| Summary/Abstract |
Grand strategy change analyses exhibit problems in balancing the interaction among ideas, external structures and developments, and domestic politics. An alternative theory is constructed that combines the correspondence between external problems and capability, shocks, political entrepreneurship, domestic politics, and reinforcement. The essence of the theory is that strategic shifts are more probable and likely to persist to the extent that more of these components involve significant changes. The 1920–1945 system leader puzzle – why the United States abstained from ascending to the system leader position in 1920 but not in 1945 – is used as an illustration of the theory's explanatory utility.
|