaching importance, among college students and the general public there is a dearth of knowledge about it. Many of the conversations in these audiences are animated by ongoing myths and problematic talking points. This book fills in the gaps of understanding while puncturing false dichotomies and tearing down walls of ideology or indifference. It addresses perennial questions including: When and why did the conflict start? What exactly are the claims of the contending sides? Why does peace seem unattainable? What is a likely long-term outcome and how can it be brought about in a peaceful way, doing justice to both sides? Finally, this book maintains that historic Palestine, the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, must become a home for both Palestinians and Jews, with equal standings for both and without exclusive claims for either. For students, scholars, and citizens of the world, this book provides a concise and level-headed way to understand one of the most complex and vexing conflicts of our time.

As one of the most enduring and bitter struggles we have seen in over 100 years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a powder keg, always on the verge of exploding and drawing in the wider region, the international community at large, and, in particular, the U.S. Although the conflict is of far-reaching importance, among college students and the general public there is a dearth of knowledge about it. Many of the conversations in these audiences are animated by ongoing myths and problematic talking points. This book fills in the gaps of understanding while puncturing false dichotomies and tearing down walls of ideology or indifference. It addresses perennial questions including: When and why did the conflict start? What exactly are the claims of the contending sides? Why does peace seem unattainable? What is a likely long-term outcome and how can it be brought about in a peaceful way, doing justice to both sides? Finally, this book maintains that historic Palestine, the land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, must become a home for both Palestinians and Jews, with equal standings for both and without exclusive claims for either. For students, scholars, and citizens of the world, this book provides a concise and level-headed way to understand one of the most complex and vexing conflicts of our time.

Stephen G. Walker, Akan Malici, and Mark Schafer present a definitive, social-psychological approach to integrating theories of foreign policy analysis and international relations—addressing the agent-centered, micro-political study of decisions by leaders and the structure-oriented, macro-political study of state interactions as a complex adaptive system. The links between the internal world of beliefs and the external world of events provide the strategic setting in which states collide and leaders decide.

The first part of this ground-breaking book establishes the theoretical framework of neobehavioral IR, setting the stage for the remainder of the work to apply the framework to pressing issues in world politics. Through these applications students can see how a game-theoretic logic can combine with the operational code research program to innovatively combine levels of analysis. The authors employ binary role theory to demonstrate that relying only on a state-systemic level or an individual-decision making level of analysis leads to an incomplete picture of how leaders steer their ships of state through the hazards of international crises to establish stable relations of cooperation or conflict.

Stephen G. Walker, Akan Malici, and Mark Schafer present a definitive, social-psychological approach to integrating theories of foreign policy analysis and international relations—addressing the agent-centered, micro-political study of decisions by leaders and the structure-oriented, macro-political study of state interactions as a complex adaptive system. The links between the internal world of beliefs and the external world of events provide the strategic setting in which states collide and leaders decide.

The first part of this ground-breaking book establishes the theoretical framework of neobehavioral IR, setting the stage for the remainder of the work to apply the framework to pressing issues in world politics. Through these applications students can see how a game-theoretic logic can combine with the operational code research program to innovatively combine levels of analysis. The authors employ binary role theory to demonstrate that relying only on a state-systemic level or an individual-decision making level of analysis leads to an incomplete picture of how leaders steer their ships of state through the hazards of international crises to establish stable relations of cooperation or conflict.

U.S.-Iran relations continue to be an international security problem in the Middle East. These two countries could have been friends, but instead they have become enemies. Stating this thesis raises the following questions: Why are the United States and Iran enemies? How and when did this relationship come to be? When the relationship began to deteriorate, could it have been reversed? What lessons can be learned from an analysis of past U.S.-Iranian relations and what are the implications for their present and future relations?

Akan Malici and Stephen G. Walker argue that the dynamics of U.S.-Iran relations are based on role conflicts. Iran has long desired to enact roles of active independence and national sovereignty in world politics. However, it continued to be cast by others into client or rebel roles of national inferiority. In this book the authors examine these role conflicts during three crucial episodes in U.S.-Iran relations: the oil nationalization crisis and the ensuing clandestine coup aided by the CIA to overthrow the Iranian regime in 1950 to 1953; the Iranian revolution followed by the hostage crisis in 1979 to 1981; the reformist years pre- and post- 9/11 under Mohammad Khatami from 1997 to 2002. Their application of role theory is theoretically and methodologically progressive and innovative in illuminating aspects of U.S.-Iran relations. It allows for a better understanding of the past, navigating the present, and anticipating the future in order to avoid foreign policy mistakes.

Role Theory and Role Conflict in U.S.-Iran Relations is a useful resource for international relations and foreign policy scholars who want to learn more about progress in international relations theory and U.S. relations with Iran.

U.S.-Iran relations continue to be an international security problem in the Middle East. These two countries could have been friends, but instead they have become enemies. Stating this thesis raises the following questions: Why are the United States and Iran enemies? How and when did this relationship come to be? When the relationship began to deteriorate, could it have been reversed? What lessons can be learned from an analysis of past U.S.-Iranian relations and what are the implications for their present and future relations?

Akan Malici and Stephen G. Walker argue that the dynamics of U.S.-Iran relations are based on role conflicts. Iran has long desired to enact roles of active independence and national sovereignty in world politics. However, it continued to be cast by others into client or rebel roles of national inferiority. In this book the authors examine these role conflicts during three crucial episodes in U.S.-Iran relations: the oil nationalization crisis and the ensuing clandestine coup aided by the CIA to overthrow the Iranian regime in 1950 to 1953; the Iranian revolution followed by the hostage crisis in 1979 to 1981; the reformist years pre- and post- 9/11 under Mohammad Khatami from 1997 to 2002. Their application of role theory is theoretically and methodologically progressive and innovative in illuminating aspects of U.S.-Iran relations. It allows for a better understanding of the past, navigating the present, and anticipating the future in order to avoid foreign policy mistakes.

Role Theory and Role Conflict in U.S.-Iran Relations is a useful resource for international relations and foreign policy scholars who want to learn more about progress in international relations theory and U.S. relations with Iran.