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.

International Politics in the Age of Existential Threats

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Alexander Sears
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
First Century ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Nation States ◽  
Security Practices ◽  
Political Units ◽  
International Anarchy

Abstract Humans in the twenty-first century live under the specter of anthropogenic existential threats to human civilization and survival. What is the significance of humanity’s capacity for self-destruction to the meaning of “security” and “survival” in international politics? The argument is that it constitutes a material “revolution” in international politics—that is, the growing spectrum of anthropogenic existential threats represents a radical transformation in the material context of international politics that turns established truths about security and survival on their heads. The paper develops a theoretical framework based in historical security materialism, especially the theoretical proposition that the material circumstances of the “forces of destruction” determine the security viability of different “modes of protection”, political “units” and “structures”, and “security ideologies” in international politics. The argument seeks to demonstrate the growing disjuncture (or “contradiction”) between the material context of anthropogenic existential threats (“forces of destruction”); and the security practices of war, the use of military force, and the balance-of-power (“modes of protection”); the political units of nation-states and structure of international anarchy (“political superstructure”); and the primacy of “national security” and doctrines of “self-help” and “power politics” in international politics (“security ideologies”). Specifically, humanityapos;s survival interdependence with respect to anthropogenic existential threats calls into question the centrality of national security and survival in international politics. In an age of existential threats, “security” is better understood as about the survival of humanity.

Power Politics in the Nuclear Age

2020 ◽  
pp. 10-30
Author(s):  
Keir A. Lieber ◽  
Daryl G. Press
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Nuclear Age ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Competitive Nature ◽  
Practical Sense

This chapter describes the unique attributes of nuclear weapons that make them the most effective instruments of deterrence ever created. It discusses the intensely competitive nature of international politics that has endured despite the nuclear stalemate. Stalemate exists when neither adversary in a war can escape destruction and emerge victorious in any practical sense of the term. The chapter talks about the Clausewitzian definition of war as an extension of politics, by which other means becomes an absurdity since no rational goal of statecraft can entail suicidal destruction. It emphasizes why strategic stalemate should not only deter war but also allow countries to abandon a wide range of costly and risky policies designed to increase their security.

STRATEGIC CALCULATIONS IN WOODROW WILSON'S NEUTRALITY POLICY, 1914–1917

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 608-618
Author(s):  
Ross A. Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Close Attention ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
William Jennings Bryan ◽  
First World ◽  
Made In

This article analyzes Woodrow Wilson's view of the First World War's implications for U.S. national security and the way in which he related the balance of power between the belligerents at different points in time to his diplomatic objectives. It approaches this topic, which is a subject of much debate among historians, by comparing Wilson's view of the war from late 1914 to early 1915 with that of his secretary of state, William Jennings Bryan, and by examining how those perceptions shaped the response of the two leaders to the sinking of theLusitania. Bryan and Wilson both wanted the United States to stay out of the war, both wanted the United States to mediate an end to it, and both of them saw mediation as a doorway to reforming international politics. Unlike Bryan, however, Wilson saw Germany as a potential threat to the United States and paid close attention to the balance of power between the Allies and Central Powers; he specifically believed that the Allies were likely to win the war. These views led Wilson to reject Bryan's advice to de-escalate theLusitaniacrisis and to adopt a much more confrontational policy toward Germany, one of the most consequential decisions Wilson made in the neutrality period.

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.

The relevance of international law: a Hegelian interpretation of a peculiar seventeenth-century preoccupation

1995 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Ringmar
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Politics ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Do So

International law, traditional scholars of international politics tell us, is a useless fiction. Statesmen either do not follow legal stipulations or they do so only when it is in their interest to do it. International law plays no independent role in world politics since it can always be reduced to the more fundamental considerations of power politics. National interests simply do not bow to legal requirements.

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.

Power Politics

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex J. Bellamy
Keyword(s):  
East Asia ◽  
National Security ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Military Power ◽  
Nuclear Deterrence ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Security Practices ◽  
Security Relations

This chapter explores the role of “power politics”—the domain of national security interests and the procurement and use of military power—in the decline of mass atrocities in East Asia. It suggests that power politics made an important, but not the singularly most important, contribution. The chapter has three parts. First, it explores how conventional power politics contributed to the decline of mass atrocities in East Asia. Although not central to the overall story, once they were established, the balance of power and both conventional and nuclear deterrence played a role in limiting the further escalation of potential conflicts. Second, it examines the limits of power politics. Third, it points to specific security practices that were more consequential, including the development of omnidirectional security relations, a tendency to avoid destabilizing competition, de-polarization, and the enmeshing of great powers in the region’s norms

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.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Keir A. Lieber ◽  
Daryl G. Press
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Nuclear Deterrence ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
Nuclear Age

This chapter explains the central anomaly of the nuclear age. It talks about the continuation of great power competition under the shadow of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are the most effective instruments of deterrence ever invented, but they have not eliminated the incentives for countries to compete intensely with each other for greater security, power, and strategic advantage. The chapter focuses on understanding why power politics endure in the nuclear age, which not only solve a puzzle for international relations theory but also provides vital insights into the requirements of nuclear deterrence. It also explains the trends that may undermine nuclear deterrence in the coming decades.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document