Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Balance of Power (BOP) Theory in International Relations - CSS Notes
Balance of Power (BOP) Theory in International Relations - CSS Notes
Notes
From 1648 (Peace of Westphalia) to 1789 (French Revolution) was a golden age of classical
balance of power, when the princes of Europe began accepting BoP as the supreme
principle of foreign policy.
Evident use of BoP is also noted in the mid-17th cent., when it was directed against the
France of Louis
XIV. Balance of power was the stated British objective for much of the 18th and 19th cent.,
and it characterized the European international system, for example, from 1815-1914.
The Concert of Europe (from 1815 to 1870) provides another good example of major
European states striving to achieve balance power. The increasing the power of Germany
began seeing bipolar set of alliances form, leading to the World Wars.
After World War I, the balance of power system was attacked by proponents of cooperation
and a community of power. International relations were changed radically after World War
II by the predominance of two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, with
major ideological differences between them.
After the 1960s, with the emergence of China and the third world, a revived Europe and
Japan, it reemerged as a component of international relations. With the collapse of the
USSR in 1991, the United States, as the sole remaining superpower, has been dominant
militarily and, to a lesser degree, economically.
Subjective or Objective: BoP based on appearances is subjective and fragile whereas that
based on actual capabilities is objective and more stable.
Internal balancing takes place by building up the capacity of the state, as occurred with the
US-Soviet arms race, in which both super powers tried to balance power by becoming more
powerful themselves.
Degree of Polarization
Polarization is the process that causes neutral parties to take sides in a conflict. It also
causes individuals on either side of the conflict to take increasingly extreme positions that
are more and more opposed to each other. As parties move toward these opposite “poles,”
they define themselves in terms of their opposition to a common enemy. Trust and respect
diminish, and “distorted perceptions and simplified stereotypes emerge.” Parties assume
more rigid positions and may refuse to negotiate.
The study of polarization first came to be identified with those realist writers who wrote
about the structure of the international system, the impact of military alliances on war and
peace, and the balance of power.
Truly uni-polar system would make major war less frequent, since one state can prevent
others from arming for war. War is most likely during transitions in balance. Rising power
gains strength, challenges previously superior state and, given newness of capabilities, war
occurs because each side thinks it can win
1. All states act to increase capabilities but prefer to negotiate rather than fight.
2. All states fight rather than pass up an opportunity to increase their capabilities.
3. All states stop fighting rather than eliminate an essential state.
4. All states act to oppose any coalition or single state which tends to assume a position of
dominance within the system
5. All states act to constrain states who subscribe to supranational organizing principles
6. All states permit defeated or constrained states to re-enter the system as potential
partners
Functions of BoP
BoP has prevented universal empires from transforming the world by conquest. It is
provided peace in the absence of effective mechanisms of collective security. Need for BoP
between big powers has proven particularly beneficial for secondary or smaller states.
Secondary states, if they are free to choose, flock to the weaker side, for it is the stronger
side that threatens them. On the weaker side, they are both more appreciated and safer.
States ally with those who can not dominate them to avoid domination by those who can.
Criticism of BoP
Power not peace is the overriding concern within the BoP imperative. War not peace
provides the best means to check instability in the BoP. BoP has resulted in absorption and
partition of smaller states (Poland was divided by Russia, Austria and Prussia in 1772 to
maintain BoP).
States are not static units as they can increase their power through armaments and also
acquire power through development. It is difficult for states to switch sides, given the
political, economic, socio-cultural ties.
Relevant Vocabulary