Testing balance-of-power theory in world history

Journal of Conflict Resolution, 1973

Many observers have recently noted that the international system is evolving into a multipolar world. At the same time, the notion of balance of power is being severely criticized for its vagueness and inconsistency. Seven empirically testable propositions which exemplify refined and narrowed notions of balance of power are reviewed and analyzed in this paper. These propositions, authored by A. L. Burns, M. Kaplan, D. Singer and M. Small, F. H. Hinsley, R. Rosecrance, and F. Harary concern one of four major approaches to the multipolar system: (1) the rules of a theoretical balance of power system, (2) the functioning of alliances, (3) historical systemic periodization, and (4) the application of structural balance theory to the international system. The Situational Analysis Project provided the data for testing these propositions over the first twelve years of the "Bismarckian system," 1870 through 1881. The propositions did not hold up well under detailed testing. The rules of the balance of power system were violated-in particular, an "ingratiation effect" was found in place of the balance-restoring mechanism; alliances led to a lessening of cooperation and attention between allies; and historical periodization was found to be inaccurate. The findings, however, did support the fundamental assumption underlying the structural balance theory. Since the future may be quite like the nineteenth century in terms of structure, a reevaluation of the Bismarckian system is not an irrelevant exercise but rather an inquiry into the functioning of a system we may actually have to operate.

2007

The balance of power has been a central concept in the theory and practice of international relations for the past five hundred years. It has also played a key role in some of the most important attempts to develop a theory of international politics in the contemporary study of international relations. In this 2007 book, Richard Little establishes a framework that treats the balance of power as a metaphor, a myth and a model. He then uses this framework to reassess four major texts that use the balance of power to promote a theoretical understanding of international relations: Hans J. Morgenthau's Politics Among Nations (1948), Hedley Bull's The Anarchical Society (1977), Kenneth N. Waltz's Theory of International Politics (1979) and John J. Mearsheimer's The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (2001). These reassessments allow the author to develop a more comprehensive model of the balance of power.

A central concept in International Relations scholarship, the 'Balance of Power' (BoP) has been seen as both convenient justification for power politics and as necessary precondition for liberal internationalism. This paper will refute neither of these perspectives, but will seek instead to establish the view that the usefulness of the BoP stems not from any quality inherent in the concept, but rather from the widespread acceptance of its importance, and from the existence of a broader set of assumptions implicit in that acceptance. The paper will explore the implications of the adoption of the BoP concept by the international (and academic) community by examining the historical context that surrounded its ascendance and the ways that ascendance was ensured. The emphasis on 'balance' can in fact be seen as having resulted in a significant redefinition of ''power and, importantly, the construction of a new framework of legitimacy. A focus on the normative function of the concept can provide a more nuanced basis for an analysis of its effectiveness as a tool for the study and practice of international relations.

2016

The Balance of Power is one of the foundational concepts for the academic discipline of International Relations. Most treat it as a theoretical or analytical concept – a tool that scholars use to investigate the workings of world politics. However, there is a gap in the literature on the balance of power; it is also a concept used by political practitioners and diplomats in concrete debates and disputes throughout centuries. No one has systematically investigated the concept as a ‘category of practice’, and I seek to redress this omission. I ask, how, why, and with what effects has the balance of power concept been deployed across different contexts? This is important, because the discipline needs to investigate the histories of its dominant concepts – the balance of power deserves attention as an object of analysis in its own right. I combine a genealogical reading (by what accidents of history did we end up here?) with conceptual history (how was the balance used then as a rhetori...

Tuijin Jishu/Journal of Propulsion Technology, 2023

The concept of the Balance of Power has long been a significant factor in the realm of international politics. This article examines the evolution of power dynamics across time, starting with its inception in the early modern European state system and extending to its expansion on the global scale. The study delves further into the intricate dynamics of power equilibrium by examining the impact of various perspectives on its implementation and perception. The Peace of Westphalia, which was created in 1648 after the end of the Thirty Years' War, introduced a framework whereby governments aimed to prevent the dominance of a single power and maintain peace via the formation of alliances and the division of power. This event served as the foundational ground for the concept of the balance of power in historical context. The notion, which was originally centred in Europe, ultimately evolved into a fundamental principle of international law. The article also investigates several perspectives on power dynamics, with a specific emphasis on the realism paradigm that prioritizes state-centred evaluations of power and self-interest. The examination also includes an analysis of the liberal perspective, which prioritizes international institutions and collaborative endeavors aimed at maintaining stability. Furthermore, it engages with the constructivist paradigm, which emphasizes the significance of ideas, identities, and norms in shaping international power dynamics and conduct.

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, 2016

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.

2016

The balance of power has a long tradition in Western intellectual history. It can be traced back to the late medieval period and until this day the metaphor is widely used in all kind of social contexts, from internal politics and labour disputes to family or gender relations (Little 2007). Moreover, nobody doubts the role it has played in the thinking and practice of international relations during European Modern Times, more particularly since the eighteenth century. Indeed, in contrast to its use in other areas of human activity, the balance of power has traditionally been considered a central element in international relations, despite the fact that already in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries commentaries pointed to the vagueness of the concept (Wight 1966). Similarly, in 1954, in one of the fi rst postWar reviews of the balance of power concept, Ernst Haas concluded that the precise meaning of the term balance of power is disputed, with different, sometimes contradictory, sometimes overlapping meanings. More than 40 years later, Sheehan (1996) came to the same conclusion. To give only some examples: In 'Politics among Nations' Morgenthau (1960) offered four different meanings, Martin Wight (1966) found nine, and Schroeder (1989) no less than 11 (Table 8.1). Morgenthau drew his defi nitions from the balance of power practice and theorizing in European history since early Modern Times. Wight used the same type of sources over the same period, while Schroeder took a narrower approach. He focused on practice and thus used diplomatic correspondence and texts by political leaders in the period between 1814 and 1914.

" 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 counterbalancing coalition emerges to restrain the rising power, such that any bid for world hegemony will be self-defeating.

Security Studies, 2005

The balance of power is a venerable concept in international relations theory, but it is plagued by ambiguities about what the concept means and what the theory purports to explain, and the key proposition that states balance against concentrations of power or hegemonic threats is rarely if ever subjected to systematic empirical test. We argue that despite these ambiguities and disagreements, there is one proposition that nearly all balance of power theorists and their critics as well would accept as an accurate reflection of the theory and that provides the basis for a "most-likely" test of the theory: great powers have balanced against extreme concentrations of land-based military power in Europe, concentrations that have created the potential for hegemony over the continent.