2.1.3 Balancing and bandwagoning: Waltz’s variants
Balancing and containment
While Waltz argued that power maximization is not desirable, offensive-minded neorealists argued that power maximization by great powers is unavoidable. This view is best represented by Mearsheimer’s (2014) book The tragedy of Great Power Politics. Arguing for great powers’ ambition to seek regional and international hegemony, the book argues that balancing behaviors of existing great powers against rising great powers which try to translate latent (in the original use, economic power, and population size largely) power to military power, may lead to conflicts (Mearsheimer 2014). Racing to the top, great powers pursuing military domination will inevitably clash with …show more content…
Pape (2005: 10, emphases added) defined the concept of soft balancing, opposing to the conventional, hard balancing, as “actions… to delay, frustrate, and undermine aggressive unilateral U.S. military policies” in the ear of American unipolar moment. They argued, given high costs of hard balancing with consequential worsening of relationship with the unipolar power, states try to balance in a low intensity which does not trigger any party, increasing costs for the unipolar great power acting unilaterally through denying American legitimacy in striving for majority agreement on the action, aiming at preventing any threat induced to existence and sovereignty (Pape 2005: 15-16; Paul 2005: 53-54, 59). For instance, collaborative efforts by Russia, Germany, and France in the United Nations Security Council and NATO to veto against American’s preemptive strike in Iraq partly reflecting the spirit of soft balancing (Pape 2005: 39-40; Paul 2005: 64-70). Soft balancers form ad hoc, issue-based coalition (Pape 2005: 36). Simultaneously, states strengthen their power capability relatively to the unipolar power; low-key and low-intensity balancing methods are employed in preventing rebound by great powers (Pape 2005: 36-37; Roy 2005: …show more content…
Soft balancing loses the persuasive power by all-inclusive nature. It includes a broad range of tactics and policies which result in difficulty to clearly define what is balancing (Kang 2009: 6-7; Pape 2005: 37). Furthermore, even soft balancing sheds some conceptual insights, what Paul (2005: 70, emphasis added) admitted that his analysis “does not make soft balancing a futile strategy, as the success of hard balancing is also uncertain, given the difficulty in determining when balancing has or has not occurred.” This view is surprisingly a question to realist theory in a sense balancing behavior is predominated and be easily determined (Parent and Rosato 2015; Walt 1987; Waltz
Balancing and containment
While Waltz argued that power maximization is not desirable, offensive-minded neorealists argued that power maximization by great powers is unavoidable. This view is best represented by Mearsheimer’s (2014) book The tragedy of Great Power Politics. Arguing for great powers’ ambition to seek regional and international hegemony, the book argues that balancing behaviors of existing great powers against rising great powers which try to translate latent (in the original use, economic power, and population size largely) power to military power, may lead to conflicts (Mearsheimer 2014). Racing to the top, great powers pursuing military domination will inevitably clash with …show more content…
Pape (2005: 10, emphases added) defined the concept of soft balancing, opposing to the conventional, hard balancing, as “actions… to delay, frustrate, and undermine aggressive unilateral U.S. military policies” in the ear of American unipolar moment. They argued, given high costs of hard balancing with consequential worsening of relationship with the unipolar power, states try to balance in a low intensity which does not trigger any party, increasing costs for the unipolar great power acting unilaterally through denying American legitimacy in striving for majority agreement on the action, aiming at preventing any threat induced to existence and sovereignty (Pape 2005: 15-16; Paul 2005: 53-54, 59). For instance, collaborative efforts by Russia, Germany, and France in the United Nations Security Council and NATO to veto against American’s preemptive strike in Iraq partly reflecting the spirit of soft balancing (Pape 2005: 39-40; Paul 2005: 64-70). Soft balancers form ad hoc, issue-based coalition (Pape 2005: 36). Simultaneously, states strengthen their power capability relatively to the unipolar power; low-key and low-intensity balancing methods are employed in preventing rebound by great powers (Pape 2005: 36-37; Roy 2005: …show more content…
Soft balancing loses the persuasive power by all-inclusive nature. It includes a broad range of tactics and policies which result in difficulty to clearly define what is balancing (Kang 2009: 6-7; Pape 2005: 37). Furthermore, even soft balancing sheds some conceptual insights, what Paul (2005: 70, emphasis added) admitted that his analysis “does not make soft balancing a futile strategy, as the success of hard balancing is also uncertain, given the difficulty in determining when balancing has or has not occurred.” This view is surprisingly a question to realist theory in a sense balancing behavior is predominated and be easily determined (Parent and Rosato 2015; Walt 1987; Waltz