ABSTRACT: Power’s book is reviewed as a powerful analysis of American foreign policy involving
genocide. Although behavior analysts will find themselves closely aligned with much of the book, they
will likely find fault with Power’s conclusion that there are two contrasting determinants of a nation’s
likelihood of intervening in cases of genocide internationally: a) the moral values of an intervening nation
that supports human rights, and b) national interests. In behavior analysis, moral values are not viewed as
causal entities, and as a result the dichotomy that casts acting out of self-interest and acting out of
morality as opposites must be dissolved. The resulting re-conceptualization is in line with what Power
described as “enlightened self-interest,” which is discussed as a more accurate predictor of foreign policy
decision-making and a more effective vehicle for promoting human rights worldwide