Small states are the republics with little influence that cannot help them change international order’s policies. Unlike the powerful regions, smaller territories can neither enforce their political wills nor defend their public welfare through the exertion of power politics (Vaicekauskaite 2017). For this reason, the small kingdoms rely on large countries to obtain security. When the latter amend their policies on particular global matters, the former must comply with the changes. However, smaller states can use one or more strategies in achieving adequate security and becoming highly stable and influential to bigger ones. According to Thorhallsson and Sverrir (2017), small states “can either stay neutral or join alliances, as well as bandwagon or balance” (7). Therefore, these republics may decide to work against possible threats or join great powers. Furthermore, the states might employ hedging tactics or seek shelter (Vaicekauskaite 2017). Generally speaking, the small kingdoms apply all these approaches with the same goal of obtaining enough security.
The first technique is joining alliances to work against possible threats. While powerful regions work alone, small states try bandwagoning by aligning with threatening powers or balance against the oppressors by joining blocs. Long (2017) argues that “small states should bandwagon with a rising, larger power, given that their contribution to the balance of power would be inconsequential” (14). This behavior of subordinating to dominant republics helps the small ones obtain more security in several ways. Firstly, enhanced protection improves territorial integrity, and secondly, since the risks of possible disputes reduce, there are the defined property rights. Thirdly, the small states’ actions help in setting international behavior standards (Vaicekauskaite 2017). Usually, balancing occurs when the big power’s ability results from geographical proximity. Contrarily, small territories bandwagon since they contribute lesser value to the balancing alliance. Therefore, this approach becomes the best alternative in minimizing their security hazards.
The second method is strategic hedging that big states use to manage the small republics’ risks as they support them politically and offer them military capabilities. Nevertheless, the former may impose their political will on the latter and curtail their freedom to operate (Vaicekauskaite 2017). For this reason, small nations start acting differently to evade the regional powers’ threats. In addition to the above methods, weak countries may apply strategic hedging to offset the hazards through using multilateral policies to make mutually reactive effects (Preiherman 2017). This approach helps in preventing small states from trying to bandwagon or balance. Instead, they seek ways of reducing great powers’ possible dangers without confronting them. Therefore, for the regions to succeed in strategic hedging, they should not receive any superpowers’ threat. For this reason, the small states ought to be friends with all great powers and avoid taking sides to assist them in gaining both political and economic support from them.
The third approach is the policy of neutrality, and countries practice it when they are not ready to support any superpower. Therefore, states that insist on this tactic remain independent and are not likely to change their mandate (Romano 2017). Generally speaking, neutral nations are not supposed to offer military support to other states, and so, they should not participate in wars. However, the countries ought to prepare for their defense in case others violate their independence. Power-related contributions lead to increased susceptibility and diminished security, and for this reason, small nations ought to follow the policy of neutrality in preventing wars. In short, these states should avoid involving themselves in conflicts to increase their chances of sovereignty.
The fourth strategy is alliance shelter used by small nations that face complex security disputes, which require various capacities to assist them in addressing those challenges. Therefore, the states should connect with different defense partners that can help them alleviate risks. When countries use the alliance shelter approach, it makes this engagement successful (Pedi 2020). Through this method, small territories try to lessen their vulnerability socially, economically, and politically by joining superpowers. In essence, this tactic helps the regions, which require outside protection in many dimensions, for instance, security and other states’ areas that assist them in choosing specific foreign-policy strategies.
The fifth method is the Baltic States whereby these nations’ protection mostly depends on dominating regions and their capability in leveraging their effect on neighboring countries. For example, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia share an environment whereby they face similar problems related to the supremacy of Russia. According to Veebel (2018), “attention should be directed towards both social inclusion and social welfare of the local people in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania” (19). This conduct aids in promoting social contentment that might work in Russia’s favor whenever there is conflict. For their survival, the Baltic nations can use various tactics, such as the alliance shelter strategy, which guarantees autonomy from the superpower (Vaicekauskaite 2017). In summary, although the alliance remains an essential Baltic defense approach, states can employ other policy methods in adapting to the security environment that keeps changing.
In conclusion, there are several approaches that small states use to obtain sufficient national security. Some of them include staying neutral, joining alliances, and strategic hedging. Since these countries cannot adequately defend themselves financially and militarily like the superpowers, they become highly susceptible to external forces. Usually, the small regions have many safety problems and influences, which the great powers lack. These challenges are beneficial to the small territories because they help them in determining their defense tactics. Therefore, for the republics to achieve the security, economic and political stability they require, they should remain neutral or form partnerships and become friends with others.
References
Long, Tom. 2017. “It’s Not the Size; It’s the Relationship: From ‘The Small States’ to Asymmetry.” International Politics 54 (2): 1-27.
Pedi, Rebecca. 2020. “The Small States in Europe as a Buffer between East and West.” Handbook on the Politics of Small States. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Web.
Preiherman, Yauheni. 2017. “Belarus’s Asymmetric Relations with Russia: The Case of Strategic Hedging.”UPTAKE Working Paper No. 4.Estonia: University of Tartu Press. Web.
Romano, Angela. 2017. “Re-Designing Military Security in Europe: Cooperation and Competition between the European Community and NATO during the Early 1980s.” European Review of History Journal 24 (3): 1-47.
Thorhallsson, Baldur, and SverrirSteinsson. 2017. “Small State Foreign Policy.” The Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vaicekauskaite, ZivileMarija. 2017. “Security Strategies of Small States in a Changing World.” Journal on Baltic Security 3 (2): 7-15.
Veebel, Viljar. 2018. “NATO Options and Dilemmas for Deterring Russia in the Baltic States.” Defense Studies 18 (2): 1-23.