Balance of Power

Theory

IB Global Politics
UWC Costa Rica
 Key Point
National security is
strengthened when military
capability is distributed so
that no single state can
dominate all others
 Balance of
Power Theory
is a realist
theory
 Key assumptions of realist
theories
• International order is anarchic

• Primary goal of all actors is survival

• Power is relative
 What happens if one state
becomes stronger?
According to Balance of Power Theory, that
state will take advantage of its strength and
attack weaker neighbours

This provides an incentive for those

threatened to join each other in a defensive
coalition
 How might states counter an
external threat?
• When faced with an external threat from a
more powerful state, states have several
options:
– Balancing
– Bandwagoning
– Buck-passing
– Blood-letting
 Balancing
Balancing encompasses the actions that a
particular state or group of states take in
order to equalise the odds against more
powerful states

(make it more difficult and hence less likely

for powerful states to exert their military
advantage over the weaker ones)
 Two types of balancing
Internal External
Balancing Balancing
• Internal balancing • External balancing
involves efforts to involves strengthening
enhance state's power by and enlarging one's
increasing one's alliances and interstate
economic resources and
military strength in order cooperation in order to
to be able to rely on prevent a hegemon or
independent capabilities counter a rising power.
in response to a potential
hegemon and be able to
compete more effectively
in the international
system
 Bandwagoning
A state aligns with a stronger, adversarial
power and concedes that the stronger
adversary-turned-partner disproportionately
gains in the spoils they conquer together

Question: Why would a state choose to

bandwagon instead of balance?
 Buck-passing
• Instead of balancing against an aggressor,
some states instead choose to "pass the
buck" whereby instead of taking action to
prevent a potential hegemon's rise, it will
pass the responsibility on to another state

• Mearsheimer argues there are 4 strategies

states can use to facilitate buck passing
One:
• Seeking good diplomatic relations with the
aggressor in the hope that it will divert its
attention to the "buck-catcher”
Two:
• maintaining cool relations with the buck-
catcher so as not to get dragged into the
war with the buck-catcher and as a result
possibly increase positive relations with
the aggressor
Three:
• increasing military strength to deter the
aggressive state and help it focus on the
buck-catcher
Four:
• facilitating the growth in power of the
intended buck-catcher
 Blood-letting
If a state is an enemy with both the aggressor and
the intended buck-catcher, a buck-passer can
implement a bait and bleed strategy whereby the
state causes two rivals to engage in a protracted war
while the baiter remains on the sideline.

Bloodletting, a further variant whereby a state does

what it can to increase the cost duration of the
conflict can further increase the buck-passer’s
relative power

Question: Why might states prefer bloodletting and

buck passing to balancing?