Edited by T. G. Otte, British World Policy and the Projection of Global Power, c.1830–1960 examines British global power by exploring the volatile factors of that strength from the Victorian to postwar era. The chapters highlight the shifting winds of change and how power was transformed, employed, and diminished. Bringing together leading scholars, this collection is dedicated to the late Keith Neilson and his approach that “placed political and material power at the heart of his” research on Britain's world power (xiii). The book was inspired by Neilson's work, examining empirical, but also less quantifiable aspects of power, ranging from financial dominance to diplomacy. Beyond these separate factors, it demonstrates how the “interwoven” nature of these components was the most significant aspect of British power.

The book opens with chapters about imperial defense and war. John Robert Ferris explores British intelligence with the War Trade Intelligence Department in economic warfare during the First World War. He argues that the collection of information, the tools to process information and the dissemination demonstrates that “economic warfare was not merely a matter of navies, but of the interaction between sea power, intelligence and international law” (45). Also looking at conflict, David French describes minimum force in the context of colonial counterinsurgency operations from 1857 to 1967. After reviewing various legal codes, he finds that following the First World War, the British the public was critical of excessive violence used to defeat opponents, which necessitated disguising the brutality of suppressing insurgencies. Moving away from official colonial holdings, Hamish Ion highlights Yokohama, Japan, as a strategic location for British imperial defense and influence for change from 1864 to 1875. Lacking colonial administration but reaping colonial benefits, he concludes, high-level policies from British diplomatic and military offices had lasting local influence as well as social and cultural impact.

In terms of formal power, Otte focuses on the Foreign Office as a “knowledge-based organization,” where collecting, archiving, and interpreting data was vital to success in foreign policy in the late nineteenth century (93). Yet, as he explains, the office's influence in government declined after the First World War due to wartime challenges, competing internal entities and external interference. Kathleen Burk examines British financial and commercial networks in South America during the nineteenth century, demonstrating the importance of connections to send financial information to London. Exploring the networks, the information sent, and the end of British “financial hegemony” after the First World War, Burk concludes that “strong and wide-ranging” business and bank networks that exercise good judgments “can fall victim to one factor: power and the associated circumstances of its exercise” (128). Additionally, Dominic Lieven analyzes changes in Russian elites’ perceptions of Britain between 1900 and 1914. He connects Russia's larger geopolitical strategies or international alignments to the changes in perceptions, such as emulation, resentment, and utility.

Reviewing internal British government decisions, John H. Maurer explores Imperial Germany's “naval challenge” provoking Britain's renewed sea power before the First World War. He writes, “By overreacting to uncertainty about German intentions, Britain gave a clear demonstration of its strength to compete against Great Power challengers, possessing the financial resources, industrial capacity, and cutting-edge technology to build a navy as strong as any in the world” (170). Focusing on the public perceptions of war in 1914 and 1939, Zara Steiner reviews tabloids and argues there were mixed feeling before the First World War and a lack of enthusiasm over the difficult struggle ahead in the Second World War. She explains, “they would fight if necessary, and as in July 1914, few in September 1939 doubted that Britain would emerge victorious from the coming war” (200). In contrast, Erik Goldstein examines British ambassadors between 1919 and 1939, with attention to the impact of the First World War on diplomats and their role in maintaining world power. Reviewing fifty-one paladins, he describes how changes from the war caused the decrease of professionalism and the increase of politicization with non-career diplomats.

As for interwar empire, Douglas E. Delaney studies the Imperial General Staff and the dominions in maintaining interoperability, managing raw materials, and exchanging officers for the Commonwealth. Highlighting the power of correspondence and shared military education for promising officers, he explains that the system was a way to inexpensively monitor military power and capability, which in turn laid the foundation for establishing a large military force during the Second World War. Conversely, Kent Fedorowich looks at challenges in Anglo-Dominion relations by exploring the planning and failure to hold the Imperial Conference of 1941. Describing dominion demands for greater consultation and internal diplomatic debates about influence, he argues that the failed conference was a “paradox” that “demonstrated the individuality of each of the dominions in the conduct of their own foreign policy within an evolving, now multi-centred Commonwealth alliance” (275). Lastly, G. Bruce Strang surveys British assessments of Japan in the late 1930s, with attention to the reasons that Britain did not impose sanctions when the country invaded China and posed a threat to British interests in Asia. He concludes that British assessments revealed the difficulty of using economic sanctions to stop Japan, which meant that Britain accepted Japanese encroachment.

British World Policy and the Projection of Global Power, c.1830–1960 is a diverse collection of well-researched and insightful essays on British global power. Nicely blending research about the metropole, empire, and nations affected by Britain, it provokes a rethinking about tangible and intangible forms of power. The chapters are methodologically diverse, providing useful ways to consider power, strength, and influence in empirical and nonempirical ways. However, the diversity of the chapters means that they are not always thematically connected beyond the broad concept of global power. This book is a fine tribute to Keith Neilson and is highly recommended for scholars interested in empire, the impact of the World Wars, and decline of British power.