The Working Of The Classical Balance Of Power System

1975 ◽  
pp. 107-132
Author(s):  
Partha Chatterjee
Keyword(s):  
Power System ◽  
Balance Of Power

Evaluation of Residential PV-EV System for Supply and Demand Balance of Power System

2015 ◽  
Vol 135 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustapha Aachiq ◽  
Joao Gari da Silva Fonseca Junior ◽  
Takashi Oozeki ◽  
Yumiko Iwafune
Keyword(s):  
Power System ◽  
Supply And Demand ◽  
Balance Of Power

State Formation in Korea and Japan, 400–800 CE: Emulation and Learning, Not Bellicist Competition

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Chin-Hao Huang ◽  
David C. Kang
Keyword(s):  
Power System ◽  
Public Goods ◽  
East Asia ◽  
State Formation ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Internal Stability ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Bureaucratic Control ◽  
Administrative Capacity ◽  
Competition State

Abstract State formation occurred in Korea and Japan 1,000 years before it did in Europe, and it occurred for reasons of emulation and learning, not bellicist competition. State formation in historical East Asia occurred under a hegemonic system in which war was relatively rare, not under a balance-of-power system with regular existential threats. Korea and Japan emerged as states between the fifth and ninth centuries CE and existed for centuries thereafter with centralized bureaucratic control defined over territory and administrative capacity to tax their populations, field large militaries, and provide extensive public goods. They created these institutions not to wage war or suppress revolt: the longevity of dynasties in these countries is evidence of both the peacefulness of their region and their internal stability. Rather, Korea and Japan developed state institutions through emulation and learning from China. The elites of both copied Chinese civilization for reasons of prestige and domestic legitimacy in the competition between the court and the nobility.

The Balance of Power in World Politics

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall L. Schweller
Keyword(s):  
Power System ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Shared Responsibility ◽  
Normal Operation ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
Material Forces ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Core Theory ◽  
Minimum Requirements

The balance of power—a notoriously slippery, murky, and protean term, endlessly debated and variously defined—is the core theory of international politics within the realist perspective. A “balance of power” system is one in which the power held and exercised by states within the system is checked and balanced by the power of others. Thus, as a nation’s power grows to the point that it menaces other powerful states, a counter-balancing coalition emerges to restrain the rising power, such that any bid for world hegemony will be self-defeating. The minimum requirements for a balance of power system include the existence of at least two or more actors of roughly equal strength, states seeking to survive and preserve their autonomy, alliance flexibility, and the ability to resort to war if need be. At its essence, balance of power is a type of international order. Theorists disagree, however, about the normal operation of the balance of power. Structural realists describe an “automatic version” of the theory, whereby system balance is a spontaneously generated, self-regulating, and entirely unintended outcome of states pursuing their narrow self-interests. Earlier versions of balance of power were more consistent with a “semi-automatic” version of the theory, which requires a “balancer” state throwing its weight on one side of the scale or the other, depending on which is lighter, to regulate the system. The British School’s discussion of balance of power depicts a “manually operated” system, wherein the process of equilibrium is a function of human contrivance, with emphasis on the skill of diplomats and statesmen, a sense of community of nations, of shared responsibility, and a desire and need to preserve the balance of power system. As one would expect of a theory that made its appearance in the mid-16th century, balance of power is not without its critics. Liberals claim that globalization, democratic peace, and international institutions have fundamentally transformed international relations, moving it out of the realm of power politics. Constructivists claim that balance of power theory’s focus on material forces misses the central role played by ideational factors such as norms and identities in the construction of threats and alliances. Realists, themselves, wonder why no global balance of power has materialized since the end of the Cold War.

Alignment, Nonalignment, and Small Powers: 1945–1965

1966 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Rothstein
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Power System ◽  
Long Range ◽  
Political System ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Small Power ◽  
The One ◽  
Small Powers ◽  
Patterns Of Interaction

A functioning balance-of-power system, comparable to the one which existed throughout the first half of the nineteenth century, limits the ability of Small Powers to achieve their own goals. However, in compensation it provides more real security for them—in terms of the maintenance of independence—than other historical systems, all of which offered the Small Power some elements of maneuverability but to the detriment of long-range security. At first glance the contemporary political system appears to contradict this generalization: Surely, one would presume, the new status of Small Powers reflects a system in which the weaker units of international politics have finally achieved both security and influence. Nevertheless, a closer examination of actual patterns of interaction substantially qualifies this presumption: The original generalization, that is, remains basically sound.

Partnership in a Balance of Power System

2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-560
Author(s):  
K Subrahmanyam
Keyword(s):  
Power System ◽  
Balance Of Power
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document