The Merits of Balance of Power as a Mode of Analyzing International Conflict and Peace - Coursework Example

Balance of Power By: Introduction When there is a balance of power, no nation can interfere with the interests of another nation. In international relation, the concept of balance of power is important in checking the power of a state (Beylerian, 2004, p. 25). A state, by definition according to international relation to international relation is a political organisation with a centralised government. Therefore, the concept of balance of power entails sharing power among the sates equally. According to the theory of balance of power, a state or alliance that increases its power is threatening another state or alliance. Such case will see the threatened state or alliance increasing their power in response. In most cases, the threatened states will try to fight back and ensure there is balance of power (Booty, 2011, pp. 120-152). The paper will discuss the merits of balance of power as a mode of analyzing international conflict and peace. 2. The theory of balance of power The theory emphasizes on distribution of authority, where power has to be shared equally among the appropriate entities. The theory is very crucial in studying international relations, especially, international conflicts. When the theory is studied with respect to the world wars, the concept contributes significantly to both traditional and modern literature, thinking and politics(Rummel, 1979, p. 32). Balance of power can be studied in relation to war. The theory is integrated with the concept of ‘security dilemma’. During the world war period, all the states were seen to use force anytime. Therefore, all the nations were always prepared to use force. There were factors during the world war that influenced the climate of fear (Danilovic, 2002, p. 70). Some of these factors include arms races, formation of alliances, and in many times open conflict. In fact, the European international politics was an anarchic system by nature. The leaders of the European policy were characterized by the lack of higher authority than the nation-state, meaning each entity was sovereign. From literature reviews and studies, it would be logical to say that ‘in anarchy, security is the highest end’ (Danilovic, 2002, p. 20). There was lack of overall authority, therefore, system of alliance and military dominance was the order of the day. During this era, the idea that war was a corollary of the balance of power dominated. From the above discussion, balance of power theory was the cause of conflict during the world war, especially World War I (Booty, 2011, pp. 1-4). During World War I, leaders believed war would help them achieve power. Leaders, during this period of World War I, would do as much as possible to strengthen their position(Capie, 2002, p. 63). The fundamental strategy during this time was forming coalitions and alliances. Many states formed alliances for immediate purposes. When another better opportunity availed itself, states would switch their alliances (Claude, pp. 77-85). There were factors that had an impact upon the balance of power during the world war period. During this period, imperialism was a dominant force. Imperialism had a considerable impact on the balance of power in Europe (Claude, pp. 77-85). Imperialism did not allow balance of power to work efficiently. With imperialism, states expanded their competition to the global level, from the regional level(Beylerian, 2004, p. 56). The other factor is fragility of the balance. To be more precise, unification of Germany made it difficult to maintain the status quo. Balance of power failed in this case because Germany itself failed to maintain their balance (Rohde, 2010, p. 60). 2.1 Balance of power and international relations Numerous studies indicate that balance of power is a policy. This policy allows a state to increase its own military capability to counter any threat posed by another state. From these studies, one learns that containment is the policy of forming geographically based coalitions in order to counter any threat. For instance, after World War II, the United States used the containment policy against the Soviet Union. The US built military alliances throughout Europe, Asia, and the Middle East (Paul, 2004, p. 36; Claude, pp. 77-85; Emmers, 2012, p. 63). A study by Booty noted that the balance of power theory allowed nations to respond effectively in case of rapid changes in international power and status (Booty, 2011, pp. 60-72). This could happen, for example if one state tries to conquer the region. A research by Davis states that balancing in this case, will help in maintaining stability amongst nations in the world (Davis, 2011, p. 150). 2.2 Ways in which balance of power works effectively When alliances seem to be fluid, many states can form a balance of power. This happens when unions are easily formed or broken depending on the expediency, without regarding values, religion, history, or form of government (Miller, 2006, p. 56). Usually, a single country often acts as a balancer. This country will support the strongest state or alliance (Wohlforth, 1993, p. 125), for instance Britain in the 18th and 19th century (Wohlforth, 1993, p. 125). Britain, in this period, acted as a balancer in Europe, especially in its relation with Germany, Russia, and France (Saltzman, 2012, p. 201). Similarly, two countries can balance against each other. This happens when they match their military capability. For instance, in the Cold War, both the US and Russia expanded their nuclear capability in order to balance each other (Mills, 1999, p. 89). Balance of power has a major weakness. Garnett, in his study, found out that it is difficult to measure power using balance of power. Occasionally, any country uses factors such as land mass, population and more, in order to derive power. However, this power does not estimate the military strength of the country (Garnett, 1984, p. 70). Studies indicate that, for there to be effective military, states should consider factors such as leadership, morale, geography, and a bit of luck (Yetiv, 2008, p. 87). Additionally, the people in power may have misperceptions that may seriously affect the calculation of power. For instance, during the Vietnam War, the US leaders always underestimated the strengths of the Vietnamese Communists. The leaders saw Vietnam as much weaker than the US (Sheehan, 2004, p. 100). 2.3 Intention of balance of power The balance of power identifies the consensual scientific judgment in the mainstream international relations theory (Beylerian, 2004, p. 78). Experts argue that the balance of power is an old-fashioned concept with no explnation to the behaviour of states. Many people have not either proven or disapproved the idea because it seems to be so elusive and contradictory. Therefore, balance of power concept is faith, but not a theory that explains political outcomes(Niou, 2007, p. 20). Balance of power can be very useful as a socially constructed idea, which in the past, especially the world war period, guided the behaviour of immoral statesmen (Claude, pp. 77-85). There were many intentions of the concept of balance of power. This concept intentionally eliminates different variables that are prerequisites for detailed analysis in international politics. The concept focuses on the quantifiable variables of state-to-state relationships. However, the material power equations are always hard to measure. Thereby, the evaluations of the strengths in the system are a matter of perception (Little, 2007). 2.4 What balance of power addresses The balance of power addresses statesmen in history, which act according to imperfect information and time constraints (Claude, n.d., pp. 77-85). The factor that makes balance of power so influential is that many diplomats used this concept to make foreign policies. For instance, balance of power was widely used in England especially in domestic affairs. During the 19th century, scholars described balance of power as the ‘figment’ of imagination (Claude, pp. 77-85). Other critics during this period argued that the ‘concept was founded on the nature of man’. These critics believed that the concept was serving the interests of nations while endangering the security of its people (Schweller, 2010, p. 101). During the World War I, many countries, specifically Britain, had the task of preventing any power striving for ‘preponderance’. Many people believe that the balance of power was a theme in British diplomacy, ever since the time of Elizabeth I (Goldstein, 1991, p. 120). Additionally, balance of power is the main reason why World War 1 ended. Germany had surrendered, and the United States, Britain, Italy and France signed the armistice. Because Germany had started the war, the signing of the treaty would serve as there punishment and demonstration of guilt for starting the war. This was a means of balancing the power and that they would no longer threaten world piece. Historians trace the concept of balance of power back to the conflicts in Italian city-states in the 15th century. From then, the Franco-Spanish rivalry, which lasted from the 16th to 18th century, developed the idea of balance of power (Brooks, 2008, p. 50). However, the rivalry experienced mechanical balance of power because power oscillated between states. During the age of enlightenment, the concept of balance of power became part of the law of nature (Brooks, 2008, p. 59). The concept of balance of power faced challenges during the 18th and the beginning of the 19th century. During the First World War, many analysts saw this as a preventive war meant to restore the balance of power that was perceived to be threatened. Because of this perception, there was the emergence of the mentality of the ‘cult of offensive’. The mentality was a contributing factor in the irrevesible process of mobilization happening in the German and Russian armies(Wohlforth, 1993, p. 87). From the above discussion, it is clear that the materialistic interpretation of balance of power does not make sense. The paper recommends the need to include both ‘social’ and ‘interaction’ variables in order to understand in depth the transformation of balance of power systems (Garnett, 1984, p. 101). 2.5 Limits of understanding The international relation scholars have not constructed a stable state-centric international system (Claude, pp. 77-85). The system always contained mixture of international, regional, domestic, and local conflicts. With the revolution in communication methods, people nowadays have a higher perception of global problems. Nowadays, the pictures they are confronted move many people on a daily basis. It is common for Non-Governmental Organizations to rise from local initiatives to become players in the global stage. There have been emergencies of more and more stakeholders in the global power play. In other words, the world has to be prepared to deal with subjects and actors of different qualities and capabilities (Brooks, 2008, p. 150). It is necessary to define balance of power concept clearly. For instance, many people ask questions such as ‘should we know the regional BOP concept or a global one, or a domestic one?’ In order to use the concept of balance of power in the world structure, it is necessary to: include regional models to explain the relevance of balance of power calculations of players. Develop a structural model, which involved different policy fields. Correlate these various functions to construct ideal types of player strategies (Capie 77-85). The above measurements do not enter deep into the complex power structure. Therefore, there is a need to use the above strategies as models to compare ‘real’ behaviour of the actors. Additionally, there is need of making judgments to determine which elements of balance of power can be manipulated, and which of the elements lead to self-organizing balance of power structure (Capie, 2002, p. 100). 3. An aggregate theory A balance of power theory could be used to conduct researches in international relations, but only from the starting point. However, the concept can help ask diagnostic questions in the field of international relations (Claude, pp. 77-85). The common way in which people learn the intentions of players in the international system is through studying official state documents such as the national security doctrines. However, these documents are distorted ideologically. They cannot be the only source (Claude, pp. 77-85). Balance of power theory helps the people to observe the global structure ‘from above’. The people in this case will be as objective as possible. The concept of balance of power helps analysts in international relation to start their analysis with a power-oriented approach (Claude, pp. 77-85). 3.1 A global picture A person can use the concept of balance of power to construct a consistent and a simplified image of world politics. The paper concentrated on the World Wars, and after a closer analysis, one recognizes a triangular structure (Claude, pp. 77-85). Experts argue that the US is at the centre of the international system. According to the concept of balance of power, the US is capable of projecting its power globally. A study by Claude defined the US, before the 9/11, as a status quo power. The author argues that the US dominated nearly all issues related to power in foreign policy areas. There was no serious challenge to the US (Claude, pp. 77-85). The US dominates its region. For this case, all potential regional hegemony have no perspective of becoming hegemonic in their region. In other words, no further power is left for global aspirations (Claude, pp. 77-85). 4. Conclusion The paper has discussed the merits of balance of power as a mode of analyzing international conflict and peace. Balance of power is a theory that emphasizes on distribution of authority, where power has to be shared equally among the appropriate entities. The paper noted one main disadvantage of this concept, which is poor materialistic interpretation of the theory. The recommendation here was to include both ‘social’ and ‘interaction’ variables in the concept, in order to understand in depth the transformation of balance of power systems. Balance of power is very useful when it comes to international relations. Scholars and researchers could use this concept to formulate theories in the field of international studies. A person can use the concept of balance of power to construct a consistent and a simplified image of world politics. In this paper, one could easily understand the politics of the world wars, especially World War I. References Beylerian, O., 2004. Inauspicious Beginnings: Principal Powers and International Security Institutions After the Cold War, 1989-1999. s.l.:McGill-Queens Press - MQUP. (http://www.mqup.ca/inauspicious-beginnings-products-9780773526259.php) Booty, H., 2011. The Balance of Power: a Cause of War, a Condition of Peace, or Both?. E-international relations student. Brooks, S. G., 2008. World Out of Balance: International Relations and the Challenge of American Primacy. s.l.:Princeton University Press. http://www.e-ir.info/2011/01/31/the-balance-of-power-a-cause-of-war-a-condition-of-peace-or-both/ Capie, D. H., 2002. The Asia-Pacific Security Lexicon. s.l.:Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1818212 Claude, I. L. The Balance of Power Revisited. Review of International Studies, 15(2), pp. 77-85. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20097172?sid=21104881024951&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=2129. Danilovic, V., 2002. When the Stakes are High: Deterrence and Conflict Among Major Powers:University of Michigan Press. https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472112872-fm.pdf Davis, C., 2011. Power, Threat, Or Military Capabilities: US Balancing in the Later Cold War, 1970-1982. :University Press of America. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww4.fnac.com%2Flivre-numerique%2Fa6766210%2FCarmel-Davis-Power-Threat-or-Military-Capabilities-US-Balancing-in-the-Later-Cold-War-1970-1982&ei=nWyRVL7pI4v4UqOlgNgH&usg=AFQjCNG9PQocmc-nOQSSHInYA3xLskk9aA&sig2=IYItLyiMylr24HbHYXLJOw&bvm=bv.82001339,d.d24. Emmers, R., 2012. Cooperative Security and the Balance of Power in ASEAN and the ARF. s.l.:Routledge. http://frenndw.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/astim-ralf-emmers.pdf. Garnett, J. C., 1984. Commonsense and the Theory of International Politics :SUNY Press. http://www.palgrave.com/page/detail/commonsense-and-the-theory-of-international-politics-john-c-garnett/?K=9780333351314. Goldstein, A., 1991. From Bandwagon to Balance-of-power Politics: Structural Constraints and Politics in China, 1949-1978. s.l.:Stanford University Press. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2950061?sid=21104881024951&uid=2&uid=2129&uid=4&uid=70 Little, R., 2007. The Balance of Power in International Relations: Metaphors, Myths and Models. :Cambridge University Press. Miller, E. A., 2006. To Balance Or Not to Balance: Alignment Theory and the Commonwealth of Independent States. s.l.:Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Mills, C. W., 1999. The Power Elite. s.l.:Oxford University Press. Niou, E. M. S., 2007. The Balance of Power: Stability in International Systems. s.l.:Cambridge University Press. Paul, T. V., 2004. Balance of Power: Theory and Practice in the 21st Century. s.l.:Stanford University Press. Rohde, C., 2010. The balance of power (BOP) in international relations theory. Introduction, pp. 1-4. http://www.christoph-rohde.de/textbopinintbez.pdf. Rummel, R., 1979. UNDERSTANDING CONFLICTAND WAR: VOL. 4:WAR, POWER, PEACE. Ending Conflict And War:The Balance Of Powers. https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE10.HTM. Saltzman, I. Z., 2012. Securitizing Balance of Power Theory: A Polymorphic Reconceptualization. s.l.:Lexington Books. Schweller, R. L., 2010. Unanswered Threats: Political Constraints on the Balance of Power. s.l.:Princeton University Press. Sheehan, M., 2004. The Balance of Power. s.l.:Routledge. Wohlforth, W. C., 1993. The Elusive Balance: Power and Perceptions During the Cold War. s.l.:Cornell University Press. Yetiv, S. A., 2008. The Absence of Grand Strategy: The United States in the Persian Gulf, 1972--2005. s.l.:JHU Press. Read More