The Concept of Hegemony - Case Study Example

 Hegemony refers to the dominance of a particular group, over another group. This is normally achieved through the legitimization of ideas and norms (Daddow, 2013). The word hegemony is currently used for purposes of describing the dominant status of a particular group of ideas, when they are compared to alternative ideas or norms (Varela, 2011). For example, it is possible to denote that capitalism, achieved a sense of hegemony, when it is compared to communism. During the periods of the cold war, these two ideas were competing with one another (Rengger, 2000). This paper provides a detailed analysis of hegemony, and how it can be used to explain the concepts of international relations. In meeting its objective, this paper will analyze the dimension of hegemony, and how it can be used to explain relations in the International System. The researcher will use the hegemonic stability theory, in meeting the objectives of this paper. There are at least five important characteristics that shape the concept of hegemony. Kleinberg (2011) explains that hegemony is more than exercising domination over other states, and this is because it has characteristics that must be depicted in a hegemon. One such important characteristic is that it must have a strong military or militaristic alliance. This is when compared to any of its rivals. During the cold war period, there wasn’t any single Hegemonic state, and this is because of the competition between the USSR and the United States. Both these countries had a strong military that was not superior to another (Daddow, 2013). Furthermore, their military alliances were strong. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, and an end to the cold war, United States remained a hegemonic power (Rengger, 2000). This is because it had a strong military, and the strongest alliance, under NATO (Daddow, 2013). Economics is also another important dimension of a hegemonic state. A hegemon has the most technological advanced economy in the world, and it is large. Furthermore, it is an important trading partner of almost all the major powers in the world, and other lesser powers. This characteristic is best depicted in United States. The country, with a population of more than 200 million people, is economically advanced, and it is an important trading partner of the European Union, and China (Rengger, 2000). The European Union and China are not the only trading partners of United States. Other trading partners are in Africa, South and North Korea, and in Middle East. For example, in a bid of promoting trade between United States and Africa, the federal government initiated the AGOA initiative (Dunne, Kurki and Smith, 2013). This is an act that was initiated by congress in the year 2000, and its major aim was to improve the economic relationship between United States and Sub-Saharan Africa. Through economic dominance, a hegemonic power will have the capability of influencing other states or nations to act in a manner that is favorable to it (Daddow, 2013). This is the major reason why United States would only issue aid, to countries that advancing its military, economic and political interests. A good example is in Egypt, whereby it the largest African country, which receives aid from United States. Most of its military funding and supplies are done by United States. Depiction of political authority is also another important characteristic or dimension of hegemony. A hegemon has a wide number of political allies, and friendly relationships (Daddow, 2013). Most of these allies are the major powers that have a considerable influence in the world. As a hegemonic power, this characteristic is suited for United States. The United States has strong allies in Europe, Africa, Asia, and Middle East. For instance in Europe, the strongest allies of United States are France Britain and Germany. These states are very powerful, with France and Britain holding a position in the powerful UN Security council (Dunne, Kurki and Smith, 2013; Carlsnaes, 2013). Another important dimension and characteristic of an hegemon is that it has the ability of influencing the rules that govern the economic and political relations of the world (Kleinberg, 2011). This is because the hegemon and its allies control the international institutions. Institutions such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization, and United Nations are controlled by United States and its allies, who include Japan, Britain France and Germany (Daddow, 2013). For example, the UN Security council has the capability of vetoing any policy initiated by the UN General assembly, which is a threat to their interests (Daddow, 2013). The structural adjustment policies, initiated by the World Bank and IMF in the 1990s, were aimed at advocating on the interests of United States and its allies (Dunne, Kurki and Smith, 2013). This is because the policies aimed at forcing developing countries to liberalize their economies, which are the major values of countries controlling the IMF and the World Bank (Kleinberg, 2011). Davies (2011) explains that the fifth dimension of hegemony is its ability to influence the adoption of its ideology in the international relations. For instance, Karl Marx was able to denote that, any idea that rules is an idea of the hegemon (Carlsnaes, 2013). Currently, globalization, liberalism, and democracy are the ruling ideas in the international system. These concepts are also identified with United States and its allies (Dunne, Kurki and Smith, 2013). Chan (2006) explains that because of the many competing ideologies, and hegemonic powers, the international system will remain unstable. This is the reason why, the concert of Europe was unable to prevent the emergence of the First World War. Carlsnaes (2013) explains that in the 19th century, the International System was dominated by five major powers. These countries are Russia, United Kingdom, Prussia, Austria and France. These countries came together, and formed the concert of Europe in 1815 (Balogun, 2011). The major intention of this Concert was to promote and maintain world peace and stability. However, because of economic and political rivalries, the concert of Europe was unable to exert its authority, and prevent the emergence of the First World War (Daddow, 2013). It is based on this fact that Balogun (2011) explains that for there to be stability in the international system, there must be one dominant power. The hegemonic stability theory is a theoretical framework that explains this aspect (Daddow, 2013). The hegemonic stability theory asserts that the international system will become stable, only if there is a single state, that has the capability of asserting power over other nations or states (Daddow, 2013). This single nation or state is called a hegemon. Furthermore, this theory asserts that the fall of a hegemon, will affect the stability of the international system (Hensel, 2004). A hegemon has the capability of exercising power through three major ways, namely, persuasion, diplomacy and coercion. This process is referred to as hegemony. Through these methods, the hegemon power will dominate the international political and economic system (Dunne, Kurki and Smith, 2013). A hegemon will use its military power, to intimidate its competitors, and remove any rivals to its power (Balogun, 2011). This is a situation that is best depicted by United States. On most occasions, the United States, together with its allies will use military force, for purposes of advancing their interests (Daddow, 2013). This has happened in Afghanistan and Iraq, where NATO, led by United States was able to attack these countries, and overthrow a government that was hostile to them. The hegemonic nature of United States is further seen in its deployment of troops in Asia (Hensel, 2004). The United States has a permanent army base in South Korea and Japan. These are important allies of the country, and the presence of these troops in these countries, is an assurance that the US is committed to protecting them (Dunne, Kurki and Smith, 2013). The military is therefore a tool of coercion, aimed at forcefully implementing the policies and interests of a hegemon (Hensel, 2004). A hegemon will always use its superior economy for purposes of exercising soft power. For instance, a hegemon will support the economies of other states, only if they are able to satisfy or implement policies that are friendly to them (Burchill et al, 2013). An example is when United States was able to assert soft power was after the scandal of Exxon Valdez. The country was able to pass a law, which required any ship that delivers oil, to have unlimited insurance (Varela, 2011). As a large market of oil, most overseas shipping company was able to comply with the laws. It is because of such influences that the hegemonic instability theory emerged (Daddow, 2013). This theoretical framework argues that a unipolar system is not the best, in international relations. Unipolar refers to the situation whereby one state dominates the international system (Baylis, Smith and Owen, 2013). This state is called a hegemon. According to this theoretical framework, the hegemon will use its military capability for purposes of imposing its will. This will in turn lead to an increase in violence, which is associated with political conflicts within a region (Burchill et al, 2013). A good example is the invasion of Iraq, by United States. In justifying its invasion of Iraq, the president of America falsely denoted that the country has weapons of mass destruction (Varela, 2011). However, none of these weapons were found, and hence it was only a pretext of invading Iraq (Baylis, Smith and Owen, 2013). The impact of this invasion has caused political and economic instability in Iraq, and the countries surrounding it. For example, currently, there is a civil war in Iraq that pits the government of Iraq, against a terrorist group, called Islamic State. This could not have happened, if the second gulf war did not occur (Baylis, Smith and Owen, 2013). Furthermore, the hegemonic instability theory asserts that a hegemon is responsible for promoting economic inequality. This is because it uses the resources of less developed countries, to its own advantage (Baylis, 2001). The structural adjustments policies were aimed at opening up the economies of third world countries, so that American and Western multi-national companies could invest in it (Dunne, Kurki and Smith, 2013). This is despite the economies of these countries, being unable to produce a company that could compete with these multi-national corporations (Burchill et al, 2013). Furthermore, the alliances created by an hegemon, will mean that other countries would get involved in the formation of counter alliances, which is not good for the international system. A good example is the formation of NATO by United States and its allies (Varela, 2011). The Soviet Union responded by the creation of the Warsaw pact. However, the weakness of this theoretical framework is that it does not recognize the positive impact of a hegemon in the international system. In conclusion, hegemony can be used for purposes of explaining interactions within the international system. In the current state, the international system is dominated by the United States, which is viewed as an hegemon (Baylis, Smith and Owen, 2013). The United States has the world’s largest economy, and its military is the most powerful. Through its economy, the United States has managed to assert some elements of soft power. An example is the AGOA initiative which allows sub-Saharan African countries to export products into the US market at a duty free (Kleinberg, 2011). However, countries qualifying to benefit from this initiative must have a liberal economy, which is a key ideology supported by United States. Furthermore, its military has the capability of projecting force in almost all the areas of the world. This is depicted, by its military bases that are situated in Europe, Asia, and America. Furthermore, United States has managed to influence ideas and concepts all over the world. Bibliography: Balogun, M. (2011). Hegemony and sovereign equality the interest contiguity theory in international relations. New York: Springer. Top of Form Bottom of Form Baylis, J. (2001). The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Baylis, J., Smith, S., & Owen, P. (2013). The Globalization of World Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burchill, S., Linklater, A., Davetak, R., Nardin, T., Paterson, M., Reus-Smit, C., & True, J. (2013). Theories of International Relations. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Top of Form Bottom of Form Carlsnaes, W. (2013). Handbook of international relations. London: SAGE Publications. Top of Form Bottom of Form Chan, S. (2006). Theories of international relations. London: SAGE Publications. Daddow, O. (2013). International relations theory: The essentials (2nd ed.). London: SAGE. Top of Form Bottom of Form Davies, J. (2011). Challenging governance theory: From networks to hegemony. Bristol, UK: Policy Press. Dunne, T., Kurki, M., & Smith, S. (2013). International Relations Theories, Discipline andd Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Top of Form Bottom of Form Hensel, H. (2004). Sovereignty and the global community: The quest for order in the international system. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate. Top of Form Bottom of Form Kleinberg, R. (2011). The politics of international trade regulation in the developing world: Law and policy of "preferential" treatment in the governance of world trade. Durham, N.C.: Carolina Academic Press. Top of Form Bottom of Form Rengger, N. (2000). International relations, political theory, and the problem of order beyond international relations theory? London: Routledge. Top of Form Bottom of Form Varela, M. (2011). Hegemony and heteronormativity revisiting 'the political' in queer politics. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate. Top of Form Bottom of Form Zakaria, F. (2008). The post-American world. New York: W.W. Norton. Read More