PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11924578

Three wars that never happened.

Abstract

This article discusses three serious wars that were averted and the three men who averted them. In 1478-79, Pope Sixtus IV's hatred of the Medici culminated in aggressive war against Florence, supported by his powerful ally King Ferrante of Naples. The initial stags of this war were indecisive, but it was about to become much more serious, probably involving all the Italian states and possibly meaning the total destruction of Florence. Lorenzo il Magnifico sailed to Naples, convinced Ferrante this more serious war was against his interests and obtained a generous peace. In 1861, the British Government responded to the boarding of a British ship by a vessel of the American North with a peremptory letter. Albert, Prince Consort, though dying of typhoid fever amended the letter to save Lincoln's face and thus averted war with the North. From 1871 to 1890, Otto von Bismarck worked for a stable peace between the European powers to be attained by arranging meetings of most or all of them to accustom them to solving disputes by negotiation. Two such meetings in Berlin secured 36 years of peace between the powers, despite many disputes, and in particular averted war for possessions in Africa, which could have involved them all.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

W M S Russell. Three wars that never happened.. https://doi.org/10.1080/13623690208409603

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Health inequalities in Scotland and England: the contrasting journeys of ideas from research into policy.

Both the UK's Labour Government and Scotland's devolved Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition Executive have committed themselves to reducing health inequalities. Furthermore, both institutions have emphasised the importance of using evidence to inform policy responses. In light of such political commitments, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the field of health inequalities in order to: (i) review the available research evidence; (ii) assess the extent to which policies have been based on this research evidence; and (iii) evaluate the success (or failure) of policies to tackle health inequalities. Yet so far only limited attention has been given to exploring how key actors involved in research-policy dialogues understand the processes involved. In an attempt to address this gap, this article draws on data from semi-structured interviews with 58 key actors in the field of health inequalities research and policymaking in the UK to argue that it is ideas, rather than research evidence, which have travelled from research into policy. The descriptions of the varying journeys of these ideas fit three types--successful, partial and fractured--each of which is outlined with reference to one example. The paper then employs existing theories about research-policy relations and the movement of ideas in an attempt to illuminate and better understand the contrasting journeys. In the concluding discussion, it is argued that the third approach, which focuses on the entrepreneurial processes involved in the marketing of ideas, is most helpful in understanding the research findings, but that this needs to be discussed in relation to the political context within which negotiations take place.

England↗