Two empirical studies examining the role of non-recognition in great power conflicts and in international crises will demonstrate the value of this symbolic approach.Theories on the origins of war are often based on the premise that the rational actor is in pursuit of material satisfaction, such as the quest for power or for wealth. These perspectives disregard the need for homo symbolicus the preservation of a positive self-image for both emotional and instrumental reasons. A good reputation ensures authority and material resources. Non-recognition can be as much as an explanation of war as that of other explicative 'variables'. Two empirical studies examining the role of non-recognition in great power conflicts and in international crises will demonstrate the value of this symbolic approach.CONTENTSAcknowledgements ivList of Tables viIntroduction 1PART I SYMBOLIC APPROACHES TO WARChapter One: The Struggle for Recognition in Social Relations 9Utilitarian logics 10Psycho-logics in the quest for recognition 12Chapter Two: The Struggle for Recognition in International Relations 15The recognition problematic in internationalrelations theory 17Hypotheses on the link betweennon-recognition and war 27PART II: CASE STUDIESChapter Three: Losing the War, but Winning Respect? 47The pacifi cation between great powers by respect 52War to avoid shame? 64Chapter Four: Saving Face and Peace; the Politics of Recognition inInternational Crises 87The Politics of Recognition in International Crises 88Crises with a Bellicose Outcome (losing face) 97Crises with a Pacifi c Outcome (saving face) 112Index 159Thomas Lindemann is Professor of Political Science at Artois University (CERAPS Lille 2) and is visiting professor at Paris I-Sorbonne and Sciences Po Paris. He has recently published?Penser la guerre. L'apport constructiviste?(L'Harmattan 2008) and?La guerre?(Armand Colin 2010) and?The International Politics of Recognition?(edited with Erik Ringmar for Paradigm, 2011).