CDSn4001:
Conflict
Analysis
International systemic
causes of war: balance
of power
October 27, 2020
Miriam Matejova
Agenda
• Systemic theories in IR and war
• How does anarchy lead to war?
• How can we achieve peace in anarchy?
• Different types of realism
• Balance of power theory vs hegemonic
stability theory
• Polarity in IR
Basic tenets of realism
Interest of states Survival
How to achieve survival Increase power
Human nature Man is flawed and therefore prone to
conflict
Anarchy The environment in which sovereign
nation-states act
The international structure
• Kenneth Waltz – an American political
scientist and the father of neorealism
– Asked: Why do wars occur?
• “International anarchy is the permissive
cause of war.”
– Sovereign nation-states in a system of
international anarchy will behave conflictually,
because there is nothing or no one to prevent
conflict.
International anarchy
• International politics is composed of sovereign
nation-states that are beholden to no higher
power.
• There is no world government (i.e., self-help
system)
• Anarchy in IR is not lack of order but a lack of
an orderer.
Realism and power
• Hans Morgenthau:
“International politics,
like all politics, is a
struggle for power.”
• Power defined largely in
terms of coercion.
• Mostly viewed as
specific assets or
material resources
available to state.
– Power is military
power.
– Economic power as
an essential
underpinning of
military power.
(Classical) realism vs neorealism
Classical realism Structural realism (neorealism)
Power for the sake of power: power as
end
Power for security: power as means
Human nature as the cause of war Anarchic structure as a necessary but not
sufficient condition for war
Domestic factors matter (in a limited way) Focus on states as unitary actors
interacting in international system
Defensive vs offensive realism
STRUCTURAL REALISM
DEFENSIVE OFFENSIVE
States should gain “appropriate amount
of power”
It makes sense for states to pursue as
much power as possible
Pursuit of hegemony is foolish States should pursue hegemony
Key writers: Waltz, Jervis Key writers: Mearsheimer,
Gilpin, Schweller
Balance of power theory
• Balance of power: A system in which no single
actor is dominant; also, the distribution of power
in such a system, which is not necessarily equal.
– no single state is sufficiently powerful to defeat the
others.
Hegemonic stability theory
• Stability results from unipolarity, in which one dominant
state ensures some degree of order in the system.
• Hegemon = leader or dominant actor
– “global cop”, reducing the degree of anarchy in the system
• War is most likely when the dominant position of the
leader erodes, giving other states the temptation to
seek dominance.
➢if the rising second-place state
seeks to assert its power, or
➢if the hegemon attacks
preemptively to crush the
rising threat before it becomes
even more powerful.
Balance of power vs hegemonic
stability
• Balance of power: stability in balance;
chances of war increase as one state seeks to
dominate the others
• Hegemonic stability: stability in dominance;
chances of war increase as the situation
moves toward equality
Is this a realist world?
• Do you agree with realists? Why (not)?
• How do we achieve peace in a realist
world? In a neorealist world?
Polarity in international politics
Examples
Unipolarity The hegemon keeps order, sets up the
rules, mediates disputes, and opposes
any autonomous action
Rome
USA since 1991?
Bipolarity Two competing great power
hegemons. Each presides over an
alliance of weaker states.
Athens vs Sparta (5th century
BC)
The Cold war
Tripolarity With three great powers, no balance
is possible. Each state seeks to avoid
having the other two gang up on it.
?
Multipolarity With a municipality of powers,
multiple combinations can produce
balance.
Almost all European history
(19th century Europe)
World since 9/11?