scholarly journals Balance of Power as Main Instrument of Equilibrium in Contemporary International Relations

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Orazalina Korlan Burkitbayevna ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Main Instrument

E. H. Carr: a ‘historical realist’ approach for the globalisation era

2002 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 697-717 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Goldfischer
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
National Interest ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Primary Concern ◽  
Economic Instruments ◽  
New Era ◽  
Realist Approach ◽  
Considerable Cost

Realist international relations scholars have approached the connection between economics and security in two ways. Cold War-era realists derived the national interest from the international balance of power, and assessed the utility of both military and economic instruments of statecraft. A second realist approach, advanced by E. H. Carr in his 1939 The Twenty Years' Crisis, places interstate competition in the context of another struggle over wealth and power in which no-one's primary concern is the national interest. That is the realm of capitalism (and resistance to capitalism). That deeper set of connections between economics and security was overlooked in Cold War IR literature, at considerable cost to our understanding of world politics. Understanding why Carr's ‘historical realism’ was bypassed can help pave the way for a more fruitful realist approach to comprehending a new era in world politics.

scholarly journals Russia and the problem of Kosovo and Metohija

Balcanica ◽  
2007 ◽  
pp. 243-268
Author(s):  
Predrag Simic
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
South Ossetia ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Usa

Nearly ten years since the 1999 NATO military intervention against Serbia and the establishment of UN administration, Kosovo and Metohija has resurfaced as a topical issue in international politics, separating the positions of the USA and Russia, and becoming a precedent in international relations, possibly with far-reaching consequences not only for the future of the western Balkans but also for many territorial disputes worldwide. Russia has only recently pulled herself out of the years-long Chechnya crisis, and facing similar problems in her 'new neighborhood' (Abkhazia, South Ossetia Transdniestria), is among the countries that might be affected by this precedent. Secondly, with her bad experience in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s, Russia has become sensitive not only to any disturbance in the balance of power in the Balkans but also to any change to the existing international order. Moscow has not forgotten that during the 1990s many Westerners saw Serbia as a 'metaphor for Russia' and that the NATO interventions against the Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina (1995) and against Serbia (1999) revealed Russia's weakness, sending her the message to give up her interests in the Balkans and Europe. Thirdly, diverging American and Russian policies on Kosovo and Metohija coincide with their strained relations over the deployment of an antimissile 'shield' in Poland and the Czech Republic, the war in Iraq, policy towards Iran and other issues currently at the top of the list of international problems. Fourthly, meanwhile Russia has managed to recover from the disintegration of the USSR and to consolidate her economic and political power in Europe and the world, owing above all to oil and gas exports, but also to the export of industrial products (military in particular). The precedent that an independent Kosovo and Metohija would constitute in international relations is therefore a test of Russia's role as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. She has found herself in the role of the defender of the fundamental principles of international law such as the inviolability of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the UN members.

The Philadelphian system: sovereignty, arms control, and balance of power in the American states-union, circa 1787–1861

1995 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel H. Deudney
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
American States ◽  
Close Analysis ◽  
Legitimate Violence ◽  
American Union ◽  
Real State

A rediscovery of the long-forgotten republican version of liberal political theory has arresting implications for the theory and practice of international relations. Republican liberalism has a theory of security that is superior to realism, because it addresses not only threats of war from other states but also the threat of despotism at home. In this view, a Hobson's choice between anarchy and hierarchy is not necessary because an intermediary structure, here dubbed “negarchy,” is also available. The American Union from 1787 until 1861 is a historical example. This Philadelphian system was not a real state since, for example, the union did not enjoy a monopoly of legitimate violence. Yet neither was it a state system, since the American states lacked sufficient autonomy. While it shared some features with the Westphalian system such as balance of power, it differed fundamentally. Its origins owed something to particular conditions of time and place, and the American Civil War ended this system. Yet close analysis indicates that it may have surprising relevance for the future of contemporary issues such as the European Union and nuclear governance.

Russia and the Ukraine Crisis: An Analysis of Trade Expectations Theory

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Evan Kerrane ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Liberal Theory ◽  
Security Dilemma ◽  
State Action ◽  
Novel Theory ◽  
Defensive Realism ◽  
Nuanced Understanding ◽  
Ukraine Crisis

A debate between liberal and realist international relations theories centres on the influence of trade interdependence on state action. While liberal theorists tend to see interdependence as only a mechanism for peace, realists view trade dependency as a potential for state vulnerability. Dale Copeland’s trade expectations theory offers a bridge to this divide by arguing perception of future trade accounts for whether states perceive trade as a vulnerability or mechanism for cooperation. Copeland’s novel theory argues when states possess a positive expectation of future trade, they will continue to pursue trading relationships, as argued in liberal theory. However, once these expectations turn negative, states may face a trade-security crisis stemming from the trade vulnerabilities. This thesis applies Copeland’s theory the Russian experience leading up to the 2013 – 2014 Ukraine Crisis. The application of the theory addresses two key criticisms of trade expectations theory: first, the question of what constitutes “reasonableness” within the expectations of trade, and second, grounding the theory within the broader international relations literature. Copeland’s reliance on a “reasonable man” test of trade expectations lacks a nuanced understanding of what a reasonable perception of a state is. Through the addition of militarism as a state bias and belief, this thesis shows the theory’s logic developing within a defensive realist framework. The thesis applies the case study to a two-level security dilemma, grounding the theory’s core contribution, the trade-security dilemma, within defensive realism. Placing Copeland’s theory within this framework reveals trade expectations to be an intervening variable within a balance of power competition. Finally, the application of trade expectations theory to Russia and the Ukraine Crisis gives greater depth in understanding Moscow’s dilemma. Framing a trade-security dilemma within the broader balance of power dynamic exposes the Russian trade crisis which occurred as Kyiv shifted towards the West.

Reflections on International Legitimacy

2021 ◽  
pp. 210-218
Author(s):  
Martin Wight
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The Other

In this essay, presented at a Sussex history seminar in 1971, Wight set out reflections on international legitimacy—supported by historical examples—in addition to those included in his two essays entitled ‘International Legitimacy’, one published as an article in 1972 in the journal International Relations, and the other as a chapter in his 1977 posthumous book Systems of States. Wight pointed out in this essay that governments on some occasions have set aside established principles of legitimacy in order to serve other purposes—maintaining a preferred balance of power, gaining territory, promoting commercial relations, or pursuing state-consolidation, sometimes with a ‘lack of scruple’. Wight observed that rules regarding legitimacy have furnished grounds ‘for argument, controversy, conflict, even war’. He nonetheless concluded that ‘the influence of principles of legitimacy upon international politics has generally been overestimated’ and ‘has declined rather than grown, with the transition from the dynastic to the popular age’. Prevailing concepts of legality and legitimacy have correspondingly enjoyed less ‘moral ascendancy’.

3. Realism

2021 ◽  
pp. 66-102
Author(s):  
Georg Sørensen ◽  
Jørgen Møller ◽  
Robert Jackson
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Thomas Hobbes ◽  
Research Programme ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The Past ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Offensive Realism ◽  
Classical Realism ◽  
Defensive Realism ◽  
Power Concept

This chapter examines the realist tradition in international relations (IR), which is best seen as a research programme with several approaches using a common starting point. It highlights an important dichotomy in realist thought between classical realism and contemporary realism, including strategic and structural approaches. After describing the elements of realism, the chapter discusses the international thought of three outstanding classical realists of the past: Thucydides, Niccolò Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes. It then analyses the classical realist thought of Hans J. Morgenthau, along with strategic realism, neorealism, and neoclassical realism. Special attention is devoted to the defensive realism of Kenneth Waltz and the offensive realism of John Mearsheimer. Furthermore, the chapter looks at the recent theoretical debate among realist IR scholars concerning the relevance of the balance of power concept and it shows that realists often disagree among themselves. The chapter concludes with an overview of how the different realist theories treat international and domestic factors.

11. Key Issues in Contemporary IR

2018 ◽  
pp. 313-348
Author(s):  
Robert Jackson ◽  
Georg Sørensen ◽  
Jørgen Møller
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
World History ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
Clash Of Civilizations ◽  
Relative Significance ◽  
Key Issues

This chapter examines four of the most important contemporary issues in international relations (IR): international terrorism, religion, the environment, and balance and hegemony in world history. It also considers the different ways in which these issues are analysed by the various theories presented in this book. The chapter begins with a discussion of what the issue is about in empirical terms, the problems raised and why they are claimed to be important, and the relative significance of the issue on the agenda of IR. It then explores the nature of the theoretical challenge that the issues present to IR and how classical and contemporary theories handle the analysis of these issues. The chapter addresses Samuel Huntington’s ‘clash of civilizations’ thesis, the influence of religion on politics, opposing views on the environment issue, and how throughout history different state systems have come to equilibrate on either balance of power or hegemony.

1. International Relations and the European Union

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Hill ◽  
Michael Smith ◽  
Sophie Vanhoonacker
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Eu

This edition examines the contexts in which the European Union has reflected and affected major forces and changes in international relations (IR) by drawing on concepts such as balance of power, multipolarity, multilateralism, interdependence, and globalization. It explores the nature of policymaking in the EU's international relations and the ways in which EU policies are pursued within the international arena. Topics include the EU's role in the global political economy, how the EU has developed an environmental policy, and how it has attempted to graft a common defence policy onto its generalized foreign and security policy. This chapter discusses the volume's methodological assumptions and considers three perspectives on IR and the EU: the EU as a subsystem of IR, the EU and the processes of IR, and the EU as a power in IR. It also provides an overview of the chapters that follow.

Remarks by Morton Kaplan

1973 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 111-113
Author(s):  
Morton Kaplan
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Balance Of Power

Less than a generation ago international relations textbooks either referred to the international system as a realm of anarchy or applied to it global generalizations such as the balance of power. That the number of major states in the system, their economic and military potential, their alliance patterns, and so forth might affect the resort to force and the results of such resort was largely foreign to analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document