The nineteenth century system: balance of power or political equilibrium?

1989 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul W. Schroeder
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Power System ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Political Equilibrium ◽  
Operating Rules ◽  
Theoretical Analyses

Students of international politics do not need to be told of the unsatisfactory state of balance of power theory. The problems are well known: the ambiguous nature of the concept and the numerous ways it has been defined, the various distinct and partly contradictory meanings given to it in practice and the divergent purposes it serves (description, analysis, prescription, and propaganda); and the apparent failure of attempts clearly to define balance of power as a system and specify its operating rules. Not surprisingly, some scholars have become sceptical about the balance of power ‘system’ and a few have even denied that balance of power politics prevailed in the nineteenth century. None of the methods generally used seems to promise much help. These have included studying the views and theories of balance of power held by individual publicists, theorists, and statesmen, making case studies of the balance of power in certain limited periods, analysing events and policies within an assumed balance of power framework, or constructing theoretical analyses comparing the supposed system of balance of power to other systems. Undoubtedly a method for operationalizing the study of the balance of power would be very valuable, and efforts to do this have yielded useful information. But the obstacles to establishing reliable indices of power and status and the problems of quantifying alignments and co-operation-conflict ratios in international affairs are formidable indeed.

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.

Leibniz’s Political Vision for Europe

2015 ◽  
pp. 663-683
Author(s):  
Friedrich Beiderbeck
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Roman Empire ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Holy Roman Empire ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Louis Xiv ◽  
Church Politics ◽  
Cultural Structures

This chapter examines Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz’s political vision for Europe, beginning with his views on the Holy Roman Empire and the Peace of Westphalia. It considers how Leibniz viewed Germany’s political and cultural structures and his support for the Reich, along with his thoughts on order, security, and law. It also discusses Leibniz’s modern notion of state and his ideas of territorial power, diplomacy, and international politics; his views on France’s foreign policy under Louis XIV and the War of Spanish Succession (1701–1713/14); and his dispute with Abbé de Saint Pierre over peace and balance of power in Europe. Finally, the chapter looks at Leibniz’s pronouncements on denominational issues and church politics, particularly the presence of Protestants and Catholics in Germany, and his arguments with regards to the House of Hanover and the role played by Great Britain in power politics as a counterbalance to French hegemony.

Conclusion

2020 ◽  
pp. 120-132
Author(s):  
Keir A. Lieber ◽  
Daryl G. Press
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Close Attention ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Nuclear Age

This chapter summarizes key findings in the proponents of the “theory of the nuclear revolution,” which contend that nuclear weapons are transformative because they greatly reduce the need for countries to engage in intense security competition. It emphasizes that although nuclear weapons are the greatest tools of deterrence ever created, they do not automatically confer national security benefits on their owners, much less guarantee enduring safety from foreign threats. The chapter looks into the unfortunate reality of international politics in the shadow of nuclear weapons, in which countries must still pay close attention to the balance of power, search for ways to change the balance when they find themselves at a disadvantage and contemplate and plan for war in order to protect vital national interests. It explains how fears that tragically drove international politics for centuries still exist and how those fears are justified. The nuclear age remains an age of power politics.

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.

‘Amphibious Agents’

2019 ◽  
pp. 121-135
Author(s):  
Jennifer Davey
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Diplomatic History ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Life Itself

By the mid nineteenth century, the terms ‘female diplomacy’ and ‘female diplomat’ had begun to creep into contemporary usage, as women sought to exert influence in international politics. This chapter places Mary within this wider context of female diplomatic activity and focuses on her role as an agent of international politics. It examines her involvement in international affairs, considering her connections with diplomats, ambassadors, and foreign politicians. It explores two connected facets of her activities as a diplomatic agent: her role in the dissemination of news and intelligence and her function as an advisor. It also explores Mary’s intellectual ideas about international affairs, and her opinions on key diplomatic developments. As this chapter will suggest, incorporating the activities of diplomatic women into the narrative of international affairs forces us to think afresh about the types of sources used to construct diplomatic history, as well as the nature of nineteenth-century diplomatic life itself.

14. The International Politics of the Gulf

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matteo Legrenzi ◽  
F. Gregory Gause
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Iraq War ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Political Identity ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Gulf Region ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Security Challenges ◽  
The Face ◽  
Gulf States

This chapter examines the international politics of the Gulf region, with particular emphasis on the security challenges confronting the Gulf states. It begins with an analysis of the policies of Iraq and Saudi Arabia as well as the United States’s increased involvement, focusing on the issues of regime security, political identity, and balance-of-power politics as they emerged during the Iran–Iraq War of 1980–1988 and the Gulf War of 1990–1991, and also from the Saudis’ alliance decisions in the face of those wars and the Iraq War of 2003. It also discusses Iran’s role, its nuclear programme, and relations with the Arab Gulf states and concludes with some remarks on the significance of the negotiations between Iran and the so-called P5+1, along with the ramifications of the Saudi–Iran rivalry for the international politics of the Gulf and the balance of power in the entire region.

scholarly journals “What Value Should We Attach to All These Petitions?”: Petition Campaigns and the Problem of Legitimacy in the Nineteenth-Century Netherlands

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 509-530 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maartje Janse
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Liberal Education ◽  
Political System ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Education Law ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Context

This article focuses on large-scale petitioning campaigns, or petitionnementen as they were called, organized between 1828 and 1878, including contemporary reflections and debates on this new phenomenon. Although there were only a handful of petitionnementen, they had a remarkable impact—not only on the issues at hand but also on the balance of power between Crown, Cabinet, Parliament, and people. Mass petitions necessarily challenged the political system, whose legitimacy was based on elections under a limited franchise. Based on parliamentary reports, pamphlets, and other sources reflecting on petitioning in general and the petitionnementen more specifically, this article asks how petitioners claimed legitimacy, and how politicians and other observers responded to those claims. Special attention is given to the international context within which Dutch petitioning practices developed. The article focuses on three case studies, representing the major petitioning campaigns of this period: the Southern petition movements of 1828–1830 that were a catalyst for the Belgian revolution (thus reinforcing the association between mass petitioning and revolution), the Anti-Catholic “April Movement” of 1853, and the so-called People’s Petitionnement of 1878, against the liberal education law. Remarkably enough, in the Netherlands it was not progressive reformers, but most prominently conservative Orthodox Protestants who organized petitionnementen.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document