000			04226nam a2200565Ia 4500
001			221783
003			IT-RoAPU
005			20250106150841.0
006			m|||||o||d||||||||
007			cr || ||||||||
008			240426t20182005nyu fo d z eng d
020			_a9781501717871 _qPDF
024	7		_a10.7591/9781501717871 _2doi
035			_a(DE-B1597)9781501717871
035			_a(DE-B1597)503447
035			_a(OCoLC)1038475151
040			_aDE-B1597 _beng _cDE-B1597 _erda
050		4	_aD840 _b.S63 2005
072		7	_aPOL023000 _2bisacsh
082	0	4	_a909.82/5
084			_aonline - DeGruyter
100	1		_aSpruyt, Hendrik _eautore
245	1	0	_aEnding Empire : _bContested Sovereignty and Territorial Partition / _cHendrik Spruyt.
264		1	_aIthaca, NY : _bCornell University Press, _c[2018]
264		4	_c©2005
300			_a1 online resource (326 p.) : _b7 tables, 3 maps
336			_atext _btxt _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _bc _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _bcr _2rdacarrier
347			_atext file _bPDF _2rda
490	0		_aCornell Studies in Political Economy
505	0	0	_tFrontmatter -- _tContents -- _tMaps And Tables -- _tPreface -- _tIntroduction: Contested Territories And Empire -- _tChapter One.Institutional Frameworks And Territorial Policy -- _tChapter Two.The Changing Fortunes Of Empire -- _tChapter Three.The Hexagon Or The Empire: France And The Algerian Quagmire -- _tChapter Four.Whitehall Tacks To The Wind Of Change -- _tChapter Five.Ranking With Denmark: The Dutch Fear Of Imperial Retreat -- _tChapter Six.The First Maritime Empire And The Last: Portugal In Africa -- _tChapter Seven.Russia Retreats From The Union -- _tChapter Eight.The Fourth Republic In Jerusalem -- _tConclusion: Contesting Sovereignty In A Global System -- _tBibliography -- _tIndex
506	0		_arestricted access _uhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec _fonline access with authorization _2star
520			_aAt the dawn of the twentieth century, imperial powers controlled most of the globe. Within a few decades after World War II, many of the great empires had dissolved, and more recently, multinational polities have similarly disbanded. This process of reallocating patterns of authority, from internal hierarchy to inter-state relations, proved far more contentious in some cases than in others. While some governments exited the colonial era without becoming embroiled in lengthy conflicts, others embarked on courses that drained their economies, compelled huge sacrifices, and caused domestic upheaval and revolution. What explains these variations in territorial policy? More specifically, why do some governments have greater latitude to alter existing territorial arrangements whereas others are constrained in their room for maneuver?In Ending Empire, Hendrik Spruyt argues that the answer lies in the domestic institutional structures of the central governments. Fragmented polities provide more opportunities for hard-liners to veto concessions to nationalist and secessionist demands, thus making violent conflict more likely. Spruyt examines these dynamics in the democratic colonial empires of Britain, France, and the Netherlands. He then turns to the authoritarian Portuguese empire and the break-up of the Soviet Union. Finally, the author submits that this theory, which speaks to the political dynamics of partition, can be applied to other contested territories, including those at the heart of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
538			_aMode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.
546			_aIn English.
588	0		_aDescription based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 26. Apr 2024)
650		0	_aDecolonization.
650		0	_aPostcolonialism.
650		0	_aWorld politics _y1945-1989.
650		0	_aWorld politics _y1989-.
650		4	_aHistory.
650		4	_aPolitical Science & Political History.
650		7	_aPOLITICAL SCIENCE / Political Economy. _2bisacsh
850			_aIT-RoAPU
856	4	0	_uhttps://doi.org/10.7591/9781501717871
856	4	0	_uhttps://www.degruyter.com/isbn/9781501717871
856	4	2	_3Cover _uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/cover/isbn/9781501717871/original
942			_cEB
999			_c221783 _d221783