I liked this book. It is good for anyone interested in the United Nations history of theory for peacekeeping and to see where peacekeeping theory is headed. Contributors look to see what works and what doesn't work in Peacekeeping missions. There are some prominent contributors to this book. Including the current Secretary-General of the UN and a former Secretary-General. To me the most inspired part of the book was a special foreword by Nelson Mandela. This is a man that has fought for peace most of his life and he could be considered one of the greatest men of the 20th century.

Section of Realism is extraordinary, but the chapters Socialism and Liberalism are somewhat weak.

I recommend this book to any student of International Relations or Political Philosophy. Doyle does an excellent job of describing the foundations of the main theories in the discipline of International Relations. By starting with the philosophers behind each school of thought, he reveals the often misunderstood assumptions made by scholars in each school. Thus, he shows us why scholars in International Relations frequently talk past each other when discussing a topic.

Before reading Doyle, I had never really come across a good survey of political philosophy which logically relates the classical political theories to their practical corollaries in international relations. I must say I am very much impresssed with Doyle's effort and am delighted to find how well he is able to put all theories (he deals with realism, liberalism and socialism) in an illuminating perspective, and how he is able to ingeniously distinguish the different strands within the respective political theories. What I like in particular is how he associates certain strands of thinking with certain philosophers, and how he then combines and compares these different views within a larger theoretical perpective, thus providing a clear overview on the theories at large. I must admit only having read parts of it, most of the section about realism, all of it on liberalism and some of it on socialism, but still think I have a good enough idea to be able to comment on this book. I initiallty felt inclined to give this book only four stars, since it only deals with a small number of thinkers and theories, but realising the vastness of the subject, I felt I could not withhold Doyle's book the 5th star. So for those seeking the broader view of international relations, going beyond the confines of conventional IR theory, Doyle's book is an absolute eye-opener.

It started off pretty good with some interesting examples but then I found it pretty ordinary. Their is little I found particular interesting or new in what the writer had to say. I certainly do not feel that I have learnt a great deal about this subject since reading this book