1999
DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511496165
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Transition of Power

Abstract: This book addresses one of the least understood issues in modern international history: how, between 1930 and 1945, Britain lost its global pre-eminence to the United States. The crucial years are 1930 to 1940, for which until now no comprehensive examination of Anglo-American relations exists. Transition of Power analyses these relations in the pivotal decade, with an epilogue dealing with the Second World War after 1941. Britain and the United States, and their intertwined fates, were fundamental to the cour… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…231 For a discussion of Anglo-American relations in World War II and the transition of power, see Kimball, 2011;Reynolds, 1988;McKercher, 1999;Dobson, 2002. -the United States. At first, Britain sought to continue to exert global influence despite dire economic and financial straits at home and a crumbling Empire.…”
Section: What Was the Historical Outcome Of British Choices?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…231 For a discussion of Anglo-American relations in World War II and the transition of power, see Kimball, 2011;Reynolds, 1988;McKercher, 1999;Dobson, 2002. -the United States. At first, Britain sought to continue to exert global influence despite dire economic and financial straits at home and a crumbling Empire.…”
Section: What Was the Historical Outcome Of British Choices?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While power can be measured in terms of GNP and GDP, it can also, as McKercher stresses, be 'computed in the numbers of troops, ships and aeroplanes, and other implements of war, and their strategic dispositions available to support diplomatic initiatives'. 52 Until the Second World War, the most powerful weapon of war, or, as Reynolds puts it, 'the 1900s equivalent of modern strategic missiles -the international symbol of power and status' was the battleship. 53 By January 1896, after Cleveland's threat was issued, Britain had 44 battleships, while the US, its potential power notwithstanding, had 'only one really first-class' battleship.…”
Section: To Appease or To Concede?mentioning
confidence: 99%