REALIST THEORY OF INT’L POLITICSOn Power: Elements of National Power and the Four Distinctions of Power

REALISM Key topics for this

lecture: Background to

Balance of Power Theory

Elements of National Power

Political Power Examination of

“Power” and “Force”

BALANCE OF POWER In his text, Politics Among

Nations, Morgenthau defined several aspects of polarity and how states would balance with each other in various power-based arrangements.

Stressed the virtues of the classical, multipolar, balance of power system and saw the bipolar rivalry between the US and the USSR as especially dangerous

GREAT POWERS

MIDDLE POWERS

SMALL POWERS

UNIPOLAR WORLD

GREAT POWERS

MIDDLE POWERS

SMALL POWERS

GREAT POWERS

MIDDLE POWERS

SMALL POWERS

BIPOLAR WORLD

MULTIPOLAR WORLD

DEFINING POLARITY

10

5

3

255

10

5

3

255

Rise of Threat FromMost Powerful StateIn Multipolar System

Balancing Behavior(Links Indicate

Alliance Tie)

BALANCE OF POWERTHE BILLIARD BALL EXAMPLE

HYPOTHESIS 2: IF THE SYSTEM IS MULTIPOLAR, THENCONFLICT WILL BE MORE LIKELY.

HYPOTHESIS 3: IF THE SYSTEM IS BIPOLAR, THENCONFLICT WILL BE LESS LIKELY.

H2: MULTIPOLARITY--(+)--> PROBABILITY OF WAR

H3: BIPOLARITY--(-)-->PROBABILITY OF WAR

NEO-REALISM: HYPOTHESES #2 & #3

5

3

255

WEAKLY POLARIZEDMULTIPOLAR

WORLD

STRONGLY POLARIZEDMULTIPOLAR

WORLD

559

3

5

3

255

559

3

POLARIZATION VERSUS POLARITY Key danger of multipolarity: UNCERTAINTY AND MISPERCEPTION

AS STEPHEN KRASNER HAS NOTED: “Analytically, realism is most definite when it is

investigating situations in which constraints imposed by the international system threaten minimalist state objectives: the protection of territorial and political integrity. Realism can offer its most precise explanations when states have few options because they are narrowly constrained by the international distribution of power…Realism is less analytically precise when the international system is not tightly constraining.”

Krasner, Stephen. “Realism, Imperialism, and Democracy: A Response To Gilbert.” Political Theory, 20, no. 1, Feb. 1992. Pg. 40.

IS REALISM VIABLE TODAY? YES. Realism still offers viable analytic tools and

prescriptive capabilities, debatably within a more parsimonious context, to scholars and policy makers.

States remain the primary actors within the international system.

States are still greatly concerned with power and security.

States still pursue their own national interests.

The international system remains anarchic.

ELEMENTS OF NATIONAL POWER1. Natural resources – self-sufficiency in terms

of food, raw materials (esp. oil)2. Industrial Capacity3. Military Preparedness – technology,

leadership, quantity and quality of armed forces

4. Population – distribution matters, trends5. National Character – elusive to give a

prognosis of, but HM assures us of its existence

6. Quality of Diplomacy – most important element, although it can be unstable

FOUR DISTINCTIONS OF POWER1. Power vs. influence

Influence can persuade, but cannot compel2. Power vs. force

Military component… As seen on next slides3. Usable vs. unusable power

See case of availability of nuclear weapons Only works if the targeted state cannot reply in

kind A weapon unused is a useless weapon???

4. Legitimate vs. illegitimate power Is the exercise of power morally or legally

justified

POLITICAL POWER VS. FORCE Force

The actual exercise of physical violence (ie imprisonment, war, etc.)

Armed strength = most important factor (in IR) making the political power of a nation

When used, it “signifies an abdication of political power in favor of military power.”

Is based on a physical relationship: When used, the relation between two

people/states/groups becomes based on physical elements, losing any psychological relationship between the two.

The stronger in the relationship will dominate (physically) the actions of the other.

FOUR FUNCTIONS OF FORCE (ROBERT J. ART)

POLITICAL POWER VS. FORCE (CONTINUED) Political Power

Is based on a psychological relationshipRefers to the control over the minds,

leading to control of certain actions in others

Derived from three sources: The expectation of benefits The fear of disadvantages The respect of love for men or institutions

Can be applied through orders, threats, persuasion, charisma of officeholders

DEPRECIATION OF POLITICAL POWER Many scholars in recent centuries have come to

believe that int’l power politics is a temporary phenomena

19th C: liberals saw it as obsolete… democracy had won over absolutism; permanent peace would soon win over power politics; W. Wilson expounded on this theme (14 Points)

They (above), according to Morgenthau, are wrong. Power struggle is universal It would be useless and self-destructive to free some (in

IR) from the desire for power and leave it in others. The desire for power can’t be abolished everywhere. Ex: within societies, murder is wrong; but nearly all

societies view war (murder of the enemy) as may be logical or necessary