Realists v Liberals: Balance of Power Flashcards
analyse why the concept of balance of power divides realists and liberals
bipolarity: realist v liberal view
multipolarity: realist v liberal view
bipolarity: realist v liberal view
The balance of power refers to how power is distributed in the international system. Realists and liberals disagree over which power balance is more likely to prevent conflict. On one hand, realists favour a system of bipolarity in which there are two dominant poles of power. They argue that bipolarity leads to stability as there is a massive incentive for the two main powers to avoid engaging in real conflict with eachother. This is because minor powers attach themselves to either of the dominant powers, making it highly unlikely for one of the main powers to start conflict with the other or any of the minor powers because they’ll be initiating conflict with all of its allies too. For example, during the Cold War, the two main blocs of power were NATO (dominated by the USA) and the Warsaw Pact (dominated by the Soviet Union). The USA and the Soviet Union were also militarily balanced and their nuclear weapons created a system of mutually assured destruction, which deterred conflict as war would destroy both states. Realists argue that this led to the ‘long peace’ between 1945 and 1990, which demonstrates how bipolarity leads to stability and balance.
However, liberals disagree and argue that bipolarity is inherently unstable because it does not curb the hegemonic ambitions of the main powers. The two will compete with eachother in anticipation of one of them attempting to seize hegemonic status, often through an arms race, which results in immense tension. For instance, Cold War bipolarity nearly ended in nuclear war during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. As liberal thinker John Stuart Mill argued, humans are rational and guided by reason and liberals would argue that it was this human rationality, alongside luck, that prevented the nuclear conflict rather than the system of bipolarity itself. Therefore, there is a clear division between realists and liberals as to which particular balance of power is best.
multipolarity: realist v liberal view
Instead, liberals favour a multipolar balance of power in which there are three or more poles of power. They argue that, in such a system, states will realise the futility of conflict because the potential gains will be relatively small. Socialists like Karl Marx, as well as liberals, have an optimistic view of human nature and argue that humans are bound by bonds of fraternity which allows us to cooperate and work towards common goals – a view which liberals adhere to. For instance, Rosseau believed that states will choose to cooperate as it produces greater benefits for all. With states more evenly matched, cooperation is far more likely to be successful which can be seen in the signing of numerous agreements to tackle world issues such as the 2009 G20 agreement not to resort to protectionism in response to the global economic crisis. Therefore, a multipolar system can be said to create balance and harmony.
Contrastingly, realists reject this view and believe that multipolarity is the most dangerous balance of power. As the number of actors in the international system increases, so does the number of potential conflicts because when there are multiple power centres even a small increase in power has the potential to make a state a great power. As conservative thinker Thomas Hobbes argued, people and states seek “power after power” and it is this pursuit of power that creates tension. Similarly, realist thinker Thucydides believed that humans, and therefore states, are fundamentally self-centred and will pursue their own interests at the expense of others. For example, China has been increasing naval patrols and building islands in the South China Sea, creating unease in the region which could escalate into serious conflict. Realists would argue that this illustrates how unstable a multipolar system is, which contradicts the liberal view of multipolarity. Consequently, liberals and realists are divided over the concept of the balance of power, with realists favouring bipolarity and liberals favouring multipolarity.
