{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025390625, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005859375, 'mean_word_length': 5.568376068376068, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
System Effects: Complexity in Social and Political Life Robert Jervis Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997, pp. ix, 309

and internationalism, while the Northeast had entered a period of industrial decline and was more interested in protectionism and "strategic retrenchment." Trubowitz notes that in "each of these periods, politicians from different parts of the country sought to equate regional interests with the national interest" (27). Regional economic interests defined foreign policy debates, while regional coalitions determined policy outcomes. Trubowitz's argument raises a host of issues. For one, it speaks to realist scholars who contend that international events determine foreign policy. He agrees that international events are important, but demonstrates that the meaning of international events varies from region to region. It is these debates over meaning that shape policy debates. Moreover, the author makes an important contribution to the literature on the sources of foreign policy change. Much of this literature has focused on changes in the international environment, shifts in public opinion, generational change and regime change. Trubowitz's study argues convincingly that policy change may also stem from shifting regional coalitions. Trubowitz's book is well written and innovative. Some may criticize him for reducing all foreign policy issues to debates about economic interests, but his central argument remains provocative: all foreign policy debates are, at heart, both local and economic.