Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Balance of power

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    13,727
    Reviews
    10

    Default Balance of power

    At the core of the balance of power theory is the idea that national security is enhanced when military capabilities are distributed so that no one state is strong enough to dominate all others. If one state gains inordinate power, the theory predicts that it will take advantage of its strength and attack weaker neighbors thereby providing an incentive for those threatened to unite in a defensive coalition.

    Some realists maintain that this would be more stable as aggression would appear unattractive and would be averted if there was equilibrium of power between the rival coalitions.

    When confronted by a significant external threat, states may balance or bandwagon. Balancing is defined as allying with others against the prevailing threat, whereas bandwagoning refers to alignment with the source of danger. States may also employ other alliance tactics, such as buck-passing and chain-ganging.

    There is a longstanding debate among realists with regard to how the polarity of a system impacts on which tactic states use, however, it is generally agreed that balancing is more efficient in bipolar systems as each great power has no choice but to directly confront the other.

    Along with inter-realist debates about the prevalence of balancing in alliance patterns, other schools of international relations, such as constructivists, are also critical of the balance of power theory, disputing core realist assumptions regarding the international system and the behavior of states.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance...nal_relations)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    somewhere in the back of beyond
    Posts
    1,556
    Reviews
    56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by irishdeltaforce View Post
    At the core of the balance of power theory is the idea that national security is enhanced when military capabilities are distributed so that no one state is strong enough to dominate all others. If one state gains inordinate power, the theory predicts that it will take advantage of its strength and attack weaker neighbors thereby providing an incentive for those threatened to unite in a defensive coalition.

    Some realists maintain that this would be more stable as aggression would appear unattractive and would be averted if there was equilibrium of power between the rival coalitions.

    When confronted by a significant external threat, states may balance or bandwagon. Balancing is defined as allying with others against the prevailing threat, whereas bandwagoning refers to alignment with the source of danger. States may also employ other alliance tactics, such as buck-passing and chain-ganging.

    There is a longstanding debate among realists with regard to how the polarity of a system impacts on which tactic states use, however, it is generally agreed that balancing is more efficient in bipolar systems as each great power has no choice but to directly confront the other.

    Along with inter-realist debates about the prevalence of balancing in alliance patterns, other schools of international relations, such as constructivists, are also critical of the balance of power theory, disputing core realist assumptions regarding the international system and the behavior of states.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance...nal_relations)
    And here's me thinking this is going to be about escorts fighting among them selves? Lol

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to johnb59 For This Useful Post:

    irishdeltaforce (06-10-14)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •