Divided Union: The Politics of War in the Early American Republic / Edition 1

by Scott A. Silverstone

Overview

Between the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, the United States was embroiled in competitive inter-state politics. Although it did not directly involve itself in European affairs, the United States did engage regularly in dangerous struggles with other states and with colonial powers with territory on the American periphery. Aside from the War of 1812, the Oregon Crisis, and the Mexican War, other "near misses" included here—disputes of 1807 and 1809 with Britain, with Spain over East Florida in 1811–13, with Mexico in 1853, and disputes with Spain over Cuba in 1853–55 and with Mexico in 1858–1860—have been ignored in the democratic peace literature. Scott A. Silverstone finds these cases particularly useful for testing alternative explanations of constraints on armed conflict, because the United States backed down each time, allowing each crisis to pass short of its full potential for violence.

Silverstone builds on a nascent theory of institutional constraints on the use of force presented in the Federalist Papers to explain American attitudes toward participation in conflicts. He argues that the federal character of American democracy that emerged from the founding and the large size of the new American republic provide the keys to understanding its decision-making processes. Divided Union shows how the institutional features of federal union and the diverse social, economic, and security interests within this geographically extended republic created political conditions that impeded the use of force by the United States before the Civil War.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780801442308
Publisher:	Cornell University Press
Publication date:	08/17/2004
Series:	Cornell Studies in Security Affairs
Edition description:	New Edition
Pages:	288
Product dimensions:	6.12(w) x 9.25(h) x 1.06(d)
Age Range:	18 Years

About the Author

Scott A. Silverstone is Associate Professor of Political Science at the United States Military Academy.

What People are Saying About This

Walter A. McDougall

Scott A. Silverstone's closely argued, smoothly written synthesis reminds us that wars prevented are just as real as wars that occur. It also reminds us, in timely fashion, that the Federalists who framed the U.S. Constitution meant for decisions of war and peace to rest with the people and states. How much things have changed since 1787!

John M. Owen

In Divided Union, Scott A. Silverstone draws on copious amounts of historical literature to make a compelling case that diverging regional interests, coupled with certain constitutional features, prevented presidents from using force in many cases. In unusually clear prose he synthesizes the literatures on U.S. foreign policy and U.S. intergovernmental relations.

Editorial Reviews

Silverstone addresses big questions about matters of war and peace in America's federal system, and he develops a carefully reasoned, nuanced, and persuasive theory on the central importance of regional politics in restraining the use of military force.

Journal of Military History

"Scott A. Silverstone's closely argued, smoothly written synthesis reminds us that wars prevented are just as real as wars that occur. It also reminds us, in timely fashion, that the Federalists who framed the U.S. Constitution meant for decisions of war and peace to rest with the people and states. How much things have changed since 1787!"

Walter A. McDougall

"In Divided Union, Scott A. Silverstone draws on copious amounts of historical literature to make a compelling case that diverging regional interests, coupled with certain constitutional features, prevented presidents from using force in many cases. In unusually clear prose he synthesizes the literatures on U.S. foreign policy and U.S. intergovernmental relations."

John M. Owen

"Silverstone addresses big questions about matters of war and peace in America's federal system, and he develops a carefully reasoned, nuanced, and persuasive theory on the central importance of regional politics in restraining the use of military force."—Journal of Military History

"Scott A. Silverstone's closely argued, smoothly written synthesis reminds us that wars prevented are just as real as wars that occur. It also reminds us, in timely fashion, that the Federalists who framed the U.S. Constitution meant for decisions of war and peace to rest with the people and states. How much things have changed since 1787!"—Walter A. McDougall, University of Pennsylvania and Foreign Policy Research Institute

"In Divided Union Scott A. Silverstone draws on copious amounts of historical literature to make a compelling case that diverging regional interests, coupled with certain constitutional features, prevented presidents from using force in many cases. In unusually clear prose he synthesizes the literatures on U.S. foreign policy and U.S. intergovernmental relations."—John M. Owen, author of Liberal Peace, Liberal War: American Politics and International Security

From the Publisher