1. Kenneth N. Waltz, “The Emerging Structure of International Politics,” International Security 18 (Fall 1993), pp. 5–43;
2. Kenneth Oye, “Explaining the End of the Cold War: Morphological and Behavioral Adaptations to the Nuclear Peace?,” in Richard Ned Lebow and Thomas Risse-Kappen, International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995), pp. 57–84; and Wohlforth, “New Evidence on Moscow’s Cold War.”
3. For a critique of the realist argument, see Richard Ned Lebow and John Mueller, “Realism and the End of the Cold War,” International Security 20 (Fall 1995), pp. 185–86. Representative liberal literature includes Michael W. Doyle, “Liberalism and the End of the Cold War,” and Thomas Risse-Kappen, “Ideas Do Not Float Freely: Transnational Coalitions, Domestic Structures, and the End of the Cold War,” in Lebow and Risse-Kappan, International Relations Theory, pp. 85–108 and 187–222;
4. Matthew Evangelista, Unarmed Forces: The Transnational Movement to End the Cold War (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999).
5. The literature on the end of the Cold War, including constructivist interpretations, is reviewed by Matthew Evangelista, “Internal and External Constraints on Grand Strategy: The Soviet Case,” in The Domestic Bases of Grand Strategy, eds. Richard Rosecrance and Arthur Stein (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993), pp. 154–78, and Richard Ned Lebow, “The Rise and Fall of the Cold War,” Review of lnternational Studies 25 (5) (December 1999).