Balance vs. Imbalance of Power International Relations Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda®
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment

The balance of power in international relations is the distribution of world influence between power units, which usually means countries in the context of geopolitics. Imbalance, in turn, implies the dominance of a single country or a bloc of allied states. Maintaining balance is an essential aspect of foreign policy, which, however, should not be associated with peace or war. Promoting the balance of power as a basic strategy of interaction among states is not a guarantee of friendly relations, and historical examples of the 20th century confirm this. Similarly, imbalance does not mean that a situation is fraught with an inevitable armed conflict. Although the balance of power is considered the basis of international order and security, relations among countries do not always depend on this indicator and can be both peaceful and hostile.

Balance of Power: Major Features

Since the balance of power implies equilibrium among countries, it is customary to believe that this nature of relationships means peaceful interaction. Nevertheless, the example of the Cold War between the USSR and the USA in the second half of the 20th century proves that, despite the absence of an open armed conflict, both superpowers were in a state of intense confrontation. The desire for world domination and the establishment of a unipolar world was manifested in the absence of mutual understanding and partnership, although from the standpoint of diplomatic relations, no norms were violated. This example confirms that if two or more countries adhere to a strategy of maintaining the balance of power, their interaction can be hostile and subsequently develop into an aggressive form of relationship.

In case the balance of power is promoted as a strategy for maintaining peace, which is the background for the formation of such a geopolitical principle, a tension between states can persist. The difference from the aggressive tactics of relationships is the separation of regions of dominance when the world turns into a bipolar, tripolar, and even a more complex platform on which the roles are distributed. For instance, if individual large states determine the principles of influence in specific regions, this does not exclude their hostility towards one another. Thus, although initially, the balance of power is a strategy for maintaining peace among sovereign states, the forms of relationships may be characterized by hostility.

Imbalance of Power: Alternative Perspectives

The imbalance of power implies the lack of equilibrium in favor of a specific state with an obvious dominant advantage. Today, such a geopolitical strategy is less common than several centuries ago, when major powers controlled large territories. However, on the example of economic processes, one can notice how leadership is formed. East Asia is a region in which rivalry between China and Japan is traditional. However, over the past years, the balance of power has shifted towards the PRC due to its economic growth and interaction with major powers, including Russia. Therefore, in its region, the Chinese economic monopoly and, therefore, the dominant role is obvious.

At the same time, such an imbalance does not imply an open conflict or hostility. With sufficient potential, China adheres to its current development strategy and does not plan to engage in war or prove its strength. Previously, when armed conflicts were a priority in shaping statehood, coercive measures were a key way to prove superiority. However, today, in an era of democratic society, such practices are unacceptable. Thus, the imbalance of forces has alternative manifestations, and today, it is associated rather with dominance than aggression.

Conclusion

The balance of power is a term used in international relations to indicate the presence or absence of equilibrium among individual countries. Even with an officially maintained balance, states may seek dominance through aggression, and the example of the Cold War proves this. The imbalance of forces does not have to lead to war and can maintain the existing dominance of one state over others in peaceful conditions.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, February 19). Balance vs. Imbalance of Power International Relations. https://ivypanda.com/essays/balance-vs-imbalance-of-power-international-relations/

Work Cited

"Balance vs. Imbalance of Power International Relations." IvyPanda, 19 Feb. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/balance-vs-imbalance-of-power-international-relations/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'Balance vs. Imbalance of Power International Relations'. 19 February.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "Balance vs. Imbalance of Power International Relations." February 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/balance-vs-imbalance-of-power-international-relations/.

1. IvyPanda. "Balance vs. Imbalance of Power International Relations." February 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/balance-vs-imbalance-of-power-international-relations/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Balance vs. Imbalance of Power International Relations." February 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/balance-vs-imbalance-of-power-international-relations/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
1 / 1